This is Why Criticizing Anita Sarkheesian is Irrelevant and Pointless

[Doom972]

I don't recall the last time I laughed so hard because of a forum post. You almost had me thinking you were serious until the Martin Luther King analogy. You earned that forum badge.

OT (just in case): Everything is open to criticism. Especially people who make one-sided arguments based on nothing but conjecture and then disable the ability to rate and comment on it.

 

[Uhura]

she's now a consultant at EA (yeah, you heard right. Ms. Sarkeesian now gets to dictate to you what sort of games you can and cannot play)

Yes, she totally gets to dictate everything at EA now. Sure.

 

[Do4600]

like trying to find grammatical errors in Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream Speech."

How dare you compare Sarkeesian with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I am offended by that comparison. I would be just as offended if you compared her with Gloria Steinem.

Sarkeesian is a demagogue in the worst kind of way, she created hate so she could profit from rallying against it.

Even implying that she, in some way, is in the same category as somebody who was the greatest force for human equality the world has ever seen lends far, far, FAR too much credit to Sarkeesian.

I'm going to stop typing now before I write something I'll regret.

 

[comraderichard]

I was going to agree to you until you compared a feminist who has no right to be the voice of feminism in gaming for various legitimate reasons to a guy who spent his life fighting out in the streets for equal rights for minorities and died because of it, real freaking tasteless, bub.

Who are you to say so. Plenty of people like her videos and plenty of people can and do critique gaming on feminist levels. She's just the one who has been harassed the most. She has the right to share her perspective

Except she's gone well beyond simply being a feminist pop culture critic and now any attempt at discussion by feminists, or anyone who wants more equalized creative freedom in the games' industry, will either be compared to her or lumped in with her. We know there's a sexual bias in the industry, we know this because most open-minded and creative works have to fight to get the main female character on the bloody cover. Anita Sarkeesian is not doing anything to fix this, her views are a groan-inducing mix of simplistic ideals with little bearing in reality: she is correct but she's not trying to argue her point correctly.

I'm not trying to speak for all feminists, but frankly it's disgusting that you have this mentality that I need to move in lockstep with the rest of you. Just because a bunch of us decided to throw money at her and expected her to fix all the problems doesn't mean we all did, we need to operate in a way that pushes for creative freedoms, not just throw around buzzwords and show video clips while drowning people who don't agree with them in incendiary rhetoric. You don't have to be so goddamn touchy, but don't expect me to play nice when you try to pull some argument from authority BS.

 

[JSkunk22]

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.

 

[generals3]

the fact that she's now a consultant at EA

So there is truly no hope for EA to improve in the near future? Ah well, at least i'll still have that one company i love to hate.

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.

Since she's probably the loudest voice in this thing and she shoots her own arguments in the foot due to a lack of any integrity, logic and evidence, i don't see how she can be proven right? She has proven herself wrong and regardless of how hard people troll she'll still be wrong. You can't un-wrong something.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Well that would only be true if you could inherently prove that the vast majority of the posts she's getting are trolls intentionally trying to troll her. While I am sure a good percentage of them are, there are always going to be those who AREN'T trolling and who DO genuinely believe their own bile. So even if most of them are "jokes" (bad taste jokes to be sure), it's still a problem and one worth trying to shed light on. Not something we should brush away under the rug because we have a personal dislike of the speaker.

I'm not sure you're using the word "inherently" correctly.

It's sort of a simple test. Post an opinion on the internet. Watch people flock to disagree in the rudest manner possible, frequently with language ironically proving your point. This happens so reliably and predictably as to cast clear aspersion on the forum in question.

I don't dismiss her theories or the topic. I do believe trolling twitter, and then turning around and holding up your catch as proof of your ideas (or as anything other than endemic with regard to the forum), is intellectually dishonest and pointless. She's enough of a lightning rod at this point that she alters (or contaminates, more accurately) her data.

 

[Something Amyss]

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.

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.

 

[generals3]

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.

Well i was thinking of individuals. I don't think any individual is louder than her. Sure the whole group of trolls might be louder than her single voice but that's quite "normal".

 

[Something Amyss]

Well i was thinking of individuals. I don't think any individual is louder than her. Sure the whole group of trolls might be louder than her single voice but that's quite "normal".

