I do not understand.

[anthony87]

What I don't understand is why there was such a delay between Part 1 and Part 2 considering that they both seem to have been filmed as one.

Unless what's she wearing in both videos is her "presenting outfit" or something like that...

 

[UrinalDook]

Seeing as this tide of threads seems to be showing no signs of being stemmed, I finally, grudgingly watched these fuckin' videos. I was expecting to get really riled up and come back ready to rant alongside most of you.

Instead my impression was just 'is that it'?

Seriously, these two videos have been the source of so many ***** fests? It is literally just one woman pointing out all the instances of a shitty, shitty trope as it gets used in games. She draws very few conclusions in those 50 minutes, and goes out of her way to profess she knows not all games are like this, as well as saying she doesn't think the trope is either a result of intentional sexism on the part of the developers or that its occurrence will turn all male players into raging wife beaters.

It's literally 50 minutes of her saying "guys, can we please maybe have a few less games where women are completely helpless or exist solely to get roughed up and maybe have a few more games where they do stuff?" And I'm on board with that. She suggested we get a Zelda game where Sheik is the protagonist. I'd fucking love that.

She doesn't say anything particularly ground breaking, or even provocative. It's merely observing shit that exists and commenting on why it's not exactly a positive portrayal of women. Why are people so pissed off about this? Is it the kickstarter thing? I have no idea why Anita's become such a Big Name on the Internet, there seems very little to set her apart from the background noise of the rest of youtube, other than the tidal wave of negativity that's been hurled her way.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

What I don't understand is why there was such a delay between Part 1 and Part 2 considering that they both seem to have been filmed as one.

Unless what's she wearing in both videos is her "presenting outfit" or something like that...

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

Seriously, look at her stuff before the kickstarter, and after.

It's the same fucking level of production and research, so it begs the question as to what she's spending the money on.

 

[anthony87]

What I don't understand is why there was such a delay between Part 1 and Part 2 considering that they both seem to have been filmed as one.

Unless what's she wearing in both videos is her "presenting outfit" or something like that...

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

Seriously, look at her stuff before the kickstarter, and after.

It's the same fucking level of production and research, so it begs the question as to what she's spending the money on.

Ah now come on, that's not entirely fair. I happen to think that the backdrop in the post-kickstarter videos looks a lot nicer.

Money well spent!

 

[freaper]

What don't you understand?

Learn more about feminism then.

If you want to know, Anita Sarkeesian is on point in context to feminism as a school of thought. Nothing she has conveyed in her videos is incorrect and she demonstrates her criticism with great clarity and abundant evidence.

Media does have an effect upon us, not directly of course, but ideas conveyed by narrative can leave impressions upon us in the way we interpret things and our own introspective thoughts. (Games like Final Fantasy 7 and Tales of Symphonia for example have had some influence in regards to how I approach ideas in relation to morality or other topics)

If you don't care that is your own fault. You should not blame Anita for your own disinterest in the subject of how women (and men for that matter) are presented in popular media and narrative.

And the fact that people continue to judge her character shows me that they are not interested in actually learning something new, rather going on a petty crusade to assassinate someone who dares speak about awful and problematic things in video games.

The thing is, problematic things DO exist in video games, there is nothing wrong with talking about them. Just because a video game is merely meant to be 'entertainment' like any other form of media, it does not excuse it from greater dialog or insightfulness. How else do you expect people to understand the WHY of things if we just pretend that its 'normal' or expected that representation of women in games are roundly awful? And not just awful, but pretty much stereotyped to the point that the Exceptions always always always float to the top of relevancy because of how much awfulness there actually is!

Though in the end, I could always revel in the fact that Anita brings out the worst in gamer dorks everywhere and make fun of them.

I came. I read. I quoted.

To add to the discussion; she's still working on her series. For all we know she might address male stereotypes as well, of which there are plenty.
There's obviously a massive majority that doesn't give a shit about the subject matter. That doesn't mean it's not relevant to our current day and age. As long as you understand that Sarkeesian is in favour of the betterment of the gaming industry as a whole (not just the narrative part of games) you can criticize her delivery method as much as you like. If you fail to see that, however, don't butt in and kindly gtfo.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Though in the end, I could always revel in the fact that Anita brings out the worst in gamer dorks everywhere and make fun of them.

That she does.

And behaving like dicks, dishing out exaggerations, insults and nonsense all the time will totally show those damn feminists that their negative perception of gamer dudes is not fair at all.

 

[Uhura]

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

How exactly did she 'trick' people into giving her money?

 

[Daystar Clarion]

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

How exactly did she 'trick' people into giving her money?

You tell me why she needs 150k to make the same show she did before, with no notable improvements to the level of production and research

 

[Uhura]

You tell me why she needs 150k to make the same show she did before, with no notable improvements to the level of production and research

She asked for 6k.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

You tell me why she needs 150k to make the same show she did before, with no notable improvements to the level of production and research

She asked for 6k.

