Anita Sarkeesian "I'm not a fan of gaming" leaked 2010 video reveals

[SuperScrub]

If women feel empowered by her that's fine. Confident women are sexy. If they take it too far and become rude and demanding women then they'll get kicked to the curb like the overbearing bitches they've become. Status quo unchanged.

Edit: Posted before realizing the discussion had gone to the cuckoo clubhouse.

It's a madhouse and everybody is invited until the mods close down this thread and Anita's detractors find "evidence" of her burning a Nintendo Entertainment System or something equally asinine and open a thread about that.

well they will find something even if they have to make it up. i think that this trope despite the bad points is needed not all female characters can be strong and take out all the antagonists

But wouldn't you agree that it has been used so much that it's starting to become a cliche?

 

[Tony2077]

If women feel empowered by her that's fine. Confident women are sexy. If they take it too far and become rude and demanding women then they'll get kicked to the curb like the overbearing bitches they've become. Status quo unchanged.

Edit: Posted before realizing the discussion had gone to the cuckoo clubhouse.

It's a madhouse and everybody is invited until the mods close down this thread and Anita's detractors find "evidence" of her burning a Nintendo Entertainment System or something equally asinine and open a thread about that.

well they will find something even if they have to make it up. i think that this trope despite the bad points is needed not all female characters can be strong and take out all the antagonists

But wouldn't you agree that it has been used so much that it's starting to become a cliche?

yes but its not as bad as some tropes out there. i'm trying to think of the last game with the trope i've played but nothing jumps out and says hello

 

[Robert Marrs]

My opinion on her like most people has been pretty much the same from day one and is unlikely to change. I will chime in anyways though. Its obvious to me at least she is using the whole thing as a money grab. Evidence that points to her not even playing video games even though she claims she always did, advertising her kickstarter on pages like 4chan and then using the backlash (something anyone with a brain would expect regardless of the subject matter) as a "see look people are bullying me!", her apparent lack of knowledge when it comes to the content of games, and of course the stealing of footage. Not to mention she already had a youtube channel. Why did she need a kickstarter at all let alone the massive amount of money she received. The whole thing smells fishy and all of those things are enough to make me at least suspect she is just using the hyper sensitive mentality of internet feminists to cash in. She never needed even close to what she was asking for to make a few ill-informed and dishonest videos on the subject of women and video games.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

I never said it was meant to be an insult or a bad thing to be a W.H.C.M

Then if it's not an insult and you have no knowledge of my race, sexuality, and "mental gender", then stop calling me that. I prefer people refer to me by my name, Specter.

Oh you're a spectre? Does this mean you're going to stop the Reapers and fornicate with a hot blue alien girl because if you do I want pictures.

Once again, I'll ask. Will you please refer to me by my name?

Say pretty pretty please with a sugar cane on top?

I'm not going to demean myself by pandering to your childishness. I ask again. Please, refer to me by my name.

 

[SuperScrub]

I never said it was meant to be an insult or a bad thing to be a W.H.C.M

Then if it's not an insult and you have no knowledge of my race, sexuality, and "mental gender", then stop calling me that. I prefer people refer to me by my name, Specter.

Oh you're a spectre? Does this mean you're going to stop the Reapers and fornicate with a hot blue alien girl because if you do I want pictures.

Once again, I'll ask. Will you please refer to me by my name?

Say pretty pretty please with a sugar cane on top?

I'm not going to demean myself by pandering to your childishness. I ask again. Please, refer to me by my name.

Okay I'll refer to you by your name you Noble (Von) Pack of Ghostly (Specter) Mules (Baren).

 

[Specter Von Baren]

You know the guy who made the video made another one. Saying it was an edited cut made to make her look bad. Just MRA and sexist bait. And they, the makers of the video /b/ronies, did it on Anita's behalf.

We have jumped the shark.

Hhm... and after looking at this new video... I fail to see what the purpose of this all was. How exactly does this troll anyone? "Hey, I made you think this was evidence but it's not!" Okay... so what? Now everything is just the same as it was before the video and the only thing it's accomplished is waste the time of her supporters and detractors. (Shrugs) Guess that's it for this thread.

 

[SuperScrub]

You know the guy who made the video made another one. Saying it was an edited cut made to make her look bad. Just MRA and sexist bait. And they, the makers of the video /b/ronies, did it on Anita's behalf.

We have jumped the shark.

*starts to laugh uproariously* OMG we've been trolled the escapist dedicated two threads to this bullshit video and we fell for it hook line and sinker. Oh man this has got to be some of the best trolling I've ever seen this side of Chris-Chan. Man I bet everyone saying that Anita wasn't a real gamer must feel worse than the rednecks who demanded to see Obamas birth certificate to prove he wasn't a real American only for his actual birth certificate to be posted online.

