This is Why Criticizing Anita Sarkheesian is Irrelevant and Pointless

hooblabla6262

New member
Aug 8, 2008
339
0
0
Vegosiux said:
Anita Sarkeesian isn't above criticism, and her methodology is all screwed up. What she's doing is not research, but simply listing examples of what she's offended by. Not that there's anything wrong with listing examples of what you're offended by, mind, just don't call it research.
How is finding examples that back a theory not doing reasearch?
Sounds like research to me.
I mean, she ain't cooking it up in a lab, sure.
Still sounds like research to me.

And I'm pretty sure she's right.
I mean, I haven't seen anything past her first video because it seemed like really basic knowledge that any member of the gaming community would know.
If I missed something important, please, let me know.


Also, to the future serial killer who talked about murdering Anita for "being a troll", I'm sorry I called you a troll.
Clearly, I was in the wrong and the mods have done a great job to point that out to me <3
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
hooblabla6262 said:
How is finding examples that back a theory not doing reasearch?
Sounds like research to me.
I mean, she ain't cooking it up in a lab, sure.
Still sounds like research to me.

And I'm pretty sure she's right.
I mean, I haven't seen anything past her first video because it seemed like really basic knowledge that any member of the gaming community would know.
If I missed something important, please, let me know.


Also, to the future serial killer who talked about murdering Anita for "being a troll", I'm sorry I called you a troll.
Clearly, I was in the wrong and the mods have done a great job to point that out to me <3
Sure you can call it research but it's not good research. On top of that her findings don't back any theory at all. The theory that tropes are common in games? Her methodology doesn't allow to back that. To prove the theory these tropes are fucking up people's minds in RL? Nothing in her video backs that up.

And what is basic knowledge anybody would know? That the use of the damsel in distress trope reinforces toxic views of women in RL? Or that Princess Peach is a damsel in distress ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ZKAg_NmTcoc#t=931s
 

Vegosiux

New member
May 18, 2011
4,381
0
0
hooblabla6262 said:
How is finding examples that back a theory not doing reasearch?
Sounds like research to me.
Because it's not statistically correct to determine prevalence that way. The sample has to be unbiased. So, basically, what she should have done for "research" is compile a list of all video games, and let's say she limits herself to PC...stay with me please.

There's about 8K games for PC. A sample size of like 70 could do. So, she'd take a list of all those games (it's on the internet somewhere, for sure), put it into an Excel table, number those games 1-8000 (a function that's easy in Excel), then use a random number generator to pick 70 numbers between 1 and 8000. Then she'd look at which games were under those numbers, look into those games, and see whether or not sexist tropes are present in them.

Then, she'd either go "Well, I guess I was right" if the majority of the sample had sexist tropes in it, or she'd go "Well, I suppose sexist tropes aren't as common as I thought" if it did not.

That's how statistical research works. If she's doing statistical research, she has to abide by the methodology. If she's just saying she's doing statistical research but not actually doing it, then she's a fraud.

And I'm pretty sure she's right.
I mean, I haven't seen anything past her first video because it seemed like really basic knowledge that any member of the gaming community would know.
If I missed something important, please, let me know.
Not saying you "missed" anything, entitled to opinions and all, but if you want to talk facts, you better stick by the scientific method.
 

hooblabla6262

New member
Aug 8, 2008
339
0
0
generals3 said:
You know what's worse than a long ass video of a girl pointing out obvious sexism in games?
The guy who responds with a long ass video trying to undercut everything about the girl. Not just her video, but the person as well.
Sounds like politics.

The use of the damsel in distress is overused and abused. That's what I took from her video, and that is something I believe to be quite true.
Yes, there are games that go against that trope (ball punching damsel included). And there are also forces in the industry that push for these weak/boring female characters.

Anyhoo, let's just say I'm wrong and call it a day.
 

hooblabla6262

New member
Aug 8, 2008
339
0
0
Vegosiux said:
I like the way you explain things. Makes sense.

