The_Kodu said:
MysticSlayer said:
The_Kodu said:
True but the approach very much is "You should feel bad because playing these games is giving girls eating disorders merely but playing them it shows you support this"
Keep in mind, Anita doesn't think a game is all bad or all good based on its treatment of women. She even said at the beginning of her last video that it is entirely possible to really enjoy the games she criticizes but that that doesn't exempt them from scrutiny for what they do wrong. After all, it is possible to both love and hate things in the same game. It's something we all do, anyways.
No she doesn't think the game is all bad just those who play them........... linking games with content she dislikes to people being
woman abusers and rape apologists.
For the bolded part: Once again, please show where she specifically says men will abuse women or please stop exaggerating what she said. And no, pointing out that people may be more accepting of sexual harassment is not the same as saying they will abuse women.
With that said, she doesn't say that all gamers who play these games are rape apologists. Now, I can see how that can come across, but there are a couple notes:
1. She points out that it requires long-term exposure. Furthermore, she doesn't actually limit it to games. Her problem is with games have fallen into the same potentially harmful shortcomings that influence and are influenced by social problems that feminists have been arguing against for years.
2. She says that it tends to lead to increased tolerance and belief in myths. While that may not seem so different than just saying that everyone is a rape apologist, simply calling everyone one is just throwing out baseless accusations. Pointing out the potential dangers that affect more people than they don't at least gives people the opportunity to analyze their own prejudices and beliefs, which certainly shows a lot more respect for someone than going around just saying, "You filthy rape apologist!"
Also, there is a huge difference between pointing out a flawed belief and calling someone a bad person. Great people can have wrong, even disturbing beliefs, just as much as bad people can have admirable beliefs. You simply can't reduce it to a simple black/white dichotomy where good people have an entirely perfect worldview and those possessing even one flaw are suddenly bad. So even if Anita is subtly saying that plenty of gamers are rape apologists, which I seriously doubt she is, you still have to take some incredible leaps in logic to come to the conclusion that she is calling gamers bad people.
MysticSlayer said:
Frission said:
I'm not exactly familiar with this subject, but is there anyone here who can actually build a cohesive argument that doesn't insult the OP?
He makes a ridiculous premise (that Anita thinks games will cause men to rape and kill women) and has yet to back that ridiculous premise up outside of twisting her words from one video. To call out how ridiculous the OP's entire premise for the comparison is is really all we can do at this point until he actually backs up those claims.
Except I actually linked the video and gave the time code of her saying people who play these types of games are rape apologists. true there's a difference between rapist and rape apologist but neither is a particularly positive thing to say to a group of gamers.
And if there is a difference between rape and rape apologists, then the OP's claims are still unsubstantiated. And unless I've someone has posted something while I'm typing this, I still haven't seen anything supporting his claims. The closest is Saucycarpdog's first spoiler, but she was referencing the violence that occurs in games, not in real life, at that point in the video.
And let's face it, there are far more mental barriers to things like rape and murder than there are to holding incorrect beliefs and prejudices. To say that Anita and Thompson are making equivalent claims requires completely ignoring that fact, or, as so many people do, twisting Anita's words while simultaneously complaining about her taking things out of context.
Look, I don't really mind having a reasonable discussion about Sarkeesian's views and videos. Even as someone who thinks most of her basic ideas are good, I still find plenty of flaws in her logic and don't always agree with her solutions. There's plenty of room to have a discussion, and she's done a decent job of opening different discussions with various viewpoints, and there's certainly no need to act like she's the final authority or that she says absolutely nothing of value. However, when people twist her words, claim that she has no sources, and then dismisses those sources simply because they don't agree with the conclusion, then we go from having any reasonable discussion to having every discussion completely hijacked by some of the most ironic arguments imaginable.