 

[Siege_TF]

This is so goddamned stupid I don't even have words. This reminds me of those dumbasses who kept demanding Obama show his birth certificate. Where's your nerd cred Anita?! You don't like what she's saying, so rather than ignoring her, like an adult, you're just trying to discredit her with any little detail you can cling to.

When people ask if I'm a gamer, I say no. I say I play games a little bit here and there, and then I change the subject. Because the gaming "communnity" is so goddamned embarrassing and juvenile that I'd never want to be associated with it. Maybe Anita was doing the same thing?

If you have no knowledge of a subject, and you're doing a video series on it, or zero knowledge of the culture of that subject, how do you in good faith say you can make an educated argument about a supposed problem inside of said culture?

Anyways this topic should probably be locked again because no actual discussion will take place it's just Anita's supporters shitposting and refusing to discuss anything.

Who says she doesn't? Who says she has zero knowledge? You're basing your ENTIRE argument off of speculation, paranoia, and at most 30 seconds of a 4 minute video. You don't know her, you don't know anything about her. Your "research" spans some twitter comments and some videos. You know nothing.

Stop pretending you're Walter fucking Cronkite.

In other words... It's only okay in Anita does it?

This whole thing reminds me of that expert FOX got to talk about how Mass Effect was a sex simulator based on the five minutes of game footage that FOX showed her. Except nobody continued to support that particular hack and it (rightfully) ruined her career.

 

[carnex]

Interesting how Flying Turkey's are actually taking all the cradit while lying with their second video. If enyone cares to take a look at original footage (where Anita does make good presentation on some things), jump here

http://vimeo.com/13216819

But I will say this. I, personally, saw maybe 1 or 2 decent videos that really do the job of disecting her videos. Most responses are jus plain bad and, to be honest, just repeat same stuff over and over where some of that doesen't even make sense.

Not that her videos are legitimate work, worth of being used as lecture tool as she want, just that people responding, for the most part, have no skill required to make decent response.

 

[Crystalis1]

Interesting how Flying Turkey's are actually taking all the cradit while lying with their second video. If enyone cares to take a look at original footage (where Anita does make good presentation on some things), jump here

http://vimeo.com/13216819

But I will say this. I, personally, saw maybe 1 or 2 decent videos that really do the job of disecting her videos. Most responses are jus plain bad and, to be honest, just repeat same stuff over and over where some of that doesen't even make sense.

Not that her videos are legitimate work, worth of being used as lecture tool as she want, just that people responding, for the most part, have no skill required to make decent response.

The original footage mirrors what is in the supposed troll video.....

It's amazing that this flying turkey is trolling so many people for 1.5 years when using a 3 year old video ... The foresight that must have took.... /sarcasm

Considering Anita liked the original video on Vimeo it is unlikely it was taken out of context unless she would like to further explain the context.... The talking points match up with the same presentation she posted of the same material except there is not talk of her too many dicks video in the one she posted. Different talks but the same material.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Interesting how Flying Turkey's are actually taking all the cradit while lying with their second video. If enyone cares to take a look at original footage (where Anita does make good presentation on some things), jump here

http://vimeo.com/13216819

But I will say this. I, personally, saw maybe 1 or 2 decent videos that really do the job of disecting her videos. Most responses are jus plain bad and, to be honest, just repeat same stuff over and over where some of that doesen't even make sense.

Not that her videos are legitimate work, worth of being used as lecture tool as she want, just that people responding, for the most part, have no skill required to make decent response.

I've actually seen a lot of good ones but there are also a lot of bad ones. Usually though, it's easy to spot which ones are the good ones and which are the bad by the video quality.

 

[rbstewart7263]

If you can "enjoy videogames but still criticize aspects of them ala sexism" then you can also "criticize anitas honesty without simultaneously criticizing the content of her arguments" Those of you who feel so strongly in trying to defend her that you lump the two together in an attempt to discredit the original poster, I think you are being disingenuous. When someone is trying to do good things and make changes for the better they have to do it in an honest and sincere way else they stand to do the cause more harm than good.

Perhaps instead of trying to defend every flaw she has it would be better to demand better from the people who speak on such issues such as sexism in games. After all, we have no problem stomping our feet and demanding better from publishers and developers so why should anita and others with bones to pick be exempt?

