So, how about that wacky Sarkeesian lady? Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 24 NEXT | |
To put it nicely, she's the new Jack Thompson of gaming. To put it more honestly, she's an ironic sexist herself (see that "chart") and a hateful (of ironically women more than men), racist idiot to boot (see her Kanye West video), who has laughable ideals when it comes to interpreting different forms of media. She comes off as a child operating under false (and harmful if actually put into effect) intellectual pretenses, who exists off of making shallow and baseless claims over the apparent "sexism" in major franchises (said baseless criticism of major franchises results in the creation of her fleeting social relevance). Backlash is treated in opportunistic fashion, hypocritically becoming a "damsel in distress" for the internet to save. It's fascinating how her ascension to infamy can be literally summed up like this; Anita = Princess Peach. I'm sorry Mario. The Princess needs you to do her work for her. Considering my opinion of her is about as low as it can get, seeing her being incapable of making a single, simple piece pandering nonsense for her fanbase, after being supplied the obnoxious amount of over 150 G of pity money/ money out of honest interest, is not surprising in the slightest. Much like Jack Thompson, she's a fountain of lunacy and public folly operating under false intellectual pretenses. As time passed in the public eye, Thompson was rightfully discredited as a professional, and labelled and now remembered as a joke. Anita is on the road to the same fate. Seeing her ask her fanbase to essentially "do her homework" isn't much more surprising, but frustrating in a certain sense, since all I want her to do is upload her pandering, inane, and misguided ideals, let her fanbase lap it up, and for the sake of gaming and feminism, be forgotten. | |
Over all, I'm waiting to see what's done and then will discuss it at a later time, only thing to really do on the subject. Whilst I kind of understand that mindset, who's to say she isn't part of the community? I'm guessing she plays games for leisure as well as for this, that would make her part of it no matter what anyone says. | |
The more I look at the shit she's researching and the suggestions from her backers, it looks more like any single moment where a woman plays any kind of role is "sexist." Honestly, there may be a moment where a game actually is sexist, but you also need to take into account the time and setting of the story. If the game is set any earler than the mid-1900's an has an air of realism to it then of course women will not be equal. | |
As a male feminist, I'd have to say, this woman right here is forwarding the awful image that feminists have in the gamer community. | |
Wow really? She took $160,000 to make a vlog and hasn't made anything happen yet? Nobody saw that coming. Even if she had I can tell you it would have been over-analysed bullshit that did sweet fuck all. She isn't fighting sexism, she's pointing it out and doing nothing to change anything. Seriously, if someone asked you in the street to donate to his vlog talking about this shit, would you even give him a passing glance? Course you wouldn't. Anyone who donated was scammed by this bitch. Be aware, for all those white knights, that I hate this woman for how she's going about things and who she is, not because she's "standing up to sexism in video games" or because she's a woman. | |
An overwhelming majority of police officers and fireman are male though... | |
But Lego has interchangeable hairstyles... Are you honestly fucking trying to tell me that the little yellow herm-people of Lego are sexist? They're male roles because not only are the fields mostly dominated by men, but in Lego terms you also can't put fucking hats on the hair pieces. This is why so many people view her as nothing but a joke. | |
Her argument was essentially "women parts:male parts isn't 1:1, this is sexist" and "look at this Lego product line separate from the main line targeted to girls, it looks very girly and is targeted at a stereotypical female child; this is also sexist." It was a shitty argument, though that really goes without saying. | |
IN THEORY , this is true. In reality, Kickstarter's TOS has said, in no uncertain terms that they will not get involved with refund disputes. Once the project creator has taken the money out, any issues involving money are between the backers and the creators. They even define deadlines as "good faith attempts" which has very little in the way of legal teeth. http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use In fact, Gamespot had a story about this sort of issue concerning the Ouya. While it is about the Ouya, I believe that Kickstarter is talking about it in order to lay the groundwork for "We're not getting involved" with Tropes vs. Women. Any attempts to get refunds will almost certainly result in the backers having to use their own resources for legal action and, at this point, what are they going to be able to get back that would be worth the legal fees? Personally, I hope the backers don't get refunds. Most got involved with this for very dumb reasons (Wah. People are mean to me on Youtube.) and I think that it is inevitable that Caveat Emptor would catch up with one of the projects. Better to have it happen with a project like this so people will learn some form of awareness without it becoming aversion. | |
There might be something to salvage from the experience though, if the backers were to try to legally get seek money back from anita. It would be a money pit for both sides and a messy confrontation that would be sure to spark media attention. But, maybe that would be a good thing? "Hey, look at this, gamers aren't taking shit from a scammer!". (Since I know I will be commented about it by someone otherwise, not saying she is a scammer, merely that is likely how it would be spun). Probably not, mostly just a messy fight that would have crowdfunding change it's policies as a result, but hey, got to hope for something of value out of this mess, right? Not like I was expecting it to come from the promised videos themselves. | |
Okay, okay. One person tries. | |
Oh, okay. All I saw was one side, I've been trying to avoid this whole issue. | |
What's that? The blatantly incompetent individual who has practically nothing uniquely insightful to say about gender politics and sexism is having trouble meeting her deadline? Shocking. Hey, Anita, here's an idea. HIRE PEOPLE TO HELP YOU. | |
I'd have to say no, considering some of the things I've reported that they've clearly ignored. | |
Weakness is a negative character trait for both men and women in real life, but only women tend to get shown as weak in movies. That doesn't mean that male characters who exhibit weakness are acting "female" but that weakness is a trait often reserved for female characterisation. That's all the chart is really trying to show. Moving on from the chart, we can draw a broader observations about how certain characteristics are associated with each sex. Ever heard lesbians being described as "mannish" or "butch", and weak men are described as "girly"? A girl who gets down and dirty is a "Tom boy" and a vampire who falls in love is a "pussy"? Clearly, there are strict societal expectations about what traits a sex should exhibit, and not living up to those expectations results in negative comparisons to the sex those traits they are associated with: Being ugly, broad and outgoing is unwomanly. Being physically weak, sensitive, and non-violent is unmanly. | |
