I'll admit first off I was a bit harsh in my initial statement. Having spent an hour and a half essentially beating my head against a wall arguing over the same point there as here (reactionary impulse response just to avoid being part of the "bad" side), I did vent a little more on you then I should. I'm sorry for that, though I do stand by my rational, if not so much on my condemnation of you for your stance. So I guess, I am sorry for swinging with a hammer when I shoulda used a rolled up newspaper.darkfox85 said:I?m an avid gamer myself y?know, and like I said in my first post, ?me and mine are what Americans would call Liberal.? You haven?t read or understood that, and once again show that you?re presumptuous and overly defensive. I have no way tied the entirety of gamer culture to be the lowest common denominator because to do so would be tying me and mine down as well. But neither has Anita. It?s just a shame she generated the response she did, and it?s a further shame that you?ve jumped to such a conclusion to beat yourself and your community with the victim stick.runic knight said:The problem here is that you, like her, point at the frothing 4chan mob and declare them a fair representation of gamers.
Alright. You do deserve a little clarification and credit.runic knight said:I just find it dishonest to claim that such an asshat justifies support for his opposition. One bad apple does not ruin the bunch here... [W]hen you out and out say the reason you made the final decision to side with her is because of the trolls that were intentionally riled up, it suggests you are only doing it because of the response of the trolls intentionally riled up.
?The backlash and the reactions against Sarkeesian not only firmly put me on her side, but made me decide to take up feminism again.? - Me
I don?t really give much detail did I? Maybe I should?ve. But you jumped to a lot of conclusions without a more in-depth discussion and then laid a bunch of condescending personal attacks against me and I responded in kind. Why not just ask me first before you came out with all that nonsense? (And suspiciously quickly I might add.)
But like I said to someone else, I suppose I wasn?t too clear. I felt angry before this flashgame showed up but this game is hatred and insanity which I suppose broke the camels back. But I don?t care how you rationalise and apologise for the insane outcry. We all knew this would be controversial but I think something larger, deeper, and more insidious is going on. With this comment, please don?t assume I?m tarring all of us with the same brush. Give me a *little* more credit than that, huh?
I?m showing the backlash had a backlash, and I think I?m justified. You hate the insane responses to her as much as I do (despite respectfully disagreeing with her a little more than me,) so do you not think I?m at least partially justified, even if you perhaps still feel my logic is flawed, irrational, and lazy?
Again, I ask if you?ve had a look at the outrage? This is huge, and despite seeing some decent arguments being put against her that I agree with, this is going way, way too far. The error is not in my reasoning, but with fairness, not entirely in your judgement. But mostly your judgement.runic knight said:[T]he stupidity of making a decision because of the loudmouthed in the crowd.
My criticism of 4chan does not do that. You?re deliberately being dismissive.runic knight said:This suggests that your claims to be aware of everything is nothing but bullshit.
I don?t feel anyone ?asks? for this sort of behaviour and I think you?re actually overestimating 4chans importance in the backlash (if I may be so bold.) If this was some Machiavellian gambit on Anita?s part, it?s really sad that it paid off. Most of the people I?m talking to with on youtube right now (yes, I?m one of those irritating people, sue me) are pretty clearly not 4chan people. But how would I know that? It?s a good question. A better one is how would you?runic knight said:You know, since her vid was spammed over 4chan, a place notorious for trolls and is what fueled the worst of what she got in terms of asshat commentators.
Of course it?s a fucking no! I don?t consider myself the worst of the worst, and all my gamer buddies are even better than me. I would?ve hoped you assumed that being a member of a gaming community I play games both as a hobby and social experience. But instead you assume I?m trying to attack the whole gamer community. I?m not. I have never even made a slight towards it. I?d ask if you think this affair is out of order, but I think you already do.runic knight said:But please, actually address my point if you would. Is it fair to look at the worst and say they represent the whole? I would hope your response is a "no", though since you fail to understand my point of raising it before I don't know.
