The Big Picture: Remembering the Real Jack Thompson

[daxterx2005]

Wow I got a nostalgia rush from this episode. I forgot Histeria existed until you used the father time/big fat baby picture....

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

The problem was, Jack made hating him so %^*&ing easy. At one point he made a promise, if someone would make a game titled "murder simulator" that had the player going around killing game developers, he would give $10,000 to a charity. Someone did, making "I'm Ok: A Murder Simulator," at which point Jack moved the goal posts and stated the game needed to be published and sold. Penny Arcade stepped in, giving the money to Entertainment Software Association Foundation Charity, in Jack's name.

Then Jack sued Penny Arcade over this.

 

[WhiteNachos]

You can't dismiss the idea of a gamer culture in one sentence and then criticize it in the next.

That's like me saying Bigfoot doesn't exist then later talking about what an asshole Bigfoot is and how we should try to get him to stop being such an ass.

And comparing people to Jack Thompson is the ONLY time I've ever heard his name in years.

And comparing her to Anita isn't because Anita is advocating something as bad as bans, the comparison is made because Jack Thompson claimed violent video games cause violence and Anita claims they cause misogyny (and implies they cause violence without outright saying it like when she talked about real life domestic violence and then that makes games with certain kinds of violence against women was "dangerously irresponsible").

So thanks for the history lesson but everything else was a complete waste of time.

Oh and Bob, saying we need to clean out the mess (if by mess you mean video games that have what you perceive as sexism) just seems so bizarre to me. The whole point of free speech, of not having censorship is that people can make those games no matter how many people consider them trash.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Fun fact: He was disbarred, along with several others for a prostitution scandal.

That's not true, in fact his disbarment ruling is public record. He was disbarred for harassing people, sending frivolous lawsuits and unprofessional behavior.

 

[WhiteNachos]

ak93]I have never heard of Jack Thomson... So this was quite interesting. I don't know how I've been missing this.

Did you just start gaming recently (as in the last 4 years or so)?
Do you not live in America?
Did you not follow gaming news for a while?

 

[leviadragon99]

Yeah... as a gamer born, raised, and living outside America, I don't even know all that much about Jack Thompson, why he was ever relevant or why people would be still harping on about him.

 

[WhiteNachos]

If anything, doesn't this just support peoples comparisons of Jack Thompson to Anita Sarkeesian? I mean, if indeed Jack Thompson is just a guy with ideological hangups about violent cultures across a political spectrum, isn't that a word-for-word definition of Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency youtube channel?

Please do keep in mind she also criticizes movies, hip-hop and mediums of art besides gaming; she is - to me at least - someone very interested in pushing a certain agenda, not a video games critic. Same as Jack Thompson.

Anita isn't asking anyone to ban anything, or talking about how games are spreading homosexual thoughts into Our Children.

She's using basic Women's Studies 101 stuff to point out that video games are really kind of embarrassing in how they fail to really do well by half of the entire human race.

Big difference.

What does or does not "do well" by people is an opinion. Whether or not they cause violence is something that can be proven.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

0:54 seconds
Bob, That is when I stopped watching.
That is the point when I said I don't think I could watch any more of your stuff.
Bob, I've stuck through despite having differing views on gamergate.
Despite your twitter actions and your other attempts to swing the nature of your narrative in this manner.
When you made a plea for analytical discussion, I knew what your were trying to do much like how extra credits tried to provide a similar argument on their own channel and to date it will be their dumbest, weakest and least thought out episode to date.
I would have simply wrote this off as another pile of crap and I'd go back to my self fable of being Benjamen from animal farm but my brother spurned me onto watch up to 4:54.

Bob, I'm not mild a mild man, but try to be slow to anger.
People have gone years without ever seeing me so much as irritated and I pride myself on that.
This for the first time in years has gotten me genuinely upset.
I have never been quite as angry with you or what you represent then now.
Bob, if you think Mcint- i mean Anita is worth discussion, PLEASE center a video on it.
Explain things about here, give me a reason why her work is academically, Don't actually focus on any of the harassment, Explain why what she is saying, why she is saying it and look into the research she did to do it.
Do not hide tail and through rocks at us from trees, be honest with your intention.
Otherwise I will go through rationally and examine what she is doing and why she is doing it.
Frankly from what I see She is precisely like the Jack Thompson you described and more importantly her arguments use a similar sense of logic to his from what I've been able to stomach of that grade 9 presentation McIntosh calls a video.
There is legitimate criticism of her as a public figure and her academic methods.
I find the worst sin she has committed in her videos was she simply does not care, you can tell it in her tone and in her discussion, she has no love for our hobby.
And if you do create a video I suggest tackling the video she made about literally saying she Is not a Gamer and find them gross because she doesn't want to go around shooting people.

That being said, bob you have lost yourself another one of the few fans that could tolerate having different ideological views then your own.
You have lost a fan that has enjoyed your videos to this point and until today I don't think there is a video you've uploaded here that I have ever found myself unable to watch and this is the first.
Go have a in depth discussion with your friend, Dr Punchy Wright because He's doing a horrible job proof reading or your videos.
Thank you.
And stop releasing these videos timed with Jim, I wouldn't normally examine it this way but it's hard for me not to see what you are blatantly trying to do when I read the front page.

