• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anita Sarkeesian fraud revealed.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
0roo0roo said:
She's the feminist version of Jack Thompson.
Click to expand...

picard-facepalm.gif
 
Red Hawk said:
picard-facepalm.gif
Click to expand...


So can you explain why you did that?


I figure olds is older and knows who jack thompson is vs anita, both are anti video game crusaders, and for such people, their thought process is always like this, they find and select evidence that fit their preexisting conclusion, everything else, especially contradictory evidence is ignored because they aren't interested in critical thought.

Jack thompsons reasoning "His basic argument is that violent video games have repeatedly been used by teenagers as "murder simulators" to rehearse violent plans. He has pointed to alleged connections between such games and a number of school massacres. According to Thompson, "In every school shooting, we find that kids who pull the trigger are video gamers."" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)#Grand_Theft_Auto

Simplistic nonsense not much different than that of anita sarkeesian.

So yes

picard-facepalm.gif
 
Last edited:
Well for one I don't think Anita is an "anti-game crusader" anymore than she is an "anti-movie crusader". And she's not trying to take legal action against games, she's just trying to start a discussion and hopefully change some people's opinions. She thinks there's a problem with how women are portrayed in video games, that's basically it.

Jack Thompson connected video games to murder, and numerous times tried to take legal action against games to have that content removed or regulated.

Comparing Anita Sarkeesian to Jack Thompson is a gross mismatch. Are there some flaws in Anita's logic? Sure. Is her argument comparable to blaming games for murder sprees? Hell no.
 
OP your entire arguments here are so senseless they make Jack Thompson look almost sane.

I've got 3 theories about the OP.
1.) Gayest man EVER
2.) A woman trapped in a man's body (you know like the rabid anti-gay people that lash out against homosexuality when they themselves partake in it)
3.) A woman once kicked his ass, cut off his dick, then sodomized him with it, in front of his friends and family. Also she recorded it, and somehow all the Justin Beiber videos are really just weird They Live style subliminal versions of it.
 
Red Hawk said:
Well for one I don't think Anita is an "anti-game crusader" anymore than she is an "anti-movie crusader". And she's not trying to take legal action against games, she's just trying to start a discussion and hopefully change some people's opinions. She thinks there's a problem with how women are portrayed in video games, that's basically it.

Jack Thompson connected video games to murder, and numerous times tried to take legal action against games to have that content removed or regulated.

Comparing Anita Sarkeesian to Jack Thompson is a gross mismatch. Are there some flaws in Anita's logic? Sure. Is her argument comparable to blaming games for murder sprees? Hell no.
Click to expand...

She's a moralist crusader. If jack thompson is labeled as an anti video game activist when he never sued anyone over say..tetris, she kind of fits the fill too. Whatever is not to her taste shouldn't exist it seems, which is no different from jack thompson. Both rely on correlation is causation and other fallacious thought. She's just going about it a different way. After all if saving a princess affects women horribly, surely a "murder simulator" is going to screw men up even worse right? Jack at least didn't try to pretend he was a gamer who had a stake in anything, so i"ll give him that over her.




She isn't trying to start a discussion, she's pushing a toxic mentality. She promotes irrational thinking, which is frankly pretty close to religious thought. She exagerrates the seriousness of the supposed "threat" against her in order to silence any criticism she can. Its a tactic used by the dishonest, and has long been used by churches throughout history. To church orthodoxy, an atheist is a troll, and thats why blasphemy laws have existed for most of religious history. Religions always portray themselves as victim fighting back against attackers who they loudly proclaim as morally reprehensible, it allows them to avoid having to deal with dissent, victims are never accountable after all. So they silence detractors any way they can, all is justified. Why would you listen to an atheist when they have been labeled as morally reprehensible by the church after all. Anita and her kind have adapted this kind of toxic thinking to a new age. Its a convenient enough tactic that one feminist blogger was actually caught making rape threats to herself when she needed to go after some site or group. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/03/meg-lanker-simons-hoax-university-wisconsin_n_3210326.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKKQdJR7F_I
This guy explains the mentality, ignore the title, the subject at its core is the same, including the issue of free speech and efforts to silence dissent using the same set of excuses.
 
