Feminist Frequency posts critics' personal info on Twitter

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
 

Abuse is abuse no matter what type it is and the abuse needs to stop because THAT behavior is what is wrong with the community.

To the people who say "she's just a youtuber, ignore her." That was once true and that thankfully seems to be becoming the truth again. But there was a while there where her circumstances and/or troll tactics (it really could be either) made her a more public figure. She was covered on pretty much every game journalism site and was even invited to do a Ted Talks (a real mark against their credibility).

Its hard to tell how these things are going to go sometimes. Is she going to become a permanent voice in our community pushing things harder than we'd like or is she a novelty act to be forgotten in a couple of years?

If she's falling from grace, I wouldn't worry about it. There are finally more reasonable and knowledgeable women already in our community emboldened to do right what she has done wrong, to have an actual informed dialog mostly without the inflammatory language (it seems to be the male feminists who can't seem to avoid that [ahem] MovieBob and Jimquisition you're accomplishing nothing.)

Verlander:

Do I care? Nope. Send an abuse email, and get shamed. It's not like Anonymous haven't been doing this for years.

I had to comment on this, dude, aside from the Scientology protests, net nutrality, and some minor internet vigilantism, when the HELL have the anons been considered people to mimic or be like!?

You don't call yourself the good guy when you do bad guy things!

KingDragonlord:
To the people who say "she's just a youtuber, ignore her." That was once true and that thankfully seems to be becoming the truth again. But there was a while there where her circumstances and/or troll tactics (it really could be either) made her a more public figure. She was covered on pretty much every game journalism site and was even invited to do a Ted Talks (a real mark against their credibility).

Its hard to tell how these things are going to go sometimes. Is she going to become a permanent voice in our community pushing things harder than we'd like or is she a novelty act to be forgotten in a couple of years?

If she's falling from grace, I wouldn't worry about it. There are finally more reasonable and knowledgeable women already in our community emboldened to do right what she has done wrong, to have an actual informed dialog mostly without the inflammatory language (it seems to be the male feminists who can't seem to avoid that [ahem] MovieBob and Jimquisition you're accomplishing nothing.)

I'm curious; What are these troll tactics you speak of? She Kick-Started a video series about video games from a feminist prospective. If that qualifies as trolling to gamers than this really is a toxic and sexist community.

niktzv:

KingDragonlord:
To the people who say "she's just a youtuber, ignore her." That was once true and that thankfully seems to be becoming the truth again. But there was a while there where her circumstances and/or troll tactics (it really could be either) made her a more public figure. She was covered on pretty much every game journalism site and was even invited to do a Ted Talks (a real mark against their credibility).

Its hard to tell how these things are going to go sometimes. Is she going to become a permanent voice in our community pushing things harder than we'd like or is she a novelty act to be forgotten in a couple of years?

If she's falling from grace, I wouldn't worry about it. There are finally more reasonable and knowledgeable women already in our community emboldened to do right what she has done wrong, to have an actual informed dialog mostly without the inflammatory language (it seems to be the male feminists who can't seem to avoid that [ahem] MovieBob and Jimquisition you're accomplishing nothing.)

I'm curious; What are these troll tactics you speak of? She Kick-Started a video series about video games from a feminist prospective. If that qualifies as trolling to gamers than this really is a toxic and sexist community.

Really?

You don't see that deliberately, and intentionally taking games so out of context as to misrepresent them is trying to troll people and intentionally mislead?

You don't find it odd, that the only footage that can be found on the internet of hitman doing to the strippers, what she claims gamers are intended and meant to do, can only be found in her video?

You don't consider intentionally misleading an audience trolling?

Tell me do you know the definition of trolling?

I am going off memory here, so maybe I don't know it either, but I am pretty sure it is to deliberately antagonize the audience.

Funny thing about this "Toxic and sexist" community you speak of.

Most of us will admit that sexism in the video game industry is not only common, but a bit much.

Then she calls things like the Legend of Zelda, and Mario Brothers, Pac Man, and what have you sexist for strictly having women be damsels, and the gaming community, including a number of female gamers, call foul, and we are just toxic, and sexist.

No she is trying, deliberately so, to antagonize her would be audience.

Most gamers can get behind that many games are sexist.

Most gamers can not get behind Anita's message of what is sexist.

There is a difference.

My opinion on her is no secret (See: Lying, shit-stirring attention-seeking idiot) But regardless of whether or not you like her, this cannot be defended. This is foul and all she's doing is trying to get people to pay attention to her.

She does these things for attention and Feminist Frequency itself is more for being in the limelight of the internet and views than it is for actual change. This is no surprise, and we're giving her what she wants. Attention by any means she can get it.

ultreos2:

Look how riled up she makes people, and how both sides just "dig in harder".

This would be a great argument--if my entire point wasn't countering the notion that she was somehow different than the others.