Does Anita (or whatever you just called her) bother you that much? I'm pretty certain Bob didn't defend Anita... Hold on I'm going to rewatch. Nope, he did not explicitly agree with everything in Anita's videos. He said she is not the same as Jack Thompson which is true to anybody who can control their hate stiffy. Be mine and Bobs guest and criticize Anita all you want, her methods, and uncaring attitude. I have never watched her videos or any "sjw" videos and I don't have any intentions of doing so. She has the right to say whatever she wants and you have the right to express yourself. Just remember she is not some great evil which I'm going to say based on your comment that you do. I say criticize her but then don't carry the animosity that comes from hearing her stupidity with you. To be honest I don't understand why people like GamerGate keep banging on about her. All you guys do is give her more visibility and a soapbox. People go as far as to insult and threaten her for so much as voicing her thoughts. This in turn feeds the fires of her "fans" to insult and threaten all of her critics whether or not they were the ones responsible. Now conspiracy nuts are going crazy on anybody who is even nice to her and people who have their own criticisms of misogyny in video game. I express all this as an outsider. You say:

People have gone years without ever seeing me so much as irritated and I pride myself on that.

I actually doubt this if Anita bothers you.

 

[WhiteNachos]

See, I knew better than to read the comments, but that didn't stop me. The cringe is real.

Anyway, good video, Bob. You've put yourself on my list of people whose opinions I should respect again, and while that may sound cold, trust me when I say that list is probably... well, just you, Jim and Anita, at the present time of writing this. Maybe a few others, too, but you get the idea.

Why respect him and Anita?

Bob straw mans his critics and mocks them by just giving them wihny babyish voices, like a child.

Anita ... well there's a lot to be said about her but I'm curious why respect her opinion?

 

[WhiteNachos]

Does Anita (or whatever you just called her) bother you that much? I'm pretty certain Bob didn't defend Anita... Hold on I'm going to rewatch. Nope, he did not explicitly agree with everything in Anita's videos. He said she is not the same as Jack Thompson which is true to anybody who can control their hate stiffy.

Bob is either missing the point or deliberately ignoring it. Most of the comparisons are about their beliefs, not their stated goals. I.e games cause violence vs. games cause sexism.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

\At the very LEAST, the GamerGate members who DON'T support trying to outright kill Anita just to shut her up should call out any of their members who tried to do so, if only in a "GUYS!! Stop making US look bad!" motive.

We do. The problem is that we get dismissed, censored, and fought against whenever we do. This is an obnoxiously slanderous Scotsman fallacy used by the other side to dismiss the rational majority at every turn.

Rational majority of what? I'll answer that. A leaderless mob of angry people who use a hashtag where the only requirement to be in this angry mob is to use the hashtag... That about sums up #GG's image problem. Please stop saying GamerGate has a rational majority because any rational person would realize why it is not rational to associate themselves with leaderless angry mob.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Both make/have made the same points about games

Uh, nooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Not even close. Lets even just forget that their methods and reasons are entirely different for now. Jack Thompson thought that by committing violence against human avatars in videogames that it blurs the line between videogame and reality and that you will come to a point where you can't tell the difference. He thinks (or at least, thought) that if you play Call of Duty enough that if you won't be able to tell the difference between that and mowing down people in a school assembly.

Anita thinks that videogames, when having these things present with little if any criticism of the action on the part of the developers, reinforce misogynistic cultural norms and normalizes sexualized violence to a person. Not necessarily that you become desensitized to it entirely or ever act that way, but that you don't view it as strongly negatively as before, that it becomes more normalized, and that you're less likely to respond to it.

That's what desensitized means. The argument is still that they will desensitize you to violence only now it's specifically sexual violence or violence against women.

This are things she actually plain-faced says in her videos. She is extremely explicit about all of it,

Bullshit. In one video she talks about real world domestic violence and then says "Given the reality of that larger cultural context, it should go without saying that it?s dangerously irresponsible to be creating games in which players are encouraged and even required to perform violence against women in order to ?save them?."

What the hell does she mean by irresponsible? How could it be irresponsible unless she thinks it'll somehow effect real world domestic violence in some way.

and the people who don't understand the difference are typically themselves, ironically, taking her out of context. Probably the most infamous example is her Women as Background Decoration Part 1, where people like to grab that snippet showing gameplay from Hitman Absolution, and not just misrepresent what she says in that clip, but completely ignore what she says before it and right after that.

I've got the transcript right in front of me. Where exactly does she say that the Hitman games don't feature sections where "Players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters."?

Point me to the lines or the exact time in the video.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

Does Anita (or whatever you just called her) bother you that much? I'm pretty certain Bob didn't defend Anita... Hold on I'm going to rewatch. Nope, he did not explicitly agree with everything in Anita's videos. He said she is not the same as Jack Thompson which is true to anybody who can control their hate stiffy.