Oh the trolls represent something alright. They?ve been trying to silence her in any way they can and the attacks are bellow the belt. Par for the course? Yes. Worthy of being ignored? Definitely not. I can understand if Anita feels that way; you have to admit the reaction has been huge, and perhaps we should lend support for her right to free speech and if she does think all gamers are swine, let us prove her wrong on this front. If the later videos she makes meets with the same ?criticism,? maybe we should take a look at our own community and see what?s wrong with it. I have criticisms small and large of every group I?m a member of and every philosophy I subscribe to. Doesn?t mean I hate them now does it? But Anita?s only crime is existing.runic knight said:To put it more directly, she claims the trolls represent gamers as a whole after her video was baited over the assholes of the web. This is akin to saying all bears are killers after wrapping steak around yourself and jumping into a bit of starving bears. It IS dishonest representation.
Maybe I should?ve wrote more. It doesn?t excuse the nonsense you came out with (only a little bit.) I never thought it would cause this much confusion.runic knight said:I know nothing of you except what opinion you posted, which,m as you still seem to keep defending the whole "they were assholes so I will side with her" crap, it IS a sad depressing state. I use that to condemn your opinion because that is all you put of your opinion on this measure.
I really hated that Christmas songs video of hers. Storm in a tea cup and faintly insulting. Other vids? Not bad. Some others? Rather interesting actually! And I like the professional flair to it all. I wonder what she?ll have to say about something that?s a little closer to home for me? Maybe I might learn something! I don?t blame anyone for donating.runic knight said:Not quite my case, more so that you may only care because of the vile directed at her is using her gender as a point to attack by.
Accusation? Thought? Aside? You?re a slippery one I?ll give you that. As for the ?You made a bad accusation therefore the opposite is true? thing... I never had that strain of logic because it?s flawed. It was closer to judging you on the evidence of the baseless judgements you placed upon me. Or thoughts. Or ?not accusations.? And my accusations (or judgements) were not baseless, because you laid the criticism at me first. If I was wrong, I was wrong. But I know for a fact you?re wrong about me.runic knight said:But it wasn't an accusation in the end, merely a thought on the matter. the lack of integrity is, and one I will argue still as I have above, but the other aspect is merely an aside about you. As it isn't an accusation, does that mean the rest of your fault counterargument of "You made a bad accusation therefore the opposite is true" falls apart? Or will you try to rework it because you already think I am some sexist asshole when really I am just sick of bullshit logic being perpetuated as justification.
*sigh* No I fucking don?t! I never suggested that for goodness sake! Maybe some other are but I don?t. I know plenty who oppose her and aren?t sexist (again, youtube chatting) and I know this then and now. I don?t understand why you feel this way and I?m upset that you do! Maybe other people feel I?m saying that? I don?t want to upset people (at least not some of them.)runic knight said:The way you present it, it is as though there are only the two choice, with her or sexist.
Qualifier: I know I left large parts of the post unaddressed. I felt they were adequately explained elsewhere and also I?m tired. If there is anything you wish to call me out on, take aim.
But I?ll say this in closing. On her blog she thanked her supporters both female and male, and I think she acknowledges that not all gamers are total scum. Frankly, between threats of rape and murder and some other shocking stuff, I wonder if I could say the same thing if I were in her position, rather than tell the internet just to fuck itself (but that?d probably do more harm than good.)
Now, anita has used the response on her vids as justification for them and condemnation on games. A quote from her vid description itself
is just one of several examples. And an example of the entirely flawed logical process I railed against. Now yours was more interpreted from what you said about how the reaction of one side prompted you into support of the other. This suggested that you tied the opposition to her together, regardless of differentiation between assholes and people with valid complaints. Simply put, it sounded like you couldn't differentiate between them, using the assholes as reason to support her. That was were I derived the stances from, not an attempt to gain victim status, merely to point out a failed justification.The trolls only managed to prove to everyone that sexism in gaming is indeed a huge problem.
Now, I explained the logical steps of how I came to the conclusion on your stance, so it is a little unfair to call it a jump. Incomplete or incorrect perhaps, but not a leap of logic but a train of thought.