While you didn't take the same tack, it appears we agree on the major reason I brought it up. Because one was portrayed as different. Specifically for a reason that was ultimately a pointless distinction, mind.

Shodanbot:

Wasn't making a comment on atheism/theism.

Didn't say you were. And since the point was that addressing critics didn't change anything, I wouldn't be so quick to insist I missed the point.

bobleponge:
Okay, so I see a lot of people in this thread claiming that what Anita did was clearly, obviously illegal. Is it? I'd really like some evidence here.

Is posting someone's email and IP address truly illegal, and if so, under what circumstances?

I'm fairly confident it isn't illegal.

ultreos2:

bobleponge:
Okay, so I see a lot of people in this thread claiming that what Anita did was clearly, obviously illegal. Is it? I'd really like some evidence here.

Is posting someone's email and IP address truly illegal, and if so, under what circumstances?

Not sure if it is or is not legal... However I postulate the following question.

If someone here posted Anita Sarkeesians personal information, or information that would allow someone to say, find her home address, would there be a single person here that would not come to the conclusion that such posting could be a legitimate and real threat to her personal well being?

Generally speaking it is probably not wise to post information of such nature on the Internet, even if it is in response to something someone else did.

What...like a phone book does? If I really wanted to look up Anita Sarkeesian's address, I'd go to the whitepages. In fact, I just did and I found an Anita Sarkeesian on it straight away. It isn't really that sensitive a piece of information that it compromises her safety. I'm not sure I would hand it out to people who clearly offer her ill will, but it isn't something people should worry about. I'm no techy, but I am pretty sure it is the same case with IP addresses.

maninahat:

bobleponge:
Okay, so I see a lot of people in this thread claiming that what Anita did was clearly, obviously illegal. Is it? I'd really like some evidence here.

Is posting someone's email and IP address truly illegal, and if so, under what circumstances?

I'm fairly confident it isn't illegal.

ultreos2:

bobleponge:
Okay, so I see a lot of people in this thread claiming that what Anita did was clearly, obviously illegal. Is it? I'd really like some evidence here.

Is posting someone's email and IP address truly illegal, and if so, under what circumstances?

Not sure if it is or is not legal... However I postulate the following question.

If someone here posted Anita Sarkeesians personal information, or information that would allow someone to say, find her home address, would there be a single person here that would not come to the conclusion that such posting could be a legitimate and real threat to her personal well being?

Generally speaking it is probably not wise to post information of such nature on the Internet, even if it is in response to something someone else did.

What...like a phone book does? If I really wanted to look up Anita Sarkeesian's address, I'd go to the whitepages. In fact, I just did and I found an Anita Sarkeesian on it straight away. It isn't really that sensitive a piece of information that it compromises her safety. I'm not sure I would hand it out to people who clearly offer her ill will, but it isn't something people should worry about. I'm no techy, but I am pretty sure it is the same case with IP addresses.

I could give you my name right now and you won't find my address. In a phonebook at least.

Most people keep their private details hidden, I happen to keep mine hidden because of a unique name combination that if someone wanted to hurt me they would have easier access to my address if I put it out there.

Somehow I have significant reason to believe you do not have the ability to find miss Anita's home address in Canada. If she does believe those death threats in any way shape or form as she claims, she would be absolutely insane to overlook something that stupid to overlook.

Zachary Amaranth:

WhiteNachos:

So what? How does that excuse Anita in the slightest?

Please point to where I said "this excuses Anita."

If not, stop dishonestly putting words in my mouth. and don't expect me to take your word to "personally vouch" for anything.

My point had nothing to do with her and everything to do with the double standard being employed.

The double standard you assume is being employed. You just assume her critics would call her a liar for those emails because it makes it easier for you to look down on them.

Metalix Knightmare:

Verlander:

Do I care? Nope. Send an abuse email, and get shamed. It's not like Anonymous haven't been doing this for years.

I had to comment on this, dude, aside from the Scientology protests, net nutrality, and some minor internet vigilantism, when the HELL have the anons been considered people to mimic or be like!?

You don't call yourself the good guy when you do bad guy things!

Good point, but it wasn't so much about being like them, as the hypocrisy in that most people (boys) who hate on Sarkeesian for everything she does are also the people that idolise Anon, or approve of them (and the offshots like Lulsec or whatever)

I don't agree with her tactics here, nor the way her videos present "facts". I am all for better female representation but not at the cost of the credibility of such a movement. Its sad the way things go, people get so passionate about something they completely ignore what they're doing in order to accomplish their goals.
I don't know her personally, so I can't comment on who she is accurately only my own deductions from what she's presented so far. She seems to be in love with attention, biting back at the critics instead of brushing them off like any person who's comfortable in their own skin should. I don't expect people to grow a thicker skin, but rather stop feeding the damn trolls by responding in any way to them. Sure some of them won't relent but you don't have to keep listening to them either. And doxing them is pretty low, showing what kind of person she really is.
If you want to be taken seriously, then don't do things that damage your image like that. I've no love for politicians who resort to outing their opponents closet-skeletons to win an election nor do I approve of Anonymous' tactics in general and I don't approve of her doxing like this.
She really should take the moral high ground and just move on with her campaign against game but she seems incapable of doing so...
I do have a question that has nothing to do with this, has she pointed out games that have represented females "correctly"?

