Linkle and the Geek Culture War: “I’m touching your stuff!”

With the introduction of Linkle to Hyrule Warriors, the usual culture war pundits came out to say it's not enough. But what is enough for them? 

linkle header

Recently Nintendo an­nounced the in­clu­sion of a new fe­male ver­sion of Link in Hyrule Warriors named “Linkle.” Poor nam­ing choic­es aside, the re­ac­tion to the an­nounce­ment from the so­cial jus­tice pun­dits has shown a per­fect ex­am­ple of the tac­tics used by those bent of wag­ing a cul­ture war in “geek” me­dia. The re­ac­tion swung from gloat­ing and smug­ness to at­tacks and re­crim­i­na­tions of Nintendo for not ful­ly re­plac­ing Link with Linkle, or some oth­er orig­i­nal fe­male char­ac­ter. It’s of­ten said “You can’t make cul­ture war­riors hap­py.” But that sim­ply isn’t true. You just have to re­al­ize what re­al­ly makes them hap­py, and why.

On pa­per it seems like noth­ing could make the po­lit­i­cal­ly cor­rect and per­ma­nent­ly of­fend­ed hap­py. Their own in­ter­nal log­ic is con­tra­dic­to­ry. You have to re­al­ize what makes them hap­py doesn’t con­form to any sort of log­ic; the Mrs. Male trope ap­plies equal­ly whether or not Link is re­placed by a girl or a new char­ac­ter is cre­at­ed. At this point their ar­gu­ment breaks down as be­ing con­tra­dic­to­ry. “Make this beloved char­ac­ter fe­male” and “Making fe­male ver­sions of Male char­ac­ters is a neg­a­tive trope” should be mu­tu­al­ly ex­clu­sive sen­ti­ments, if you have a con­sis­tent and log­i­cal mind. They should be at odds with each oth­er.

My fel­low SuperNerdLand con­trib­u­tor, writer of “Translating Tumblr,” and all round smart cook­ie Cate Winters ob­served that the peo­ple she sees on Tumblr cel­e­brat­ing ideas like “Thor is a girl” or the pre­pos­ter­ous “Samus is Trans” fad have the same at­ti­tude as a child want­i­ng an­oth­er child’s toys. They are not sim­ply hap­py with get­ting their own toy, they also want no one else to be able to have it. She ob­served it was like an im­ma­ture child go­ing “I’m touch­ing your stuff! You can’t stop me touch­ing your stuff!” It is a self­ish and pet­ty in­stinct.

What makes cul­ture war­riors hap­py is this: oth­er peo­ple be­ing un­hap­py. If you re­al­ize this then their de­ci­sions make a hell of a lot more sense.

linkle insert 1

In cas­es that piss off their per­ceived op­po­si­tion suf­fi­cient­ly they sim­ply choose not to ap­ply their own rule­set to it. This is a rule­set based on crit­i­cal the­o­ry, and one that can at­tack any­thing as racist/sexist/problematic by de­sign. “Everything is sex­ist.” Anita Sarkeesian said it her­self. Their ide­ol­o­gy is set out so they can ar­bi­trar­i­ly choose not to crit­i­cise peo­ple seen as on their “own team,” or ideas they feel push their pol­i­tics and ide­ol­o­gy for­ward. Hypocrisy is ac­cept­able as long as it serves the cause; Nintendo didn’t pun­ish white males enough with their de­ci­sion so it wasn’t good enough. Not enough peo­ple were up­set, and a vic­to­ry could’t be claimed. Faces couldn’t be rubbed in it as ef­fec­tive­ly, and they couldn’t then start mak­ing fur­ther de­mands about the con­tent of the core Zelda fran­chise while work­ing to de­ride the rest of the fan­base.

Those at­tack­ing me­dia in the name of di­ver­si­ty can es­pouse these two con­tra­dic­to­ry ideas at the same time be­cause they don’t ar­gue from a place of log­ic; they ar­gue from a place of au­thor­i­ty and would rather at­tack and smear ideas they don’t like rather than try­ing to dis­prove or en­gage with them. This is Critical Theory 101. Social Sciences and Postmodernism move ra­tio­nal­ism aside in favour of pro­mot­ing what ar­gu­ment dri­ves a cause or idea for­ward, rather than the va­lid­i­ty of the ar­gu­ment pre­sent­ed. Linke and Female Thor are mi­nor skir­mish­es on the route to a wider goal.