Yeah that's exactly what it is. I mean even if we ignore the fact that she completely avoids addressing or even discussing the numerous problems surrounding her "project" and that she spammed 4chan in order to paint herself as some sort of strong independent womyn fighting against the sexist masses by getting the idiots there to do what they always do your argument still holds water. It totally does. I mean it's not like she deleted a number of her videos in order to trick people into believing she actually knows what she's talking about when, in fact, she's one of the most clueless person with a master's to have ever walked this earth. Yep. | |
Thank you for proving my point so succinctly. Captcha: Pea Brain. Really, Captcha? That's not a nice thing to say about the man, even if it is true. | |
I'm sorry but insulting other forum members is against the forum rules. You leave me no choice, I'm going to have to report you. | |
I like how you prove her point without even knowing it. It's genius! | |
It wasn't my intention to "bad mouth" any body. The video series showed no great production skill, certainly nothing to suggest an ability to produce a video series worthy of a $160,000 budget. Similarly the tropes in the kickstarter e-mail don't seem to be especially innovative or even researched (although the link you have supplied certainly was to more rigorous material, suggesting perhaps there is some hope of something more worthwhile). I would have though the whole point was that the research was undertaken by the kickstarter themselves. Overall, I think my comment was fair: the funding by far exceeds the expected sum (as evidenced by the original $6000 goal); there seems to have been no great activity to use this resource to produce a suitably higher quality product (for example, through hiring professional video production support or research support) and, personally, I think there is at least chance of a minimum quality product being produced to meet the terms of the kickstarter. I did not suggest this was mendacious, merely the result of an unexpected large response and a confusion as to how to respond. Interesting link though, thanks! | |
Because baiting other people is totally proving your own point. | |
Oh, that is interesting, let's see how it pans out. | |
Please do continue. Since people like you have been causing a fuss, her site has received a nice influx of views and she is more popular than ever. Give her some more attention and tell us all how much of a crazy "womyn" as you spelled it, she is. | |
Captcha said it, I didn't. I'm sure you're just a misunderstood genius. | |
Oh, you're done already? I was expecting more from you. Next? | |
Well I'm sorry but that's up to the mods to decide. No hard feelings right? | |
The irony in here is palpable. Her biggest critics rush in to misspell the word woman and end up giving her more face time. No doubt her fame fells her with delight ^^ | |
That's a rather cheeky response from someone who's ignored so many direct rebuttals in a single thread. Unfortunately, that increased "face time" she'll be getting in the near future probably won't be the kind she's hoping for. | |
To quote C-3P0 "'Popular' is hardly the word I would choose" | |
EXCUSE ME?! No nononnono..... you did not just call Percy there one of her "biggest critics" while I been arguing for several threads now just because you want an easy target. You want to argue one of her critics, stick around for the discussion. You want to point to trolls and say they represent the critics of her...well, you would be doing exactly what she did to be fair, but that is kinda a bad thing... | |
So what? Is sexism about numbers or is it about intent and context? Does that mean all games are sexist because most of the main male characters are muscular and macho? Therefore insulting all of the guys in the world who have to live up to the false expectations that they have to be a 'manly man' to be of any worth to anybody? How often does the nerdy, quiet guy get the girl? How often does the intelligent, but not physically strong guy save the world? Because people could quite easily argue that if they were so inclined, and they'd have just as many examples to back it up. As far as I am concerned, the reasons for why we lack as many strong female leads as we do males can be boiled down to two main points. 1) While in the gaming 'community' it is largely accepted that girls form a significant amount of the player base. In society in general, as well as the marketing sector, gaming is still seen as something that guys do. I cannot speak for all countries and cultures, but where I live gaming is still seen as something that guys do and girls can't figure out what's so interesting about it. This goes for the women that I know, as well as the partners of all my friends and acquaintances. As well as the mass media at large. 2) People create products with a target audience in mind. If you want to sell as many of your product as possible then you need to make it appeal to as many people as possible. If you go by games such as Call of Duty, then the vast majority of players are still male. Girls of course do like it, and there are surely many girls who are just as into it, if not more than a lot of guys, but guys are still the majority and are still the target audience as a whole. I am not saying that it's fair, and I certainly do not agree with the idea that games aimed at a male audience should have to contain a grizzly man to sell it, but that is how selling products work. To use a non-gaming example: How many make-up/skin care adverts show men? Is it sexist? Is it implying that men can't want to be hygienic, eat healthily or are incapable of looking after their home? Or to invert that, that women only care about their looks, being slim and looking after a house? No. Of course not. They aim their product at the people they judge will most likely buy it, and in the case of the gaming industry, while they may be misjudging just how many females are into gaming, they are not doing it to be sexist, they are doing it to try and get as many sales as possible, and for that, they try and create their products to interest the people they think will most likely buy it. That doesn't make it a good thing, but it is not the same thing as being sexist. | |
Just go away...all I can say. | |
I'm not a troll. My reply was met with hostility and I responded accordingly. | |
The only real question I have about her is: Why doesn't she hire someone who knows their games and helps her picking the right games to criticize? She totally got the money for it. Also, why does every discussion about these kind of subjects always end in a flame wars? | |
| Pages PREV 1 . . . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 . . . 24 NEXT | |
There was/is evidence to both sides. Anita is no stranger to omitting information to suit her viewpoint.