Geek Feminism Wiki


This article is written from a complete anti-BDSM standpoint. The people who complained about this ad have no concept of consensual BDSM and just inferred some kind of kidnapping scenario. While a case could be made for it to be a continuation of the meme that wives are annoying naggers who want to keep men from playing (so you'll take advantage of her being tied up) or inappropriately sexual in featuring a woman as object, to focus on the bondage perpetuates the demonization of BDSM practitioners and the lie circling amongst radical feminist circles that masochistic women do not exist or are poor dears who have been damaged and must have their rights to consensual sexual self-expression taken from them for their own good. (By the way, the image can be viewed here. Doesn't she look more put out than anything?) --Dragonclaws(talk) 15:34, October 18, 2012 (UTC)

I can't find an actual image of the ad, but I think the objection is to using sex (kinky or vanilla) to advertise a product that is non-sexual, rather than to kinky sex? Monadic (talk) 15:43, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
I posted a link to the image in the first comment. The article says:
The UK Advertising Standards Authority recieved several complaints saying the woman looked terrified and held against her will
Nintendo was asked by the ASA to remove the ads from future issues, and described the image of the restrained woman was “subjugated and humiliated”.
My emphasis.--Dragonclaws(talk) 17:23, October 18, 2012 (UTC)

Also, this probably took place in 1996. There was just a post about it in 2009. --Dragonclaws(talk) 21:37, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

I have now rewritten the entire article from my perspective as a third-wave feminist and submissive woman. I'm aware I'm biased, but now we can discuss further changes from this better standpoint. --Dragonclaws(talk) 17:41, March 8, 2015 (UTC)