I suppose that if she said that these tropes were in most video games, then yes she would be wrong.
I took it more as a "these things are more present than they should be".
Which to me is true, though not as much as it used to be.

Anyhoo, thanks for the friendly response :)
 

Revolutionary

Pub Club Am Broken
May 30, 2009
1,833
0
0
I realise all it does is help her entomb herself in her self-perpetuating bubble of confirmation bias, but it sure gives me something to ridicule, and if that's not the second purpose of the internet I don't know what is.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
generals3 said:
She has an entire channel dedicated to her propaganda, a twitter account, has been invited on TV and god knows where else. That's more voice any of her trolls or critics can even dream of being given.
Most of what you've described is basically boilerplate. OMG TWIITER?

Come on.

I'm still waiting for the definition of the word loud that fits this situation. Now I'm also waiting for the definition of the word loud that would fit "being asked to appear on TV."

Uhura said:
She's talking about Xbox One press conference, Mirror's Edge was in the EA press conference :O
I think she's actually a fan of the first Mirror's Edge game.
I hear what you're saying, but it's inconvenient to my narrative, so I will ignore it and accuse Anita of being TEH BIAS

Torque2100 said:
Guh, are we STILL talking about this woman?
The same reason you just wrote multiple paragraphs on her. She upsets people by saying things they don't like.

Uhura said:
Yes, she totally gets to dictate everything at EA now. Sure.
Well, you will notice that all EA titles this year feature women as protagonists and fit her anti-male agenda....

>.>

My favourite is "Ballbuster 3."
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Apologies for the double post. I got a Captcha Error, so I assumed it DIDN'T post. Apparently, there's a copy on page 6.

I'd utterly delete this post if I could, but there you have it.
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
generals3 said:
She has an entire channel dedicated to her propaganda, a twitter account, has been invited on TV and god knows where else. That's more voice any of her trolls or critics can even dream of being given.
Most of what you've described is basically boilerplate. OMG TWIITER?

Come on.

I'm still waiting for the definition of the word loud that fits this situation. Now I'm also waiting for the definition of the word loud that would fit "being asked to appear on TV."
I think i've given my definition right there: share of voice. She has more than any individual troll, you're much more likely to come into contact with her rhetoric than the one of critic X or Troll Y. What's your definition in this context?
 

Ablestron

New member
Feb 24, 2011
6
0
0
generals3 said:
Ablestron said:
Yes what she does provokes a response, but so does anyone who speaks out publicly against something; when you do this, you have to be prepared for a negative response, its just bound to happen. If anything she was provoking Microsoft and its employees for the purpose of change, and you cant cause change unless you point out the current flaws, staying quiet out of courtesy of others gets you nowhere; all those who tweeted back misogynistic comments and criticisms of her character are being immature; a criticism of a company for its lack of female presence is not a personal attack on those who enjoy the products of that company. Anita herself has stated in her videos that there is nothing wrong with enjoying the media that she criticizes, so long as we are aware of the downsides and stride towards something better. Pointing out that there are no female protagonists at the Xbox E3 conference doesn't depart from this message at all, she never once said if you like these games your a bigot or a misogynist. She didn't say any one game was bad because it had a male character either, people are coming to that conclusion because its easier to hate her and dismiss her when you put words in her mouth and take what she says out of context.
I think it's easier for her proponents to dismiss a lot she says and twist its meaning because otherwise her stance clearly becomes indefensible. Which it is. She has positioned herself as an enemy of anyone who respects games and developers. But her constant backpedaling allows her to fool some people in her "goodness". She's a lying insipid person who's always going to complain and doesn't respect anything she's complaining about. (otherwise she wouldn't attack these media the way she does it to serve her insipid agenda which consists of lying and pathological twisting)

"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?"