 

[Hover Hand Mode]

I like her videos. Am I allowed to have that opinion around here?
I continue to be astounded by the amount of hatred that is flung her way. Is it mostly because she's a feminist with opinions about games? That's fine by me because I play games while also considering myself a feminist. It really would be nice to have a wider, more dynamic field of protagonists and archetypes to choose from in while also avoiding the boring cliches we've already seen a million times. Gaming has also been a reflection of the lack of gender equality in society overall, and that applies to games themselves as well as the community that enjoys them.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

The only reason to accuse Sarkeesian of dishonesty is to attack her argument without addressing the content of her argument. Which is, as I've said, Ad Hominem, and should be disregarded. It is an argument without merit.

So what does it mean if both are criticized?

The reason it is without merit is there is no reason to believe she is dishonest or insincere.

But as others have pointed out, there actually is. Among which is her track record before TvT In Video Games. She established herself as someone that will complain about anything, porn adds on illegal sites, 'All I Want For Christmas Is You' being a sexist song, complaining about Bayonetta without ever even looking up the story, let alone play it, ect.

When someone that's made themselves known to be only interested in things backing feminism in the most trivial or overblown ways you can think of, and then she suddenly out of nowhere says she has a deep and personal interest in video-games that she had never expressed before... that's rather suspect.

I find her credibility far less suspect than the credibility of her detractors.

And I find her credibility far more suspect than her detractors.

No one who hates on Sarkeesian in these threads ever questions the credentials or honesty or sincerity of anti-Sarkeesian sources.

Because they aren't making themselves out to have credentials, they are not claiming to be any kind of major's in some field. Why question people that are not making claims? They have however displayed better knowledge of the games that Sarkeesian has represented in her videos.

No one fact-checks these people, no one investigates their sources, no one questions their authority. They are taken at their word, even though they give us no reason whatsoever to do so.

Prove it. Show me a detractor, and then show me them saying something that would require a source to substantiate, then show me no one calling them out on it.

It is massively hypocritical to say that Sarkeesian is disingenuous without even bothering to see if anything the people attacking her say is accurate.

When gamers see Sarkeesian's videos and see her getting stuff about a game and the industry wrong, then look at a video criticizing her and see them getting those things right... why look it up?

I have yet to see a single video response to one of the well made video arguments against Sarkeesian's arguments. Why not do so? Why not make a response to one of those videos?

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Doesn't happen. Both are never criticized. I've yet to see a single video or thread that actually talks about the literary elements she's speaking of in any convincing manner. It's all just been attacks on her as a person, which is not the way you conduct a discussion.

It does happen. Both are criticized. I've seen it.

See, again, you haven't actually addressed any argument she's made - you just dismissed it all out of hand as complaining. That's just more ad hominem.

I figured that since you were around when I was debating that I wouldn't HAVE to repeat myself. But if you want me to, then sure, I'll repeat myself.

What's more, unless you've been following her 24/7 for the last few years, you can't say with any certainty that she never played Bayonetta, or any other game she cites. Again, that's just more ad hominem, trying to attack her for not having sufficient 'gamer cred'.

.......... *sigh* You don't seem to have actually watched her videos.

Sarkeesian posts a video "critiquing" Bayonetta. For one, she misunderstands the characterization of Bayonetta, but the actual factual error that she gets wrong is when she lists off "good things" about her, one of which being that she's a single mother... which she isn't... Now, if she had played the game... then she'd know that, right? Further, she took down the video after this was pointed out. Interesting how doing more than throwing assumptions makes your argument far more credible. You seem to like assuming things about me and others without looking into things.

That particular bit of ad hominem is also indicative of one of the creepy, sexist ways male gamers try to alienate female gamers - and other female nerds - that somehow girls are required to 'pass' tests to prove their gamer cred while males are just taken at their word.

When have I ever said, or made it seem like, that I have a problem with female gamers? Name one instance of me saying something to the effect of "I hate those women coming into my games" or what have you. Stop trying use the gender card to explain away your opponent, this has nothing to do with Sarkeesian being a woman and I have never indicated that it has ever had anything to do with her being a woman. Further, what evidence do you have to support that males gamers hate girls? I've seen plenty of cases brought up about certain people not liking girl gamers, but it's never been something that is indicative of the whole.

See, the fact that you don't think feminism is a good thing

You seem to like putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say feminism isn't a good thing? Show me where I said that.

does not make the application of feminist theory to story and games 'trivial' or 'overblown'. It's easy for you to pretend it's not an issue worth discussion, cause you are safe from sexist female representation - it doesn't affect your experience one way or the other. That doesn't mean that it's not important to other people, and it doesn't give you leave to dismiss someone else's concerns. Also, unless you know Sarkeesian personally, you can't say what her interests are.