As for something larger, I don't know. That is part of the complaint I have with the way she does lump everything into camps and seems to spur on the trolls. In doing so, you can't tell the real fire from the smoke and anything derived from it will be questionable and nearly worthless. Now if her vid wasn't spammed all over 4chan, if she was a previously known unbiased personality presenting this and if the gaming community looked at her like an actual journalist before she posted this and then it got this sort of hate then you'd have a lot better case. But that isn't what was. I can not in good conscious look at what happened as a sign of the gaming community in any real degree. Actually, no, there is one thing i can draw from this, and that is a positive. The gaming community (as well as non gamers who watched the vid and donated) went above and beyond the call of duty in supporting her in spite of the trolls. I could point to that as a counterpoint to the trolls as showing gamers supporting her ideal in the same light you would as a sign of a greater problem.
I think backlashes in general are not that wise if they are done for the sake of backlash. Think of it along the lines of hating Justin Beiber because he is famous. Just...sort of dumb to me.
Again, I have looked at it. I have seen people driven into a frenzy of rage and bile before as well. And what has happened to her is not isolated to her alone. Politicians of both genders have had punch-them games. Countless youtubers have dealt with vile and comment section spam. Again, I can not see this as more then it is: Bile and hate stirred and spurred by 4chan trolls propagated by her own baiting of said trolls.
Being that many people mention the main reason she got so much response is because within minutes of releasing the vid, it was spammed over 4chan, not being aware of it's importance in this mess suggests less of an understanding then you were claiming.
As for her own hand in spamming it, that has been questioned, though I will see if I can't find the gathered evidence about it so far that someone had posted. She has used the response though, spinning it into justifications, egging on the trolls in some cases and, of course, taking money way above and beyond the asked for amount to the point of ridiculousness. As for why it is important, it is because it is the flash mob of the internet. suddenly, trolls everywhere. It got attention and people, seeing the trolling, follow suit. And there was also the confrontation and battles with them in the comment section that spurred more asshattery. I wont say they were all just trolls, but I will say that things would have been much different and no where near as horrid if her vids weren't spammed over the asshole of the net. More likely then not it would have reached the usual audience, then faded away, not really acknowledged. There is indeed motive in making controversy.
Now, I don't think they should be ignored, that is not what I am saying. I just think they should not be made out to be something they are not. And representatives of gamers as a community is something they are not. Anita's "crime" to me is her dishonest representation of gamers, games as a medium in general, and her lack of credibility. I am not so blind to not know the community has problems, in many areas, but I find her and the way she goes about the task of addressing the problem she sees as a horrible example of what not to do. I likened the problems with games as similar to all media and all story-telling mediums. I've compared sexism as a symptom of this larger problem and her... preference... of attacking it the same as someone being told to take a cough suppressant when coughing because of lung cancer. It masks the problem but doesn't fix it. And in masking it, it can make it worse in the long run.
If we are to look at ourselves a community and games as a whole, we need to look at it from different perceptive then her biased ideals of sexism in everything. As it is, she is becoming the boy who cried wolf and the publicity she has now will tire of her as they hear the claims of sexism and go "not again" with a groan.
I don't blame people for donating. I blame them for donating because they see a bunch of trolls posting bile on her channel. But that is my personal distaste behavior motivated like that. Seems far too similar to the mentality that allow dictators to cease power after a false flag operation. A lazy uniformed response guided by spite or fear or disgust. Though, in a sense, some would say that this is what this was.
I may have been wrong, but I based it off what you gave and showed how it was wrong and the implications of what you said. My argument was valid, which is all I can hope for. Wither or not it was correct is a different part of things. Surely, though I may have been mistaken, you can see how the conclusions drawn were based in a rational train of thought.
Again, I merely explain the implications of what you said. An expression of siding with one over the other because of what a portion of one group did offended you, well, such a stance has flaws. And they have conclusions, such as implications the asshats represent the whole and that you are either with or against the asshats (who, as representing the whole, the entirety of one side would be asshats.) When switching ou the word asshat for sexist, you can come to the conclusion of one side being sexist and the other not.