Well there you go

I personally think that taking more than she requested, with no increase in the level of output or production quality, isn't right.


If I asked for a £100 from a friend, and he gave me £1000, I would give £900 back.

I understand that not everyone sees it that way, it's just something I take issue with.

 

[Uhura]

I personally think that taking more than she requested, with no increase in the level of output or production quality, isn't right.
If I asked for a £100 from a friend, and he gave me £1000, I would give £900 back.

Kickstarter doesn't allow project creators to shut down the funding after the funding goal has been reached. People also weren't 'tricked' into giving her more money, as the Kickstarter page clearly shows how much money the project has already received. Meaning that when the project had reached
- 30k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
- 80k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
- 110k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
etc.

People who funded the project were also able to view Sarkeesian's earlier videos before they donated to this project. I really wouldn't call that 'tricking' people.

I'm not sure, how exactly do you think she should spend the extra money. She had designed a 6k video series and was overfunded by 150k. Should she be wearing a diamond studded vest? A gold grill? Would people call her use of money frivolous if she actually spent tons of money just to make the videos look extra extra pretty?

And have people who donated to the project actually asked for refunds? Or are they happy with the way they spent their money?

 

[Lionsfan]

What I don't understand is why there was such a delay between Part 1 and Part 2 considering that they both seem to have been filmed as one.

Unless what's she wearing in both videos is her "presenting outfit" or something like that...

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

Seriously, look at her stuff before the kickstarter, and after.

It's the same fucking level of production and research, so it begs the question as to what she's spending the money on.

Ahem, *raises the question, not begs the question.

Also, I don't think she "tricked anybody" into giving her money. People fully knew what they were supporting. She promised videos about tropes, and has delivered videos about tropes. Whether they're good or not is up to you, but she's delivering on her promised material.

I see it this way, people spent 50,000 dollars to build a fucking RoboCop statue and try to put it in Detroit. It doesn't matter that they're never going to go visit it, or that locals here don't want it, or that it's gonna be vandalized and grafitti'd to hell; they wanted a statue, and they're getting a statue in some form. With her, people wanted to fund the project, and now they're receiving their videos.

I think you're severely underestimating the stupidity of a lot of people. There's no need to "trick" anybody into funding stupid things.

To be honest I almost feel sorry for her. On the one hand, she presumably only wanted to keep things small, but then was overflooded with resources which she probably had no idea what to do with. And now she's in over her head and is just floundering under all the added pressure.

On the other hand, she never said things were getting out of control and rather arrogantly assured us she was doing everything right and was fighting against the "trolls of the world" (even when people didn't attack her, and just criticized her) and has this smug attitude about herself. So most of my sympathy goes away rather quickly

 

[Woodsey]

I wonder if Anita has a boyfriend. Who the fuck would date this psycho? If she does, he's probably some BDSM freak who enjoys being choked and whipped.

This is an embarrassingly pathetic comment on so many levels.

The woman is a hack.

She's like an undergraduate that didn't quite leave enough time for her dissertation and just rehashes the same simple rhetoric we've all heard a million times before.

Not to mention that she has no clue how context works.

Whilst she hardly offers the most insightful commentary I've ever seen, she's rarely illogical or unclear in her conclusions. And fuck me, at least she actually bothers to bring up these issues instead of pretending they don't exist, like half of this fucking website.

And as for your other, much more stupid comment, she did not "trick" people into giving her money, she set a goal on Kickstarter which was passed and then people carried on giving her money. Like all fucking Kickstarters. You make it sound as if she reset the counter to $100 at the top of every morning and cackled into a cauldron.

And if I could just be especially clear: there are comments which come from this website surrounding the topic of this woman and her video series that are so especially idiotic that I end up defending someone whose work I find to be, for the most part, both obvious and unenlightening.

 

[Tayh]

This topic is why we can't have good things.
People are so quick to dismiss her as a 'feminazi', they won't even take a second to consider if she actually has some valid points.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I personally think that taking more than she requested, with no increase in the level of output or production quality, isn't right.
If I asked for a £100 from a friend, and he gave me £1000, I would give £900 back.

Kickstarter doesn't allow project creators to shut down the funding after the funding goal has been reached. People also weren't 'tricked' into giving her more money, as the Kickstarter page clearly shows how much money the project has already received. Meaning that when the project had reached
- 30k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
- 80k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
- 110k, people viewed the project page and decided to give her more money
etc.

People who funded the project were also able to view Sarkeesian's earlier videos before they donated to this project. I really wouldn't call that 'tricking' people.

I'm not sure, how exactly do you think she should spend the extra money. She had designed a 6k video series and was overfunded by 150k. Should she be wearing a diamond studded vest? A gold grill? Would people call her use of money frivolous if she actually spent tons of money just to make the videos look extra extra pretty?

