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

[kaioshade]

I think Anita hits a nerve with a lot of gamers, especially the way she presents some things in her videos. It comes off as very hostile and "bitchy" at times. I do not like the tone she has in her videos, and i think some of her points are outright incorrect. However i have watched every single video, and i can appreciate what she is TRYING to do. The discussion and subject need to be tackled, i do not think she is the right person to do it, but at the moment she is better than nothing.

You do not necessarily have to LOVE a subject to speak about it. I do hope some of her next few videos are a bit better researched, because her first few videos have not had a lot to them, except a list of examples, and not really delving into the details of them, which is something i would like to see done.

Captha: Smelling Salt. How amusing and strangely fitting.

She stole the footage she used in her videos and did zero research.

You don't have to love something to speak about it, but you have to have some knowledge.

I am definitely aware she used footage from "Let's Play" videos on YouTube. Perhaps she found them a easy source of footage rather than recording new footage of a few seconds. Maybe it was to save time. I am trying to give her the benefit of the doubt. I really hope she did SOME research on these games and did not receive 160K for nothing.

The research is all speculation, while her videos may not have been the best presented, to say she has done absolutely no research is a bit of a stretch without absolute proof of the fact.

 

[quickmelt]

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.

I'm not, and you're just attacking me for no reason.

 

[Ruzinus]

Maybe she played games like Mario as a kid, quit sometime before the era before shooters became all common, then got back into it after playing Rayman or Wii sports or something following that 2010 lecture.

Her total statements are these:

Anita Age 10: Plays video games.
Anita 2010: Doesn't play video games, thinks they're currently largely about shooting and ripping peoples heads off.
Anita 2011: Does play video games, thinks they have positive aspects on cognitive abilities as shown by certain studies.

I'm not a fan of Anita, but it seems quite possible that all 3 of those things are true. I'm a fan of things now that I wasn't a year ago, I don't see why her opinions and hobbies can't change over a year.

 

[quickmelt]

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.

I'm not, and you're just attacking me for no reason.

I don't mean to attack you. It's just frustrating how stupid people become about this woman. You don't know how much research she did. You don't know why she used footage from LP's. But it makes your argument look better if you assume she stole it because "Muhahaha" and that she did zero research. You have no facts to back up your argument, no proof one way or another. You have nothing on her.

So why are you arguing at all?

I'm assuming she stole the LP footage because she felt it was easier than recording her own (which would have created a better video). So, you have no knowledge of what I "assume" she did and you're shoving words in my mouth. Why would I need to know why she used footage from LPs anyways? It's already discrediting that she did that and I don't need to say anything further. Needless to say i'm not watching any more of her videos unless she uses her own footage.

 

[Erik Zarkov]

This video does not do anything to prove that Anita is not a gamer. What the video shows is a clip from 2010 where she states that she isn't gamer, that she doesn't like certain kinds of video games, and that she is currently researching video games. After that, we have 2013 with various videos of her claiming to be a gamer.

The video does not show anything from 2010 to 2013 to show that during that time Anita was not playing video games. You're going to have a hard time convincing me that as part of her research she never played any games in this 3 year period. Even if she stayed away from the more violent games, I find it highly likely that she would learn of games that appealed to her and decided to play them. Re-igniting the enjoyment she had playing when she was younger.

Yes, that's making some assumptions. But then so does the creator of the video. He's assuming that Anita didn't play any games during her 3 years. Or perhaps another assumption, that Anita didn't play *enough* games during this time and thus she should not be allowed to give herself the title of "gamer".

So what this video ends up proving to me is that there is still a problem in the male culture where women have to prove themselves to certain men, or else be tared and feathered with the "Fake Geek Girl" or "Fake Gamer Girl" title. It also proves to me that the creator has a much smaller pair of balls than Anita, since he feels the need to hide his voice and face.

 

[TheCaptain]

You do not necessarily have to LOVE a subject to speak about it.

You don't have to love something to speak about it, but you have to have some knowledge.

Interestingly enough, this leads right back to the topic at hand, doesn't it? If you're looking at X in Y, in this case sexism in video games, you really don't need to be well-versed in both X and Y. Sure, you have a responsibility towards your backers to do your research and make your argument in an objective and rational manner (or not, depending on what your backers are looking for in the first place), but there's really no point in pretending you're a big fan of the medium you're going to criticize.

I haven't seen much of her stuff since I've been avoiding the debate almost entirely; this has gotten way to ugly for my tastes, but I'm curious. Either her perspective has changed and she now identifies as a fan of something she didn't find that important before, or she was trying to bolster her credibility by trying to appear as sort of an insider where she was not.

Might also be she's trolling, at a casual glance it looks that nothing makes her supporters flock to her side in greater numbers than those vicious, ugly attacks against her person - which, by the way, I'm ok with since the shit she's been taking from "the Internet" since it all started... well, I think we all can agree that none of that was even remotely ok.

Back to the OP, I think it must be allowed to ask these questions - it's not like somebody dug into her personal life for dirty laundry, these are conflicting statements she's made in public. And in the end, the person behind a message always matters, even though that's easy and sometimes comfortable to forget.

 

[kaioshade]

Here is another view about the Let's Play video debate. When a user uploads a Let's Play video, since they do not own the copyright to the IP in question, the video is considered fair use. Even if Anita did use the footage without notifying the uploader, she really was not legally obligated to. So slightly tacky? yes. Wrong? no.

 

[veloper]

What is a fan?

When you're not a fan of something, can you still like it?

Cherry picking is the reason why Anita's argument was so weak. Fandom is not a requirement.

 

[shrekfan246]

I'm not, and you're just attacking me for no reason.

The irony of this statement combined with your other posts on this subject is positively palpable.

OT: I'm not a "gamer" either. You know why? Because the gaming community is full of the exact type of people that we constantly ***** about being stereotyped as by the general public. Because people are currently losing their shit over the fact that Grand Theft Auto V isn't getting absolutely perfect reviews from every reviewing outlet. Because people will swear off companies forever after that company offered them free games, but "they weren't the free games I wanted". Because people throw fits over the smallest promotional material up to a year before a game is actually released, based on nothing more than supposition.

Because every time I see another thread about Anita Sarkeesian, more than half of the comments in it amount to little more than grown men throwing temper tantrums over somebody trying to talk about a subject relevant to their hobbies. Somebody who, I would like to point out, had no sway on the industry in the first place and is only becoming more relevant the more everyone complains and whines about her.

I don't even care about Sarkeesian. I haven't watched any of her videos, and I don't intend to. But seriously, everyone who bitches about her because of reasons? Realize that you're only giving her more power and legitimizing the concerns that she has brought up about sexism in the industry/community.

 

[kaioshade]

What is a fan?

When you're not a fan of something, can you still like it?

Cherry picking is the reason why Anita's argument was so weak. Fandom is not a requirement.

Of course. I generally am not a fan of fantasy, never saw (nor care to see) Lord of the Rings, or most other fantasy, but immensely enjoy Game of Thrones.

I do agree she does a large amount of cherry picking examples, something i hope she does rely on too much.

 

[TheCaptain]

Nope! LPers have no rights to footage of games they upload to youtube. If she sampled their voice, or their critique, that would be different. But she didn't. She took a couple seconds of game footage, and put it in her 25 minute video.

I actually agree with that from a purely legal point of view and assume that when producing a web series like that you probably don't think much about where you get a couple seconds of gameplay from. On the other hand, if you want to make a point within a community, it generally can't hurt to show a bit of respect to the people there. Especially if you're going for a "one of you" image.

That said, did any LP'ers actually complain about Sarkeesian using their footage or is that just something "the Internet" latched onto when it came out?

 

[kaioshade]

Nope! LPers have no rights to footage of games they upload to youtube. If she sampled their voice, or their critique, that would be different. But she didn't. She took a couple seconds of game footage, and put it in her 25 minute video.

I actually agree with that from a purely legal point of view and assume that when producing a web series like that you probably don't think much about where you get a couple seconds of gameplay from. On the other hand, if you want to make a point within a community, it generally can't hurt to show a bit of respect to the people there. Especially if you're going for a "one of you" image.

That said, did any LP'ers actually complain about Sarkeesian using their footage or is that just something "the Internet" latched onto when it came out?

I dont remember the exact individual, but one Lp'er did in fact comment that the footage she used was from ne of his videos. He was not even that angry about it, merely pointed it out, it was the collective internet at that point that used it as fuel against her.