This isn’t about di­ver­si­ty, this is about po­lit­i­cal vic­to­ry and hi­jack­ing es­tab­lished cul­tur­al icons for a pure­ly po­lit­i­cal cause. Some refuse to ad­mit it, but the hu­mor­ous im­age of Anita Sarkeesian’s con­tra­dic­to­ry state­ments that got near­ly a thou­sand up‐votes on the /r/gaming board of Reddit is wak­ing peo­ple up to their true mo­ti­va­tions.

The dis­tinc­tion be­tween “Making a fe­male Link” and “Making Link fe­male” is mean­ing­less to the gen­er­al pub­lic, but it mat­ters a great deal to cul­ture war­riors.

Making the canon ver­sion of Link a girl and hav­ing it re­place the main char­ac­ter re­moves the male ver­sion, and this is the ac­tion they are re­al­ly the most in­ter­est­ed in. This is what un­der­pinned the cel­e­bra­tion of fe­male Thor; it wasn’t about hav­ing a fe­male ver­sion of Thor. It was about sup­plant­i­ng a male char­ac­ter with a fe­male one on a large plat­form. They want to make ex­ist­ing char­ac­ters con­form to and par­rot their pol­i­tics be­cause it pro­vides them with the plat­form for their ideas that a new char­ac­ter wouldn’t have.

The wider goal is to have all me­dia re­flect and dic­tate po­lit­i­cal­ly pro­gres­sive ideas. When you look at Female Thor you are sup­posed to be re­mind­ed that you are a shit­lord, that your male space is un­der at­tack and that “Lol! Thor is a girl now! The Hulk is Asian! Take that GamerGators! The MRA Racists have lost! I’m touch­ing your stuff, your stuff is mine now ha­ha­ha! If you don’t like it then get out!” It’s fun­da­men­tal­ly about the per­ceived de­feat of po­lit­i­cal op­po­nents via the dom­i­na­tion of cul­ture. That’s what the cul­ture war is, and they can’t talk about “win­ning” it with­out ex­pos­ing that fact.

linkle insert 2

This is why every de­ci­sion that doesn’t lead to some form of cul­tur­al de­struc­tion or sup­plan­ta­tion is heav­i­ly crit­i­cized. This is why de­ci­sions most peo­ple would see as “good for every­one” are nev­er good enough. Simply re­plac­ing an all‐male with an all‐female case isn’t adding “di­ver­si­ty.” Things didn’t get more di­verse, they just changed. Having both a male and fe­male ver­sion is di­ver­si­ty, and these are the de­ci­sions cul­ture war­riors ac­tive­ly dis­like. On a fun­da­men­tal lev­el, cul­tur­al crit­ics and their le­gion of scream­ing, en­ti­tled fol­low­ers are anti‐diversity. This is why peo­ple got up­set when it was an­nounced there would also be an all‐male ver­sion of Ghostbusters be­ing made as well as the all‐female ver­sion. Nothing ac­tu­al­ly changed, the fe­male ver­sion was still be­ing made, but they can no longer rub it in people’s faces. “Ha! I’m touch­ing your Ghostbusters stuff! Look it’s all girl now! I’m rub­bing my gen­der pol­i­tics all over your stuff and there’s noth­ing you can do about it! Don’t like it? Get out!”

If there are al­ter­na­tives in me­dia that forego gen­der pol­i­tics or pro­gres­sive ideas then they have to com­pete in the mar­ket­place with them. This is an ad­mis­sion that, when pre­sent­ed with a choice, peo­ple usu­al­ly pre­fer me­dia with­out all of the po­lit­i­cal bull­shit in­volved.

Did fe­male Thor sell well be­cause it had a fe­male lead or did it sell well be­cause mess­ing with the Thor canon cre­at­ed a lot of con­tro­ver­sy and pub­lic­i­ty? Would it have sold just as well op­po­site a male ver­sion of Thor? We don’t know. But what we do know is that the de­ci­sion seemed en­gi­neered to de­lib­er­ate­ly piss peo­ple off for max­i­mum po­lit­i­cal im­pact. Once again this is not about cre­at­ing di­ver­si­ty, and the ac­tu­al qual­i­ty of me­dia is on the back‐burner. It’s about up­set­ting a group seen as po­lit­i­cal opponent’s whist push­ing for­ward an ide­ol­o­gy. It’s end re­sult will be to make all me­dia ho­moge­nous and far less di­verse in terms of char­ac­ters, sto­ry­lines, view­points and ideas. Diversity is an emp­ty buzz­word when used in this con­text.

