Prolific "video games make you bad" researcher exposed as planning to refuse to publish his work if it doesn't show video game make you bad + mor

[Dwarvenhobble]

Anti-games advocates don't leave room for doubt or extrapolation; for them, games are irredeemable and deserve nothing short of being banned and their creators to face legal consequences, and they are pretty clear about it.

Oh they do leave room. They really do.

Mary Whitehouse did it a lot with film and TV too. She even said she didn't want things censored or banned.


Just presenting it as harmful to society etc.

It's the same pattern.

Hell Fredric Wertham never called for comic books to be censored etc he called for moral restrictions on the industry.

The same thing Anita has done with gaming.

Do you think people are born sexist or does the environment they are born in contribute to them being a sexist?

That entirely depends how you define sexism and not acknowledgement of societal differences which research suggests also exist in nature.

 

[Worgen]

You've also said you believe without violent media society would be less violent yet with violent media society is being markedly less violent.

For that to be more accurate you also need to take into account the reduction of lead in paint, water and air. And you should also include greater access to abortion.

Well yes, because people defending her keep making bullshit arguments. Often relying on the ignorance or unwillingness of the person they're arguing with the provide evidence or waiting for them to find evidence from certain online sources so the can then try to dismiss the argument by going "Well you quoted the Nazi Sargon of Akkad so your argument is invalid". Using the common "Man covered in shit" argument fallacy.

Go sit in the corner and think about how I said I wasn't getting into that shit.

yes, not as often as animal fights lead to it though.

Doesn't matter, it can, which is how you are approaching this whole thing.

 

[CaitSeith]

Hell Fredric Wertham never called for comic books to be censored etc he called for moral restrictions on the industry.

The same thing Anita has done with gaming.

Sorry, but Fredric Wertham DID call for national legislation to prohibit the circulation and display of comic books to children under the age of fifteen when he appeared in front of the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency. That's way beyond than just calling moral restrictions on the industry; that's calling for bona fide lawmaking.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

For that to be more accurate you also need to take into account the reduction of lead in paint, water and air. And you should also include greater access to abortion.

And to claim societies problems are caused by games requires the ignoring of so many factors.

People thinking 90s games caused sexism when in the past women weren't even allowed to ride bicycles and there were no video games then

Go sit in the corner and think about how I said I wasn't getting into that shit.

I don't need to think on it. It's obvious people all for "Being critical of media" don't seem to be able to accept the pernicious things about Anita's own work.

Doesn't matter, it can, which is how you are approaching this whole thing.

And yet my point was violent is inherent in nature too not merely human society.

Sorry, but Fredric Wertham DID call for national legislation to prohibit the circulation and display of comic books to children under the age of fifteen when he appeared in front of the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency. That's way beyond than just calling moral restrictions on the industry; that's calling for bona fide lawmaking.

Yet initially he was calling for the industry to regular before the censorship happened from the government.

Anita realises the legal fight is lost so is trying the moralistic pressure one on others.

You know like Morality in Media tried not long ago vs Steam and adult visual novels etc on there.

 

[Agema]

That entirely depends how you define sexism and not acknowledgement of societal differences which research suggests also exist in nature.

I only need to see the title of that programme to know it's almost guaranteed to be colossal load of shit.

If for whatever reason you can have a man with a female brain or a woman with a male brain, then all it proves that that particular concept of brains being "male" and "female" is hogwash.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I only need to see the title of that programme to know it's almost guaranteed to be colossal load of shit.

If for whatever reason you can have a man with a female brain or a woman with a male brain, then all it proves that that particular concept of brains being "male" and "female" is hogwash.

You mean the video that's actually from BBC's Horizon Science documentary series?

That's the problem of passing judgement that quick lol

 

[Trunkage]

I dunno.

Could there be a cultural component? Or is from within the family? Eg. Parents passing on sexism. (Teaching them, not genetically, I mean.)

(Or both)

 

[McElroy]

Why are we digging up dead horses from half a decade ago? At least I referenced something modern. And "reinforcing and perpetuating" isn't hard to understand. The opposite of that isn't something that exists in a void either but a piece that "challenges" sexism, stereotypes and what have you. It's the same responsibility plea that I talked about earlier: for certain types of progressive critics those progressive values must be shown in the work for them to truly like it. Though I actually doubt they can ever be pleased.

Kids today are more messed up because of video games? TV used to be a techno-babysitter, but nowadays digital media encompass so so much and in excess it does disasters to childrens' still malleable brains. Natural isn't always better, but this time it is. My most cautious guess is that smartphones crossed the final barrier.

Oh and VTubers get the northeast corner of the gaming room where they can Uwu and owo and do their Japanese baby-talk in peace without bothering anyone. Yep, it's next to the garbage cans, but they're painted green to blend in.

 

[Trunkage]

That entirely depends how you define sexism and not acknowledgement of societal differences which research suggests also exist in nature.

So... women should kill men after having sex because some animals do it?

You could excuse a lot of things if we did that.

I don’t deny there is a possibility of genetics making one sexist. We also have laws and traditions that stop a lot of things that other animals are free to do. Just because our brains might be different, doesn’t mean laws should be made to encourage male or female dominated society

 

[Trunkage]

Why are we digging up dead horses from half a decade ago? At least I referenced something modern. And "reinforcing and perpetuating" isn't hard to understand.