Last edited:
SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

Give me 160k in free money from stupid people who agree, and I can make a few stupid videos to support my claim, too.

She is a successful internet troll, who simply latched onto an age old sexism issue which other people with less of a feminazi bent already pointed out about video games decades before she ever did. The big difference was she got paid to troll, based on the lie she was an avid gamer, and now there will be no repercussions for her lies, such as refunding the money she scammed.
 
0roo0roo said:
She's a moralist crusader. If jack thompson is labeled as an anti video game activist when he never sued anyone over say..tetris, she kind of fits the fill too. Whatever is not to her taste shouldn't exist it seems, which is no different from jack thompson. Both rely on correlation is causation and other fallacious thought. She's just going about it a different way. After all if saving a princess affects women horribly, surely a "murder simulator" is going to screw men up even worse right? Jack at least didn't try to pretend he was a gamer who had a stake in anything, so i"ll give him that over her.

She isn't trying to start a discussion, she's pushing a toxic mentality. She promotes irrational thinking, which is frankly pretty close to religious thought. She exagerrates the seriousness of the supposed "threat" against her in order to silence any criticism she can. Its a tactic used by the dishonest, and has long been used by churches throughout history. To church orthodoxy, an atheist is a troll, and thats why blasphemy laws have existed for most of religious history. Religions always portray themselves as victim fighting back against attackers who they loudly proclaim as morally reprehensible, it allows them to avoid having to deal with dissent, victims are never accountable after all. So they silence detractors any way they can, all is justified. Why would you listen to an atheist when they have been labeled as morally reprehensible by the church after all. Anita and her kind have adapted this kind of toxic thinking to a new age. Its a convenient enough tactic that one feminist blogger was actually caught making rape threats to herself when she needed to go after some site or group. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/03/meg-lanker-simons-hoax-university-wisconsin_n_3210326.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKKQdJR7F_I
This guy explains the mentality, ignore the title, the subject at its core is the same, including the issue of free speech and efforts to silence dissent using the same set of excuses.
Click to expand...

So all "moralist crusaders" are comparable to Jack Thompson, now? And show me one time that Anita says the games she uses as examples shouldn't exist at all. Your view of Anita's opinions and arguments seem to be getting more and more exaggerated with every post you make.
 
Red Hawk said:
So all "moralist crusaders" are comparable to Jack Thompson, now? And show me one time that Anita says the games she uses as examples shouldn't exist at all. Your view of Anita's opinions and arguments seem to be getting more and more exaggerated with every post you make.
Click to expand...

The ones that apply apply, jack was only brought into this to explain who she was.
If she has her way, games wouldn't exist in their current form or else why would she waste her time complaining. If she were set on creating and serving her own market segment instead of trying to impose her views on the rest of the gamer population, none of this would be necessary.
 
Sounds like she is against showing hot looking girls in video games, if so why doesn't she stick to magic pony or something and leave those of us who want hot girls in video games alone?

Bunny Riven in LOL.
 
Most guys have no problem at all with girls getting into gaming. In fact, I tend to see it encouraged and desired. A lot of serious gamer guys hope for a gf or wife who is into gaming at least to some degree, for the commonality and because it helps avoid her looking down on the hobby.

Guys also don't have any problem with female developers. If there's a talented female game programmer or artist or music composer, nobody in or out of the industry has a beef with that.

What does bother some people are the women who don't really actually have any talent but still end up rising through the ranks within development for reasons which clearly have to do with using their gender and with white knights not holding them to the same standard a prospective male employee would be held to. Women who end up with positions in the gaming industry, whose set of skills and level of talent makes it clear as day that if they were male instead, they'd never have gotten through the door. That does irk people, and I think it should. There is a LOT of this which goes on. There are also some very talented female game makers who got into their position completely based on merit and skill. Hats off to them.

Similar phenomenon exists within the game reviewing world. This is another industry which was brought into existence by males, who now find themselves facing a situation where a lot of the prominent game review sites would rather have an attractive girl announcing gaming news, and what seems like a suspicious number of female reviewers gaining prominence. For myself, I would say that if a female reviewer is hired, or rising through the ranks... as long as she's on that trajectory by the same standards a male reviewer would need to meet... actual quality of insight and writing, etc... then more power to her. If, however, she's getting the job in the first place and then gaining prominence suspiciously rapidly, and this is to due with her gender in any way (she's attractive, or the company is thinking how it would look good to have more female faces on their reviews, etc.) then yea, that's irksome.

It's sort of sad that the nerdy guys who created the game review industry in the US are now almost incapable of getting hired because they aren't female, hot, or at least sporting a UK accent. I guess they've been deemed boring and old news. Ah well, inevitable I guess when an industry starts to move to more video news and such.

This is a process which repeats itself in so many walks of life. Feminists said they wanted equality. They were given equal access, but when there weren't enough women showing interest in certain fields, and not enough who really met the requirements... requirements started becoming two-tiered. Considerations which shouldn't be there seeped in. This happened in everything from politics, the corporate world, gaming, journalism, you name it. "This looks bad, we don't have enough females in upper management, in congress, etc" "Yea but Bob, we don't get very many female applicants and even fewer who are qualified..." "Damn the torpedoes! Hire them!"

Now when it comes to Sarkeesian? She's just a "fan" and a critic... but this same sort of thing applies even down at the level of mere players and fans.

Is a female competitive player being featured unusually prominently given her skill level? That can bother other gamers who play competitively, I think it's obvious why.

Oh and now there's this lady (Sarkeesian) showing up saying the gaming industry should make massive changes to content and sensibilities so that a small percentage of the gamer base, most of whom seem satisfied with how gaming is anyway, can supposedly be more pleased with games... at the expense of the much larger proportion of the gaming community, who will become less satisfied with it?

Of course that's going to bother people.

It feels like an interloper coming into an environment they didn't help build or sustain in any way, and only showing up after it's gotten to be a huge industry with cultural prominence... and then trying to change it. Not even trying to change it by starting her own development house and actually creating something, either... trying to change it via industrial strength whining from the sidelines.

Even still, I don't think she would have gotten nearly so much hate if her message had been strictly "there should be MORE GAMES LIKE ________" rather than being so heavily weighted toward "THERE SHOULD BE FEWER GAMES LIKE __________"

A lot of people suspected she wasn't really a gamer, but just an extreme feminist trying to infiltrate and destroy another thing males created and enjoy, and triggered by that thing reaching a certain critical cultural mass.. which always seems to draw these types. The same thing has happened in the atheist convention community, for instance.

Turns out that evidence has now come out to show she not only isn't really a gamer like she claimed, but also that her boyfriend provided all the knowledge and effort to create her videos.

The hatred is well deserved. If you look into her, she's someone who made a very calculated move to deliberately stir up anger, and then launder that anger through naive supporters, into filthy lucre. A despicable piece of shit, she is.
 
Why doesn't anyone talk about the male stereotypes in the damsel in distress scenario.

(1) a captured male is ignored, if a male is captured no one cares to rescue him.
(2) a male who is not capable of defeating a bazillion fire-breathing ninja robots is a worthless person.

Really does wonders for the male species! If anything is to be extrapolated (and not saying it should be), these games are more damaging to men than they are to women!
 
She either needs larger tits or skinnier arms, especially if she is going to wear those sleeveless sweater thingies. Also needs to not talk so much, it appears as if she believes anyone cares what she is saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top