But what does it mat­ter what po­lit­i­cal ideas a piece of me­dia puts for­ward? Well, con­trary to most ev­i­dence which shows our po­lit­i­cal and cul­tur­al ideas are shaped main­ly by our peers and the real wold around us, Critical Theory is built on the premise that me­dia and en­ter­tain­ment have a pro­found ef­fect on our think­ing and are re­spon­si­ble for shap­ing our world‐view al­most en­tire­ly. The end goal of this laugh­able pro­ces­sion of mean‐spirted tantrums is to cre­ate pro­pa­gan­da that will brain­wash the mass­es to bring about the dom­i­na­tion of their po­lit­i­cal ideas and a new pro­gres­sive utopia. No re­al­ly. That’s what they ac­tu­al­ly think. What would ac­tu­al­ly hap­pen is me­dia would get a bit crap and peo­ple would stop watch­ing as much of it, or cre­ate al­ter­na­tives out­side of this nar­row set of rules set forth by PC dem­a­gogues. But this is the rea­son they keep push­ing against “com­pe­ti­tion” and work to make life mis­er­able for con­tent cre­ators and en­thu­si­ast au­di­ences that do not agree with them.

linkle insert 3

When you make your char­ac­ter fe­male they will de­mand it be a “per­son of colour.” When you make it a black fe­male they will de­mand it not con­form to “gen­der norms.” When you make it have a black fe­male demi­sex­u­al they will ask why it doesn’t re­flect the ex­pe­ri­ences of the men­tal­ly dis­abled. When you make your char­ac­ter a black fe­male demi­sex­u­al with schiz­o­phre­nia they will tell you it is of­fen­sive to use their ill­ness and say to add a trig­ger warn­ing. When you make it a black fe­male demi­sex­u­al with a trig­ger warn­ing for schiz­o­phre­nia they will ask why you are leav­ing out the phys­i­cal­ly dis­abled. When you make it a black fe­male demi­sex­u­al para­plegic with trig­ger warn­ing for schiz­o­phre­nia they will ask why it is be­ing cre­at­ed by white males. When you add women to your team they will de­mand women of colour. When you re­place your en­tire team with peo­ple who per­fect­ly re­flect the ex­pe­ri­ence of the now com­plete­ly un­rec­og­niz­able char­ac­ter they will won­der why a team of black fe­male demi­sex­u­al para­plegic schiz­o­phren­ics with no back­ground in cre­at­ing suc­cess­ful me­dia is hav­ing trou­ble fin­ish­ing a project that peo­ple want to buy.

Culture war­riors will only ever be tem­porar­i­ly hap­py and to achieve this you have to make every­one but them un­hap­py. Once you have giv­en in they will keep de­mand­ing changes un­til your project falls apart or be­comes un­rec­og­niz­able and eco­nom­i­cal­ly un­vi­able. They are do­ing this be­cause they think mak­ing me­dia that ad­heres to their warped ideas will func­tion to make every­one else think like them.

Don’t give into cul­ture war­riors; it’s al­ways a bad de­ci­sion. They have no gen­uine in­ter­est in your project be­yond how they can in­ject their pol­i­tics into it. Make what you want to make.

The fol­low­ing two tabs change con­tent be­low.
John Sweeney
John Sweeney is a ter­ri­bly British man with a back­ground in en­gi­neer­ing. He writes long‐form ed­i­to­r­i­al con­tent with analy­sis of gam­ing, games me­dia and in­ter­net cul­ture. He also does the oc­ca­sion­al video game ret­ro­spec­tive with a week­ly col­umn about Magic the Gathering thrown in for good mea­sure. He also does most of our in­ter­views for some rea­son, we have no idea why. A staunch sup­port­er of free speech and con­sumer rights; skep­ti­cal of agen­da dri­ven me­dia and sus­pi­cious of un­ac­cou­table au­thor­i­ty but al­ways hope­ful for change.
Scroll to top