Yeah, not when you want it to mean something else

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So... women should kill men after having sex because some animals do it?

You could excuse a lot of things if we did that.

I don’t deny there is a possibility of genetics making one sexist. We also have laws and traditions that stop a lot of things that other animals are free to do. Just because our brains might be different, doesn’t mean laws should be made to encourage male or female dominated society

True but to deny nature itself is also a problem. Like when people were claiming (and Anita was one of them) that there are no inherent differences between men and women beyond the obvious genitals etc.

It's been part of the reason for her regular pushes to make all sport non gendered

 

[Worgen]

And to claim societies problems are caused by games requires the ignoring of so many factors.

People thinking 90s games caused sexism when in the past women weren't even allowed to ride bicycles and there were no video games then

I never said societal problems are caused by video games, I said reducing the violence in them would reduce some violence, but not as much as eliminating lead. And I said reducing violence in media and how much we glorify certain kinda of violence would impact things from all media, including stories. But this is one of those 'pie in the sky' things that is almost tautological since if our stories/media had less violence then we would be less violent and wouldn't find that kind of thing glorious.

I don't need to think on it. It's obvious people all for "Being critical of media" don't seem to be able to accept the pernicious things about Anita's own work.

*fart noiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiise*

And yet my point was violent is inherent in nature too not merely human society.

Not wearing pants is pretty inherent in nature yet we seem to require pants most places.

 

[Elijin]

Anita is a fascinating case of her detractors providing her a platform, and keeping her relevant.

She made a (mediocre) video essay about sexism in video games. I assume one in a sea of essays on sexism in media. She got a platform because certain demographics rabidly felt she didn't deserve it. Had they ignored her, I doubt any of us would know her name, her reach would've been tiny.

And the trend continues. You guys are listing thing after thing she has apparently done with the internet clout you gave her. Most of us lost interest partway through her debut piece.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I never said societal problems are caused by video games, I said reducing the violence in them would reduce some violence, but not as much as eliminating lead. And I said reducing violence in media and how much we glorify certain kinda of violence would impact things from all media, including stories. But this is one of those 'pie in the sky' things that is almost tautological since if our stories/media had less violence then we would be less violent and wouldn't find that kind of thing glorious.

Why would it reduce real life violence again?

*fart noiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiise*

Well yes a lot of Anita fans are fart sniffers.

Not wearing pants is pretty inherent in nature yet we seem to require pants most places.

Well we're not quite as hairy was we once were lol

Anita is a fascinating case of her detractors providing her a platform, and keeping her relevant.

She made a (mediocre) video essay about sexism in video games. I assume one in a sea of essays on sexism in media. She got a platform because certain demographics rabidly felt she didn't deserve it. Had they ignored her, I doubt any of us would know her name, her reach would've been tiny.

And the trend continues. You guys are listing thing after thing she has apparently done with the internet clout you gave her. Most of us lost interest partway through her debut piece.

Yes sure, her detractors are the reason she got front page promotion on a number of websites and constant prominent positioning...........can anyone else smell something? It smell like gas..........

 

[Elijin]

100% sure. Her kickstarter exploded due to harassment and each thing she's done since has also been granted a spotlight due to the extreme negative following she has. It created a situation where she generated lots of traffic due to controversy and incidental support from bystanders who were there to show the harassment was not okay. Her core audience who are there for her content is small, probably because she just wasnt that charismatic, which is pretty crucial for a video essay format.

 

[Trunkage]

True but to deny nature itself is also a problem. Like when people were claiming (and Anita was one of them) that there are no inherent differences between men and women beyond the obvious genitals etc.

It's been part of the reason for her regular pushes to make all sport non gendered

I haven’t listened to anything past her second video. So perhaps she’s changed.

My main problem with the videos was that they were incredibly gendered and disregarded men, pretending the same effects benefited men but hurt women. If you’ve heard of Incels, you’d would never say that was true.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

100% sure. Her kickstarter exploded due to harassment and each thing she's done since has also been granted a spotlight due to the extreme negative following she has. It created a situation where she generated lots of traffic due to controversy and incidental support from bystanders who were there to show the harassment was not okay. Her core audience who are there for her content is small, probably because she just wasnt that charismatic, which is pretty crucial for a video essay format.

You mean the Kickstarted some-one spammed onto 4chan's /b/ for days. The Kickstarter whose entire comments are available in the internet archive (feel free to check) yet you won't find this claimed harassment in the comments as the comment section was backers only. I couldn't possibly be people published without checking and just on faith alone right?

She played on peoples sexism to get backing knowing some of the press couldn't resist a damsel in distress story lol

 

[Elijin]

Your argument appears to be "Show me the harassment in the section where you had to pay for entry". You appear to be weilding that to imply there was no harassment.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I haven’t listened to anything past her second video. So perhaps she’s changed.

My main problem with the videos was that they were incredibly gendered and disregarded men, pretending the same effects benefited men but hurt women. If you’ve heard of Incels, you’d would never say that was true.

Oh her first couple of videos were kinda mild considering how she goes later on lol. Boil the frog and all that.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Your argument appears to be "Show me the harassment in the section where you had to pay for entry". You appear to be weilding that to imply there was no harassment.

You don't have to pay to view the comments just post there lol