When did I ever say that I am unconcerned about women? When did I ever say that such an issue is not worth discussing? Show me where I said that or stop putting words in my mouth. Further, you say that unless I know Sarkeesian personally, that I can't know what her interests are. Yet you're more than willing to make assumptions about myself without knowing about me either.

In fact, it seems rather likely that the 'gross' comment actually reinforces her claim to be invested in games, particularly when seen in light of her opinions on female representation and feminist theory.

Could you let me in on what you're talking about?

If she grew up as a gamer, then chose feminist theory as her field of study, subsequently analyzing games through that lens, it seems likely that her passion would sour and turn into hostility - which would, over time (say 3 years or so) and further consideration, mellow into a more thoughtful analysis of what could be changed to remove those elements she found so distasteful, and instead bolster those things that initially attracted her to gaming in the first place. This seems to fit both her character and the kind of ways people grow and change as they learn new things and form opinions about the world around them. I see no reason to automatically assume that she is obviously trying to deceive - unless you were trying to attack her arguments without actually addressing them.

I thought, "unless you know Sarkeesian personally, you can't say what her interests are." You can't make the claim that we can't know what her interests or history are and then make your own ideas about her too. Pick one.

Because you have a weird, creepy obsession with hating this woman for having an opinion.

When have I said that I hate her? When have I said that I hate her for being a woman with an opinion. You seem incapable of stopping yourself from putting words in others mouths. Further, I could easily say you have a weird creepy obsession with defending her just because she's a woman and it would have just as much merit as your insult. None.

If they are openly admitting that they have no credentials then there's no reason to listen to them at all.

They certainly can't have any insight into Sarkeesian as a person, since none of them know her personally. And yet they make lots of claims about her as a person - something which we know they know absolutely nothing about.

I am specifically referring to the people that attack her arguments not her. Or are we not "allowed" to do that either? Seeing someone use many bad arguments leads one to believe that this person doesn't know what they're talking about, or is deliberately misrepresenting the issue to push an agenda.

Pick any video you like. I can guarantee none of them will have sources, and nobody will be questioning any of the drivel they're spouting.

Okay then.

When gamers see Sarkeesian's videos and agree with her points about how poorly females are represented, then why question her sincerity?

Cause there are plenty of gamers who think Sarkeesian is either entirely accurate or at the least addressing an issue that really does need some attention and discussion within the game community, on every level.

Obviously.

You can't say that her detractors speak for all gamers,

When did I make the claim that they did?

and you certainly can't say they get things right more often than she does

Oh yes I can. They get things right more often than she does. I've seen it.

- primarily because none of them actually talk about the plot elements she does, because they're too busy waxing their hateboners.

No. They actually have. From this entire post, it's obvious to me that you much prefer to put words in people's mouths and insult them. Far easier for you to insult them, and make a sweeping statement about all of them without ever even listening to their arguments.

It's like there's this group of skeevy neckbeards who just sit around in their mother's basements all day looking for any possible thing to hate Sarkeesian for, masturbating furiously to pictures of her with her eyes scratched out or something.

And this is the greatest example of what I said above. No intelligent dissection of arguments, just insults.

Because I'm wasting too much of my life responding to stupid ad hominem bullshit as it is. And also because I don't own any video equipment.

You can type, right? Then use your keyboard and type up a response.

 

[wetnap]

If you can "enjoy videogames but still criticize aspects of them ala sexism" then you can also "criticize anitas honesty without simultaneously criticizing the content of her arguments" Those of you who feel so strongly in trying to defend her that you lump the two together in an attempt to discredit the original poster, I think you are being disingenuous. When someone is trying to do good things and make changes for the better they have to do it in an honest and sincere way else they stand to do the cause more harm than good.

The only reason to accuse Sarkeesian of dishonesty is to attack her argument without addressing the content of her argument. Which is, as I've said, Ad Hominem, and should be disregarded. It is an argument without merit.

The reason it is without merit is there is no reason to believe she is dishonest or insincere. I find her credibility far less suspect than the credibility of her detractors.

No one who hates on Sarkeesian in these threads ever questions the credentials or honesty or sincerity of anti-Sarkeesian sources. No one fact-checks these people, no one investigates their sources, no one questions their authority. They are taken at their word, even though they give us no reason whatsoever to do so.

It is massively hypocritical to say that Sarkeesian is disingenuous without even bothering to see if anything the people attacking her say is accurate.

Obviously not true.

As said before, if someone claims to be a war veteran when they aren't when arguing about their position on war, it does matter. They only make such a claim to bolster their argument through false authority and experience. That alone doesn't invalidate their point, no one said it does, but it most certainly undermines their credibility and frankly marks them out as morally questionable. Its a matter of integrity, it shows they are willing to be very dishonest to win an argument.