And have people who donated to the project actually asked for refunds? Or are they happy with the way they spent their money?

What I don't understand is why there was such a delay between Part 1 and Part 2 considering that they both seem to have been filmed as one.

Unless what's she wearing in both videos is her "presenting outfit" or something like that...

She didn't have time to change since she was too busy rolling around in the giant pile of money she tricked people into giving her.

Seriously, look at her stuff before the kickstarter, and after.

It's the same fucking level of production and research, so it begs the question as to what she's spending the money on.

Ahem, *raises the question, not begs the question.

Also, I don't think she "tricked anybody" into giving her money. People fully knew what they were supporting. She promised videos about tropes, and has delivered videos about tropes. Whether they're good or not is up to you, but she's delivering on her promised material.

I see it this way, people spent 50,000 dollars to build a fucking RoboCop statue and try to put it in Detroit. It doesn't matter that they're never going to go visit it, or that locals here don't want it, or that it's gonna be vandalized and grafitti'd to hell; they wanted a statue, and they're getting a statue in some form. With her, people wanted to fund the project, and now they're receiving their videos.

I think you're severely underestimating the stupidity of a lot of people. There's no need to "trick" anybody into funding stupid things.

To be honest I almost feel sorry for her. On the one hand, she presumably only wanted to keep things small, but then was overflooded with resources which she probably had no idea what to do with. And now she's in over her head and is just floundering under all the added pressure.

On the other hand, she never said things were getting out of control and rather arrogantly assured us she was doing everything right and was fighting against the "trolls of the world" (even when people didn't attack her, and just criticized her) and has this smug attitude about herself. So most of my sympathy goes away rather quickly

When I say 'trick', I don't mean it in the very literal sense that she deceived people.

I mean it in the playful 'that jammy git, she managed to get 150k ' kind of way.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I wonder if Anita has a boyfriend. Who the fuck would date this psycho? If she does, he's probably some BDSM freak who enjoys being choked and whipped.

This is an embarrassingly pathetic comment on so many levels.

The woman is a hack.

She's like an undergraduate that didn't quite leave enough time for her dissertation and just rehashes the same simple rhetoric we've all heard a million times before.

Not to mention that she has no clue how context works.

Whilst she hardly offers the most insightful commentary I've ever seen, she's rarely illogical or unclear in her conclusions. And fuck me, at least she actually bothers to bring up these issues instead of pretending they don't exist, like half of this fucking website.

And as for your other, much more stupid comment, she did not "trick" people into giving her money, she set a goal on Kickstarter which was passed and then people carried on giving her money. Like all fucking Kickstarters. You make it sound as if she reset the counter to $100 at the top of every morning and cackled into a cauldron.

And if I could just be especially clear: there are comments which come from this website surrounding the topic of this woman and her video series that are so especially idiotic that I end up defending someone whose work I find to be, for the most part, both obvious and unenlightening.

Sorry, missed you in the quote.

See above

 

[Uhura]

When I say 'trick', I don't mean it in the very literal sense that she deceived people.

I mean it in the playful 'that jammy git, she managed to get 150k ' kind of way.

Well if that was your intention, then I have to point out that your posts haven't really sounded that playful. You called her a hack and you said that she 'tricked' people into giving her money in a thread where people were already shitting on her personality.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

When I say 'trick', I don't mean it in the very literal sense that she deceived people.

I mean it in the playful 'that jammy git, she managed to get 150k ' kind of way.

Well if that was your intention, then I have to point out that your posts haven't really sounded that playful. You called her a hack and you said that she 'tricked' people into giving her money in a thread where people were already shitting on her personality.

That's other people.

I'm not other people.

I'm me.

Who she is as person doesn't concern me, all I know is that I think her work sucks.

 

[PoisonTaco]

She lost all credibility when she doesn't allow for any criticism of her work. Yeah there are jerks out there who will say the most vile things because she's standing up for equality. It's the internet, it'll happen regardless of where you stand.

I think what gets to me most is that she thinks that the portrayals of women in games are sexist. I think if we had an open discussion about it we could probably agree that yes some things are sexist. But no you're not allowed to criticize her. You're either for her, or you're sexist. She's campaigning for people to be more open minded and more tolerant when she is doing the exact opposite. If she actually listened to criticisms for once, she could probably improve almost all of her arguments and make something that we can all get behind.

I'm all for discussing equality in how people are portrayed in media but it needs to be a discussion.

 

[Uhura]

That's other people.
I'm not other people.
I'm me.
Who she is as person doesn't concern me, all I know is that I think her work sucks.

Yes, you are you, which is why I didn't say that you shitted on her personality. I just pointed out that if you want to sound playful, it doesn't really work if your post sounds just like any other hate-post.