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

[wetnap]

​

In 2010 giving a lecture to students at a college she says

"I'm not a fan of video games, I actually had to learn a lot about video games in the process of making this"
Why does it matter?

She has claimed time and time again In the media that she's been a life long fan, and that has been the motivation behind her campaign. Yet as we can see, its not true.

Furthermore she later on dismisses all shooting games as "gross" in a stereotypically "girly" way, which just doesn't fit with her current "I'm a gamer girl" act.


This has nothing to do with the points made in her video, that's another discussion all together, but whether or not her motivations were honest from the get go are a valid question. She does seem to have at the very least misrepresented herself.


This also matters because she's been at the forefront of shaping the debate on this, and sadly the tactics she has used have been less than conducive to free, honest or even civil discussion.

Its clear that she decided she needed to put on the pretense of being a gamer so she could tar all those who would be against her from within the group. It makes for a better narrative than a feminist "pop culture critic" commentator going after video games from outside fandom or experience. I guess it was just another measure to help insulate herself from criticism.

 

[Caiphus]

Aside from the fact that you've just won me a bet, we didn't really need a third locked Anita thread in one day.

 

[wetnap]

Why locked?

Just keep it civil, it is a legitimate story.

 

[wetnap]

We've already had this thread twice. Both times mods locked them. Its a bullshit argument, and it saddens me that people keep feeling the need to parrot it.

Sorry just calling something bs doesn't make it so.

When one purposely misrepresents themselves so publically, it becomes a valid concern.

 

[Caiphus]

Sorry just calling something bs doesn't make it so.

When one purposely misrepresents themselves so publically, it becomes a valid concern.

No, Jeffers is absolutely correct. It's an ad hominem argument at its core, and even then not a very exciting one.

I mean, you could at least invoke Godwin's law.

Edit: And "valid concern", what the hell? This isn't a matter of national security for Christ's sake.

 

[wetnap]

Sorry just calling something bs doesn't make it so.

When one purposely misrepresents themselves so publically, it becomes a valid concern.

No, Jeffers is absolutely correct. It's an ad hominem argument at its core, and even then not a very exciting one.

I mean, you could at least invoke Godwin's law.

It would be ad hominem if someone attacked the points made in her videos based solely on this, but frankly no one is doing that.

But this isn't about that, its about her misrepresentation of herself. She puts out a narrative of herself to bolster her points, and frankly its what she relies on to both get support and coverage. This misrepresentation of her actual experience with gaming was by her own hand, no one forced her to be dishonest about where she was coming from on this issue.

Just imagine a male critic of say...the Twilight series, so for the purposes of obtaining monetary and media support pretended to be a spurned "life long" fan. Are you really saying it wouldn't matter if he was rumbled on his act?



If you lie on your resume, why does it matter?


If a fake war veteran speaks out against or for a war, he's speaking based on both false experience and false authority. Does it matter? Of course it does. Would you really say going after someone who claimed to be a war vet, but wasn't, an invalid "ad hominem" attack?

 

[Caiphus]

It would be ad hominem if someone attacked the points made in her videos based solely on this, but frankly no one is doing that.

But this isn't about that, its about her misrepresentation of herself. She puts out a narrative of herself to bolster her points, and frankly its what she relies on to both get support and coverage. This misrepresentation of her actual experience with gaming was by her own hand, no one forced her to be dishonest about where she was coming from on this issue.

Just imagine a male critic of say...the Twilight series, so for the purposes of obtaining monetary and media support pretended to be a spurned fan. Are you really saying it wouldn't matter if he was rumbled on his act?

If someone claimed they were a war veteran, are you saying it wouldn't matter if they lied?

If a fake war veteran speaks out against or for a war, he's speaking based on both false experience and false authority. Does it matter? Of course it does. Would you really say going after someone who claimed to be a war vet, but wasn't, an invalid "ad hominem" attack?

I really can't believe I'm doing this at half past midnight...

In fact, I won't. This is an issue on which there is no convincing people. Especially when a good 60% of your, admittedly sparse, posting history is on the topic of Sarkeesian. This is clearly something you're passionate about, I just don't have the time/stamina to go toe-to-toe on this.

What someone thought 3 years ago is no basis for a counter-argument, especially on the subject of video games. There are plenty of legitimate areas where one can argue against the points she makes, this is not one of them. Three years is a long time. It was roughly the average time I spent in a single country growing up, for example. That someone might have decided that they would try an entertainment medium in that time is not a strange fantasy.

And the fact that this video was brought up three times in one day shows how ridiculous the whole situation has become.

 

[sky14kemea]

Opened back up due to requests in the Mod Group. (See, we're reasonable people... )

Please try to keep it civil. I'll be letting the other Mods know to keep an eye on this thread.

 

[Thoughtful_Salt]

If games can't convince people who don't play games that they are legitimate conveyers of story and meaning, then what have we accomplished? Her outside perspective on the medium would be important in that respect. It should be noted that her opinion seems to have shifted since then, but at the outset she wanted to be convinced that our mediums storytelling was top-notch and she hasn't been convinced so far.

 

[Roxas1359]

Opened back up due to requests in the Mod Group. (See, we're reasonable people... )

Please try to keep it civil. I'll be letting the other Mods know to keep an eye on this thread.

You poor mods have been having a rough week with the WGDF thread, I don't envy your jobs at all. Especially since now the GTA V review is out and Greg didn't give it a perfect score. I fear your job may be getting harder. D:

OT:

We've already had this thread twice. Both times mods locked them. Its a bullshit argument, and it saddens me that people keep feeling the need to parrot it.

I pretty much agree with what you've said in the first, or was it the second, thread about this, it's a stupid argument in general. I mean personally I don't agree with a lot of what Sarkeesian says, but this is by far one of the pettiest arguments I've seen about her. Now to disappear from this thread because I don't feel like talking about gender issues in games anymore because they clog about as much space on these forums as ME3 threads used to. XD

 

[quickmelt]

Her central arguments arent on trial here

Exactly, because this is an ad hominem argument.

There is literally no reason to talk about Sarkeesian as a person. The only reason anyone does so is to discredit her. And the reason they're trying to discredit her is because they don't like her argument. The fact that they try to combat her argument with an assault on her personage makes this entire line of inquiry ad hominem, and therefore unworthy of anybody's time.

I'm disappointed that the mods didn't leave this locked. There's really nothing but flames to be gained here.

If she's not a gamer how does she have the necessary knowledge to critique or discuss games? That's like telling someone "I'm going to discuss the economy in a major way with zero knowledge of it." And then getting 180 grand for it. It was also revealed earlier that she didn't even play the games and stole footage from LPer's. So, theft, zero knowledge of the medium she's making videos for, and theft of the footage she "supposedly " took her self.

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[quickmelt]

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.

 

[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.