See what she's saying about devs using these tropes? That they're being dangerously irresponsible. That's what i tell drunk drivers. She's showing 0 respect to their work. For her, devs not doing what she wants is IRRESPONSIBLE. (and without any evidence to support that mind you!)


Also, her constant lack of consistency is beyond absurd:

" But just because a particular event might ?makes sense? within the internal logic of a fictional narrative ? that doesn?t, in and of itself justify its use. "

" To say that women could never die in stories would be absurd, but it?s important to consider the ways that women?s deaths are framed and examine how and why they?re written."

See how first she totally dismisses context and basically says "You know, the context doesn't justify killing wiminz" and than goes on to say "It's not always bad, it depends on how it's done". Way to backpedal and contradict yourself there.

Oh and complaining because there were no female protagonists shown at the xbox presentation is sexist as hell. What kind of shit complaint is that? I never even thought about complaining about gender representation during E3 presentations, all i cared about is the QUALITY of the games. You can support her goal, but supporting her or her methodology... Well no, just no. No sympathy there.
The two quotes you provided dont actually contradict each other at all, so I dont see how saying one after the other would a retreat from a previous stance or opinion, considering that her stance and opinion havent really changed.

The first IS meant to be a dismissal of context, that's the point she's trying to make, that even if a characters death fits within the narrative you've created as a writer, the way the character dies and why they die has a significant impact on the reader in such a way that even if it "fits" it can still be considered harmful in the big picture if the way it is done has been over used. That's why stuff like the damsel in distress is harmful, because even if there is context for it within the narrative, it has been used so much over the years that its created a lack of balance.

The second quote is directly related but how is it backpedaling to back up her previous statement with further clarification? Before she said either of these things she states that the examples she gives are only a few and while they are not necessarily harmful in and of themselves, the amount of times they have been used is harmful as a whole; because other ways of writing female characters have not been as addressed; she's pointing out the lack of balance in the writing of female characters over all, and how its harmful to have a history of taking power away from women a media outlet.

Complaining that there are no female protagonists at the Xbox One conference isn't a sexist statement, because in our culture the current problem is that women as protagonists are not generally considered as viable or as sell-able as a straight white male protagonist is, it's completely reasonable to want a better representation of women in games, and like I said earlier, she doesnt attack any one game or game developer for having a male protagonist, its the over all lack of more female protagonists that pains her, not any one individual case of the lack there of. So when she gets on Microsoft's case for not moving past the mindset that women leads mean less sales thats not making her an "enemy of games" as you say, all that means is she's challenging Microsoft's way of thinking, because the thought that women dont sell is not based in fact.

Just because you were only focusing on the quality of the games doesnt make what she says wrong, and it doesnt make you wrong either. She isnt attacking you for not noticing the lack of female representation, all she is doing is pointing it out. Her priority is to seek out a better representation for women in an area where it is lacking, your priority is to find games of high quality that you may decide to buy, she isnt effecting you negatively at all by wanting better representation (who said
 

DarkhoIlow

New member
Dec 31, 2009
2,531
0
0
"There is absolutely no games with female protagonists", it seems that she didn't see Transistor and Bayonetta 2.

The latter title may give her more fuel to add to the fire, but regardless of that there are at least two games with female protagonists, her point is moot.
 

REZNoR_greed

New member
Jan 21, 2010
66
0
0
DarkhoIlow said:
"There is absolutely no games with female protagonists", it seems that she didn't see Transistor and Bayonetta 2.
she was just referring to the Microsoft press conference. Nintendo had Bayonetta, and Sony had Transistor.

although that does inadvertently raise a point. why she chose to attack Microsoft, and not acknowledge that the other presenters all had quite a few games with female protagonists. you'd think she would've been happy about that.
 