Still looking for the definition where YouTube critiques are louder than videos where you can punch her in the face, or rape threats, or people literally throwing fits on YouTube.

 

[Ablestron]

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.

 

[generals3]

Well i was thinking of individuals. I don't think any individual is louder than her. Sure the whole group of trolls might be louder than her single voice but that's quite "normal".

Still looking for the definition where YouTube critiques are louder than videos where you can punch her in the face, or rape threats, or people literally throwing fits on YouTube.

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.

 

[generals3]

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-Traveling-Bard]

I will point out for the record that you are being more than a touch disingenuous.

There is nothing disingenuous in pointing out that people who spread the 4chan rumor do not actually have any proof that she did any trolling. Look, you have joined the forums only a month ago and I'm not sure if you have followed the Anita discussion before you joined, but the 4chan rumor is one the most common things people bring up when they want to attack Anita or dismiss the abuse she received. The argument is always "she had it coming, she trolled 4chan", and those posts are most of the time followed by other comments about how fucking stupid Sarkeesian is for trolling 4chan.

There is no proof that she trolled 4chan.
People are spreading rumors to legitimize or downplay the abuse Sarkeesian received.
That's disingenuous.

If spreading unsubstantiated rumors about a person doesn't bother you, then I don't know what else to say.

Whether or not she trolled the #E3 and #XBoxOne hashtags yesterday is hardly a matter of conjecture or speculation. She did so quite publicly. The fact that it mirrors the 4chan story is interesting, but perhaps coincidental.

Either she's too naive to understand how social media works - something I refuse to accept given both her educational speciality and her clear intelligence - or she knows throwing chum in the water attracts sharks and is quite sanguine about taking advantage of it.

Trolled? Really? Since the Xbox One reveal in May, people have been bashing Xbox and Microsoft for their anti-consumer business practices, for the design of the console, for the name of the console and for whatever else they can think of. It's been one of the most popular punching bags on these forums and pretty much on any other gaming site for weeks. Posting a negative comment about Xbox One is not automatically trolling. Or do you think any criticism aimed at Xbox One is automatically trolling?

Should she just stop using her social media sites? Is it automatically trolling if she posts something on her twitter? Help me out here.

In my eyes that makes her an opportunist. Perhaps in your eyes that makes her a hero. [Or should that be heroine? Is that too gendered?]

I wasn't being the least sarcastic when I said feminism deserves better than that.

A hero? Oh come on.

I am going to double post, because I am going to LOL after you watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEWIefam53E

She clearly is trolling just watcher facial expression at 5:20.
IF you ever deny it now after this point... well yeah.

Obviously!!!
Obviously she's a troll because look at that facial expression!! Apparently, smirking when an interviewer asks a question about trolls means "OMG guys, she's deceived us all, that troll!!!"

Human body language.
Should look into it some time it's quite a interesting topic.

And it was a smirk. The nervous hair moving, the stuttering after the question. The total bullshit defense she used to defend herself. The awkward tone in her voice. Things like that.

Anita knows what she is doing and she is doing it well.
She's nothing but a hypocrite spewing ***** that is playing the victim card to her advantage.

Because Murica love dem victims!

Seriously if America haven't been obsessed with the "Victim Game" for the past 10 years, or so. She would still be a nobody. That's just a fact.

Yes. Your baseless opinions are facts. Keep telling yourself that. And the thing about serial killers. Dude, you are not an FBI profiler (I think) so stop acting like you're an expert at interpreting body language.

What happens if I was an expert on body language and I several dozens books about it on my shelf?

You're acting like a child and I assume your a fan of Anita.

"STOP SAYING THINGS. YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING. YOU ARE DUMB"

Basically what you're telling me.


But..
You know.
I'll continue to read the books about body language.
And continue to watch videos and listen to other scientist talk about.

Because you know.
I like learning about body language.

 

[Dick Castle]

I'm just curious if she has actually debated someone with some brains, or if she just holds up random dudebro "FinalFantasy69" or "TSwizzleFutureHubby" calling her names as her sample size of all gamers?

 

[hooblabla6262]

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]

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]

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]

-snip-

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]

-snip-

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