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.
This is Why Criticizing Anita Sarkheesian is Irrelevant and Pointless
- Thread starter The_Scrivener
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most of what you've described is basically boilerplate. OMG TWIITER?generals3 said:
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 hear what you're saying, but it's inconvenient to my narrative, so I will ignore it and accuse Anita of being TEH BIASUhura said:
The same reason you just wrote multiple paragraphs on her. She upsets people by saying things they don't like.Torque2100 said:
Well, you will notice that all EA titles this year feature women as protagonists and fit her anti-male agenda....Uhura said:
>.>
My favourite is "Ballbuster 3."
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.
I'd utterly delete this post if I could, but there you have it.
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?Zachary Amaranth 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.generals3 said:
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
"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.
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.
she was just referring to the Microsoft press conference. Nintendo had Bayonetta, and Sony had Transistor.DarkhoIlow said:
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.REZNoR_greed said:
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]
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 10, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344198345163689984]
And the first bit.ly/106DEzS [https://twitter.com/search/%23E3]
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 10, 2013 [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/344191225294901248]
Good to see @#E3 [https://twitter.com/bungie]
— 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]
— 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]
— 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. ^_^
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.Ablestron said:
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.
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)
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.
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.Zachary Amaranth said:
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thanks, I'm glad someone said it before I had to.IceForce said:
OP, you're just badge fishing here, right? Come on, there's no shame in admitting it.
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:
Why is it that people call what she said bullshit and passive aggressive when there are so many other statements about the same conference that draw similar criticism?
Ive seen so many articles the past few days on how bored journalists were with all the shooter, sports, and car games Microsoft was displaying at their conference, many of which said similarly blunt statements about their lack of enthusiasm for what Microsoft is publishing/developing over twitter, none of which got the blow back that Anita's did. Both point out Microsoft isn't taking any assumed risks, some journalists also pointed out the all white male protagonist cast, but only Anita is getting pulled aside for her statement.
Anita was just stating her opinion like all the journalists were, and if the journalists are speaking about a larger trend of developers and publishers unwilling to bend to the times, or take risks, doesn't Anita's statement that there were no female protagonists in their line up match up with what the journalists are also saying? No developer or publisher is obligated to make the games journalists and feminists want to see, but that doesn't mean that the opinions of the feminist and the game journalist are unfounded bullshit.
But this raises an other question, how can she even claim to know "why" they're written? And i'd say the "how" is pretty much the same as the narrative context. The thing is that kind of backpedaling makes her point obnoxiously "vague". Her points are flying all over the planet. At one point it's "we can enjoy games but still be critical of them" than it's "writing such stories is dangerously irresponsible" and "it reinforces toxic views" (kinda contradicts the "we can enjoy them" doesn't it? It's obvious she doesn't wants us to enjoy it)Ablestron said:
Not really because even the most idiotic of her supporters has yet to reach her level of idiocy. I'm sorry but anyone who watches all her videos has to come to the conclusion she's either an attention whore, dillusional or an idiot. The amount of nonsense coming out of that woman breaks all records. If at least she had charisma and vitality I could enjoy her as a comedian like i did with Glenn Beck. (Because taking her seriously is just impossible)
"Right"? Sure you have that right, nobody prevents you from making your own game. Whether or not others decide to do what you want however isn't a right, it's a privilege. This is capitalism, not communism.
She sure is mad actually. The way she treats their work suggests exactly that. And saying they're acting dangerously irresponsibly suggest as certain amount of anger. And no feminists don't have that right, they have the right to say it but they also have the right to be criticized for that. There is nothing wrong with wanting more female protagonists but the way she approaches the whole thing is plainly wrong, this isn't a social issue, this is a matter of people not getting what they want.
But it is relatively sexist. Why do they "need" to be represented more? That you want them to be sure, but why is it needed? Are penises bad? Are tacos so much better we need more of them? If not why is there a NEED for it?
Again, if it shouldn't matter than all you should see are humans, not women and men. Not quite there are ya?
Anyway, balance is boring and silly. And if you push this mantra to the extreme we would need to force devs to write more gays, bisexuals, transgenders, jews, muslims, blacks, browns, asians, etc. Characters. Heck you might just as well write a "Political Correctness" manual devs would need to follow. It's that kind of attitude which has resulted in the new C&C being self censored. And that's the kind of things i'd like to keep out of games.
I did my research and when it comes to video games it all points towards one thing: you are wrong. All the studies and statistics are very clear: there are a lot more men interested in the games feminists are complaining about. Isn't it normal that as a consequence more attention is given to their desires? The idea of forcing devs to treat a niche market as more important than it is is not social justice or whatever you're lead to believe it is. It's complaining for the sake of it.Ablestron said:this just sounds like fucking trolling man, its obvious you wouldnt be interested in learning anything if these are the questions you still need answered. Grow up, and do your own fucking research, because Im not going to sit here for hours finding all the articles, and documents, and statistics, and personal accounts, and fucking reasons that would help to convince you that inequality is actually a problem that has yet to be solved and NEEDS solving, just because your too fucking lazy to do the research your self, especially considering that the Google search bar is probably in corner of your screen at this very moment.
the world its self isnt there yet, stop trolling, you fail at it.Again, if it shouldn't matter than all you should see are humans, not women and men. Not quite there are ya?
And a lot of so called "problems" are usually not as much problems as feminists like to tell us. Inflating statistics, only showing one side of the coin and the idea that something is a problem without any evidence of negative consequences are three common practices among feminists. I'm sorry that i don't just buy what you're saying because it should be "common knowledge".
And the reason why i ask "why" is exactly because i want to learn. There is no need to feel threatened by questions.
Define social equality. Because i'm starting to think you're following the communist idea of "equal outcome". In which case i'll have to strongly disagree with that goal as great supporter of the free market and capitalism.
That couldn't be any more wrong. The person and how the person does it is very relevant. If i want to stop poverty by killing all the poor surely the fact i'm obviously a psycho and want to use mass murder to achieve the goal is relevant? Surely you wouldn't support me just because you like the idea of getting rid of poverty?
Anita's tactics are dangerous for the gaming industry and counter productive. She is trying to use guilt and self censorship to get a "better" female representation. And let's also not forget the precedent this would create. If you can cause the gaming industry to change based on unproven claims and guilt a lot of Jack Thompsons wannabes will have a field day.
Would you guys like to hear an incredibly messed up plot to a book? Of course you do.
A woman is tormented by an arranged marriage to a man she despises. Suddenly she is kidnapped and held for ransom by pirates. At first she finds this situation worse than her previous one until he get involved in a passionate love affair with the first mate of the ship. Instead of paying the ransom her horrible betrothed and father get the navy involved to hunt down the pirates and get her back, so now she and her lover must fight to stay together.
This is just about the most insulting, degrading to women plot that I have ever heard. The woman in this book is twice a damsel, once to her arranged marriage and second to pirates. Then she apparently develops Stockholm syndrome and is effectively raped. This the plot to a romance novel a female co-worker of mine is reading, written by a woman, for the enjoyment of women.
If the damsel premise were so insulting to women why do they write/read this type of shit. I can't think of a video game that was even close to being this bad.
Edit: Sorry I know this is off topic but I had to share
A woman is tormented by an arranged marriage to a man she despises. Suddenly she is kidnapped and held for ransom by pirates. At first she finds this situation worse than her previous one until he get involved in a passionate love affair with the first mate of the ship. Instead of paying the ransom her horrible betrothed and father get the navy involved to hunt down the pirates and get her back, so now she and her lover must fight to stay together.
This is just about the most insulting, degrading to women plot that I have ever heard. The woman in this book is twice a damsel, once to her arranged marriage and second to pirates. Then she apparently develops Stockholm syndrome and is effectively raped. This the plot to a romance novel a female co-worker of mine is reading, written by a woman, for the enjoyment of women.
If the damsel premise were so insulting to women why do they write/read this type of shit. I can't think of a video game that was even close to being this bad.
Edit: Sorry I know this is off topic but I had to share
As much as someone is mentally able to consent to a captor in a life threatening situation such as being a hostage taken by pirates. Like I said in my edit far off topic, sorry guys this is the last I shall say of it.Father Time said:
What exactly was "inflammatory" about what she said? She commented that there were no games introduced at the XBone presser featuring women... and the responses were not "I disagree. Here's an example of a game that..." The responses were essentially agreeing and saying this was a good thing.Wyvern65 said:
And the rest were just flat-out attacks at the woman for being a woman. How did anything she said at the start of that warrant that kind of response?