Ablestron

New member
Feb 24, 2011
6
0
0
REZNoR_greed said:
DarkhoIlow said:
"There is absolutely no games with female protagonists", it seems that she didn't see Transistor and Bayonetta 2.
she was just referring to the Microsoft press conference. Nintendo had Bayonetta, and Sony had Transistor.

although that does inadvertently raise a point. why she chose to attack Microsoft, and not acknowledge that the other presenters all had quite a few games with female protagonists. you'd think she would've been happy about that.
She was, she posted several tweets about the reveals that had female protagonists as well as the conferences that had a female presence.

Here are some examples from her twitter

I am absolutely thrilled about the Mirror's Edge 2 announcement! The original game is one of my all time favorites! bit.ly/sorDw [http://t.co/VIFtWgcrLI]

&mdash; Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 10, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344198345163689984]

And the first bit.ly/106DEzS [https://twitter.com/search/%23E3]

&mdash; Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 10, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344191225294901248]

Good to see @#E3 [https://twitter.com/bungie]

&mdash; Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 11, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344288501099008001]

Finally! For the first time in 25 years Princess Peach is playable in a Super Mario Bros. game! #Nintendo [http://t.co/dI8Mx3rdQ2]

&mdash; Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 11, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344504737426731008]

A few interesting new game trailers featuring women from the bit.ly/18uQDPq [https://twitter.com/search/%23PS4]

&mdash; Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 12, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344621711066546176]

Here is the blog post she made on the trailers she saw with female protagonists

http://femfreq.tumblr.com/post/52752086803/new-video-game-trailers-featuring-women-at-e3-2013

I strongly suggest that you never assume something because it wasn't brought up in a forum. Often the information you need is easy to find. ^_^
 

generals3

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,198
0
0
Ablestron said:
The two quotes you provided dont actually contradict each other at all, so I dont see how saying one after the other would a retreat from a previous stance or opinion, considering that her stance and opinion havent really changed.

The first IS meant to be a dismissal of context, that's the point she's trying to make, that even if a characters death fits within the narrative you've created as a writer, the way the character dies and why they die has a significant impact on the reader in such a way that even if it "fits" it can still be considered harmful in the big picture if the way it is done has been over used. That's why stuff like the damsel in distress is harmful, because even if there is context for it within the narrative, it has been used so much over the years that its created a lack of balance.

The second quote is directly related but how is it backpedaling to back up her previous statement with further clarification? Before she said either of these things she states that the examples she gives are only a few and while they are not necessarily harmful in and of themselves, the amount of times they have been used is harmful as a whole; because other ways of writing female characters have not been as addressed; she's pointing out the lack of balance in the writing of female characters over all, and how its harmful to have a history of taking power away from women a media outlet.
Nono, in one quote she says: context doesn't matter and than she says "context actually matters". In the second quote she didn't say anything about frequency. All she said is "it can be ok if done right", doesn't say anything about "but it can't be done often!". That's the kind of back pedaling she does constantly. Like how she says things like "It reinforces toxic views of women" and than says "It doesn't suddenly turn gamers into sexists". Now sure the latter doesn't exclude the previous however many of her proponents are pretending it does when defending her. This constant back pedaling and playing with words is plain nonsense and only done to shield herself from legitimate criticism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=IJbTWlyk4Uk#t=386s I really like that part. (mainly because of the funny song) But the point he makes is quite important because it kind of obliterates Anita's whole silliness when linking video games and domestic violence towards women.



Complaining that there are no female protagonists at the Xbox One conference isn't a sexist statement, because in our culture the current problem is that women as protagonists are not generally considered as viable or as sell-able as a straight white male protagonist is, it's completely reasonable to want a better representation of women in games, and like I said earlier, she doesnt attack any one game or game developer for having a male protagonist, its the over all lack of more female protagonists that pains her, not any one individual case of the lack there of. So when she gets on Microsoft's case for not moving past the mindset that women leads mean less sales thats not making her an "enemy of games" as you say, all that means is she's challenging Microsoft's way of thinking, because the thought that women dont sell is not based in fact.
I digress, it is true it isn't sexist... Unless you follow the fallacious definition of sexism which allows the gaming industry to be described as being sexist. Because than yes her comment is sexist. If she thinks the gender matters that much than a dev should be allowed to think so too and thus stick the finger towards female protas because them being male is important to them. If one person can care about the gender that much without being sexist so can someone else. (Do mind i personally don't think it's sexist in either case but I was following the definition of sexism used by her supporters)

Just because you were only focusing on the quality of the games doesnt make what she says wrong, and it doesnt make you wrong either. She isnt attacking you for not noticing the lack of female representation, all she is doing is pointing it out. Her priority is to seek out a better representation for women in an area where it is lacking, your priority is to find games of high quality that you may decide to buy, she isnt effecting you negatively at all by wanting better representation
And why is that a priority? Isn't putting so much emphasis on sex bizarre. It's actually funny how feminists who try to tell us gender doesn't matter seem to be the one most caring about gender.
 

comraderichard

New member
Jun 11, 2013
22
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
JSkunk22 said:
The loudest voices who critique her tend to be missing the point(s) and end up proving her right, at least as far as I have seen.
Which is hilarious, I might add.

generals3 said:
Since she's probably the loudest voice in this thing
I'm not really sure what definition you can use to call her the loudest voice in this whole thing, especially since nobody would have even cared about her if not for the hysterical reactions from gamers.
Internet =/= gamers. As much as I agree that a lot of the comments lobbed at her are vile, she's not special in this regard, because this happens constantly. I've had a fair number of people wish death on me and my family because of my political views, a lot of other people I know have to put up with condescending pricks constantly, or outright get forced into confrontations. I'm of the opinion it's not what you say but what you do, and all Anita has done is talk, doing little to improve the culture of gaming beyond making it even more divisive than it already was. There are entire websites (4chan, Encyclopedia Dramatica, etc) devoted to spewing hate speech specifically tailored to get under someone's skin.

A couple hundred hateful trolls, who you don't even know for certain are gamers, saying mean things to someone ultimately does not matter unless they follow through with those threats - attempted or otherwise. Until then they're just blowing smoke, essentially being a long fart that increases with intensity every time Anita speaks because she takes such controversial positions (I don't mean feminism; I mean her positions on non-violence, resorting to masculine/feminine sorting, and generally coming off as something of a condescending hippie) and her defenders are so thin-skinned that they rally the troops to absolutely positively ruin the legitimacy of ANYONE'S counter-arguments. People who support her threw money at her, made her relevant, when she was just another internet personality getting hate from the bowels of the internet.

I'm a little bitter, not because of who she is, I respectfully disagree with her views, but how she was able to use the trolling against her to spur her followers into giving her everything she could ever want. Is that good for feminism in gaming as a whole? I say no, but many will disagree, I maintain that she's not the right person to be the voice for equality in gaming culture - not just for the aforementioned 'condescending hippie' attitude but also for her tendency to trip herself up and show ignorance on quite a few topics.

But my words mean nothing, she got her money, she got her fame, she's now the head of the table for us in gaming, hooray...
 

Brown_Coat117

New member
Oct 22, 2010
112
0
0
To all the people who say that the people who say that those who troll Anita prove the point that sexism exist in the gaming, here is my reply. So what?

Gamers like people who read books, watch movies, play an instrument and any other hobby you'd care to mention come from different walks of life and have different personalities, so saying that there are some very vocal rotten eggs out there is stating the obvious.

I posted a review of Mass Effect 3 on the Bioware social site, in it I said that there were problems with both mechanics and the story, but overall I enjoyed the experience. I was called a fanboy, a fag and had a threat to cut my balls off,

I have also been trolled because i prefer my Fender Strat to any Ibanez guitar that I have played. Once again being called names and threatened with violence.

The moral of the story is that assholes exist, and the anonymity of the internet makes the more vile than they would dare in real life.
 

Mareon

New member
Nov 20, 2010
59
0
0
Look, here is a thought: Maybe the Trolls are actually human beings that should never ever and never be excused to write the bile that they write for any reason.
 

Ablestron

New member
Feb 24, 2011
6
0
0
Nono, in one quote she says: context doesn't matter and than she says "context actually matters". In the second quote she didn't say anything about frequency. All she said is "it can be ok if done right", doesn't say anything about "but it can't be done often!". That's the kind of back pedaling she does constantly. Like how she says things like "It reinforces toxic views of women" and than says "It doesn't suddenly turn gamers into sexists". Now sure the latter doesn't exclude the previous however many of her proponents are pretending it does when defending her. This constant back pedaling and playing with words is plain nonsense and only done to shield herself from legitimate criticism.
When she says context matters in the second quote she's talking about a different form of context than in the first. The first quote is about the narrative context. See that she mentions "fictional narrative" in the first quote; it means the context within the actual story; example, the reason Zelda is kidnapped is because of her piece of the triforce; anita is arguing that even though the damsel in distress trope works within the "narrative context" that does not exempt it from being an example of the trope.

In the second quote she is talking about the context of its formation, why & how they wrote it the way they did, ect.. (see that she says "how and why they're written")An example of this would be the development & writing decisions made that turned the game Dinosaur Planet into Star Fox Adventures.

I digress, it is true it isn't sexist... Unless you follow the fallacious definition of sexism which allows the gaming industry to be described as being sexist. Because than yes her comment is sexist. If she thinks the gender matters that much than a dev should be allowed to think so too and thus stick the finger towards female protas because them being male is important to them. If one person can care about the gender that much without being sexist so can someone else. (Do mind i personally don't think it's sexist in either case but I was following the definition of sexism used by her supporters)
Don't confuse what a person's supporters say with what they are actually saying. They are not one in the same mind, a supporter of Anita could easily be missing the point entirely and go off the deep end, but that doesn't make their actions Anita's responsibility. I support her but Im obviously not saying the same things that the people you mention are saying am I? Ranking Anita with the silliest and most idiotic of those who support her is incredibly unfair.

Of course men have a right to be represented in games, and in many ways, they still aren't fully; how often do you see a black male protagonist over a white one for example? The reason your not racist for wanting better female representation is because it does not exist on the same level as male representation. So the feminist argument goes like this "if men have a right to be represented in this medium, don't women also?" Again, like Ive said before, Anita isn't mad at any one game or developer for the over all trend, she simply wants more to take the risk and try and represent women better. And when large conglomerates like Microsoft refuse to budge out side of their idea that men are still the only demographic worth aiming for then feminists are within their right to call them on that without being sexist against men.

To put it plainly, saying women need to be represented more does not mean representing men is wrong.


And why is that a priority? Isn't putting so much emphasis on sex bizarre. It's actually funny how feminists who try to tell us gender doesn't matter seem to be the one most caring about gender.
The argument real feminists give isn't "Gender doesn't matter" its "Gender shouldn't matter". Meaning, no one should have to raise awareness about a lack of gender representation, but unfortunately we DO, because there is an imbalance in how women are portrayed in comparison to men, as well as how often women are portrayed versus how men are portrayed.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
IceForce said:


OP, you're just badge fishing here, right? Come on, there's no shame in admitting it.
Thanks, I'm glad someone said it before I had to. :p

OT: My main problem is that you can't change the hearts and minds of the people you're trying to reach by getting up on a soapbox and ranting and raving and using plenty of your own vitriol. Pointing to the example brought up in OP, MLK was a highly respectable man of impeccable character who DESERVED to be listened to, Anita just comes off as another pissed-off feminist. It's the same thing with Rush Limbaugh. Who knows? He might actually make all the sense in the world and be able to make point after point after absolutely valid point...but because he comes off as a ranting, raving right-wing lunatic, nobody gives anything he says a second thought.

Quite simply, this person said it best:
Wyvern65 said:
*sighs*

Feminism deserves better than this.