Bob is either missing the point or deliberately ignoring it. Most of the comparisons are about their beliefs, not their stated goals. I.e games cause violence vs. games cause sexism.

And? Seriously this one stupid person's opinions rile you guys up enough to bother making a comparison to someone who actually went out of his way to ban video games for what amounts to "political" reasons. This is like a joke that just keeps getting worse. Is it that hard for you guys to keep your hate stiffys in check? Can you guys do what i do when dealing with evangelical Christians that are not in positions of power and influence and ignore her? We have to post thread topics about her making a retarded tweet that was in poor taste? Gah i feel like I'm watching the inside edition.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Dunno, Bob. I hadn't heard the name Jack Thompson in years until I watched this video.

I had. His name has popped up a lot in discussion threads where people oppose those who try to give a critical analysis to something they like.

Critical analysis on top of claiming they cause sexism, and can desensitize people to sexual violence.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Does Anita (or whatever you just called her) bother you that much? I'm pretty certain Bob didn't defend Anita... Hold on I'm going to rewatch. Nope, he did not explicitly agree with everything in Anita's videos. He said she is not the same as Jack Thompson which is true to anybody who can control their hate stiffy.

Bob is either missing the point or deliberately ignoring it. Most of the comparisons are about their beliefs, not their stated goals. I.e games cause violence vs. games cause sexism.

And? Seriously this one stupid person's opinions rile you guys up enough to bother making a comparison to someone who actually went out of his way to ban video games for what amounts to "political" reasons. This is like a joke that just keeps getting worse. Is it that hard for you guys to keep your hate stiffys in check? Can you guys do what i do when dealing with evangelical Christians that are not in positions of power and influence and ignore her? We have to post thread topics about her making a retarded tweet that was in poor taste? Gah i feel like I'm watching the inside edition.

She should be ignored but I wouldn't dismiss every criticism of her as hate stiffies.

 

[Pebkio]

Actually, along respects of Moviebob's conclusion... Anita Sarkeesian is pretty much EXACTLY like Jack Thompson. I mean, it's not like I heard anyone say the name of Jack Thompson so I don't know where this episode came from, but now you've got me thinking.

Jack only did what he did to get recognition, money and authority. Anita is doing the same. Sure, Jack was trying to ban video games outright while Anita is only critical, but both are guilty of trying to make the biggest deal out of a controversy, ever, for personal goals of famehood and influence.

But, again, I don't see why this episode was made, because this is the first time I've heard mention of him in years. I thought about him recently, but it was a VH1 "where are they now" moment.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Them being dead is in reality not the important detail in the pictures.

As for Anita Being wrong on one example.

Anyone that actually uses a Thunderf00t video as "evidence" is probably not going to be taken seriously. When the man makes a video titled "Feminism poisons everything" there is no real logic there. No real discussion is wanting to be had. He's not the best person to go to. For any of this stuff. Like at all.

When you dismiss an argument by attacking the source of the argument rather than the actual arguments that's called an ad hominem fallacy, which is what you did.

Now why don't you try actually addressing what he said. You can pretend someone else said it if it helps.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

Does Anita (or whatever you just called her) bother you that much? I'm pretty certain Bob didn't defend Anita... Hold on I'm going to rewatch. Nope, he did not explicitly agree with everything in Anita's videos. He said she is not the same as Jack Thompson which is true to anybody who can control their hate stiffy.

Bob is either missing the point or deliberately ignoring it. Most of the comparisons are about their beliefs, not their stated goals. I.e games cause violence vs. games cause sexism.

And? Seriously this one stupid person's opinions rile you guys up enough to bother making a comparison to someone who actually went out of his way to ban video games for what amounts to "political" reasons. This is like a joke that just keeps getting worse. Is it that hard for you guys to keep your hate stiffys in check? Can you guys do what i do when dealing with evangelical Christians that are not in positions of power and influence and ignore her? We have to post thread topics about her making a retarded tweet that was in poor taste? Gah i feel like I'm watching the inside edition.

She should be ignored but I wouldn't dismiss every criticism of her as hate stiffies.

Their is criticism and then there is banging a drum with your hate stiffy. Guess which camp GamerGate falls into? Here's a clue: Banging a drum with a hate stiffy means being loud and repeating over and over? Be my guest criticize her, point out her ignorance and then fucking let it go.

 

[Teoes]

Funny thing I noticed...

A lot of the people here who are demonstrably or at least presumably pro-GG are condemning this video because "nobody care about him anymore." Yet I'd say about 80% of the anti-Anita/pro-GG think pieces I've read and watched on youtube (in particular those by GG figureheads like Thunderf00t) make that comparison. So for a group "over" Jack Thompson they sure do like to invoke his name to bash one ultimately irrelevant critic.

This amused me too. I checked back and found one thread from about 5 days ago with Jack's name in the title; another one 5 days back from that.. and I'm sure there was a third recently that I didn't turn up in that quick look.

Anita goes full Jack Thompson 2.0!!

Yep. No-one cares..

OT: Y'know what, fuck the debate. It'd been a while and I hadn't been bothered looking this guy up for the details, so this video was funny in its detailing of someone's silly behaviour. Cheers.