Ultratwinkie:
http://gintaxalvissforever.tumblr.com/post/91880828757/anita-sarkeesian-is-doxing-to-those-who-dont

NOTE: I will not post directly to twitter. That is against the rules and ethics.

I like how that "Fire Summoner" Tumblr user felt the need to redact obviously fake contact information for one of the supposed doxxing victims. Maybe because not showing that it was fake made the anti-Sarkeesian narrative more convincing, hm?

And, of course, this is a case of exposing harassment. Criticism and harassment is not the same thing.

JediMB:

Ultratwinkie:
http://gintaxalvissforever.tumblr.com/post/91880828757/anita-sarkeesian-is-doxing-to-those-who-dont

NOTE: I will not post directly to twitter. That is against the rules and ethics.

I like how that "Fire Summoner" Tumblr user felt the need to redact obviously fake contact information for one of the supposed doxing victims. Maybe because not showing that it was fake made the anti-Sarkeesian narrative more convincing, hm?

And, of course, this is a case of exposing harrassment. Criticism and harrassment is not the same thing.

And you can tell the contact info is fake....how exactly? I fail to find harassment in that email. He didn't kill her fucking dog. If you don't like what's in an email you can fucking delete it. And Fire Summoner redacted the contact info because not doing so is illegal.

jpz719:

JediMB:

Ultratwinkie:
http://gintaxalvissforever.tumblr.com/post/91880828757/anita-sarkeesian-is-doxing-to-those-who-dont

NOTE: I will not post directly to twitter. That is against the rules and ethics.

I like how that "Fire Summoner" Tumblr user felt the need to redact obviously fake contact information for one of the supposed doxing victims. Maybe because not showing that it was fake made the anti-Sarkeesian narrative more convincing, hm?

And, of course, this is a case of exposing harassment. Criticism and harassment is not the same thing.

And you can tell the contact info is fake....how exactly? I fail to find harassment in that email. He didn't kill her fucking dog. If you don't like what's in an email you can fucking delete it. And Fire Summoner redacted the contact info because not doing so is illegal.

If you can't tell this is fake, you have problems:

Name: W.G, The Daily Telegraph interview request
E-mail: yoouoaoroeoaocouonot@telegraph.com

Furthermore, if you fail to find harassment in someone (who's not acting alone, mind you) e-mailing you with a fake name and address to tell you that you're a wh*re, extremely dumb and a disgusting pig... well... that's your issue to deal with.

And if you don't like a video on YouTube, you can fucking close the tab. Sending an e-mail filled with insults to the author is not an okay way to deal with disagreeing with her.

jpz719:
I fail to find harassment in that email. He didn't kill her fucking dog. If you don't like what's in an email you can fucking delete it.

So, harassment only counts if it's physical harassment?

Online harassment is a thing too, you know.

jpz719:
And Fire Summoner redacted the contact info because not doing so is illegal.

So everyone keeps saying. But repeatedly saying it doesn't make it true.

Care to provide a citation for this?

IceForce:

jpz719:
I fail to find harassment in that email. He didn't kill her fucking dog. If you don't like what's in an email you can fucking delete it.

So, harassment only counts if it's physical harassment?

Online harassment is a thing too, you know.

jpz719:
And Fire Summoner redacted the contact info because not doing so is illegal.

So everyone keeps saying. But repeatedly saying it doesn't make it true.

Care to provide a citation for this?

The term "online harassment" doesn't really make much sense to me. They're some anonymous random fuck who could be on the other side of the country from you. Their words are meaningless white-noise. Unless you actually know them personally their words don't mean shit.

jpz719:

IceForce:

jpz719:
I fail to find harassment in that email. He didn't kill her fucking dog. If you don't like what's in an email you can fucking delete it.

So, harassment only counts if it's physical harassment?

Online harassment is a thing too, you know.

jpz719:
And Fire Summoner redacted the contact info because not doing so is illegal.

So everyone keeps saying. But repeatedly saying it doesn't make it true.

Care to provide a citation for this?

The term "online harassment" doesn't really make much sense to me. They're some anonymous random fuck who could be on the other side of the country from you. Their words are meaningless white-noise. Unless you actually know them personally their words don't mean shit.

Then congratulations to you on being someone who hasn't experienced harassment by strangers whilst apparently lacking the ability to put yourself in the shoes of those who do. Please don't mistakenly view your own personal experiences as universal for everyone.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked