• Why Are You So Angry? - Innuendo Studios
    27 replies, posted
I remember Innuendo Studios from when he did a pretty extensive and interesting analysis of the reactions surrounding [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTUW-owa2w]Phil Fish[/url]. Now he went and did an entire series on the people surrounding GamerGate (oh boy...). Wanted to post it here because I think FP has plenty of these sort of folks around. I think it's a pretty great psychological analysis, not that I'm an expert, but it explains a lot of the behaviour and group dynamics. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y8XgGhXkTQ[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEHuNrC8yU[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSmDq5Czae0[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6TrKkkVEhs[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCqQ9LxzTwM[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfPAoz9GnWM[/media] Take what you want from it.
I really liked his previous video on Phil Phish, which brought up some valid points as to why we disliked him. But when I got into this series, I was wondering how he could be so far off. Granted, I only got through the first three videos before I had to raise objections, but I feel like he's so far off from the point that the only way he would ever point out the faults of [B]both[/B] sides is if he were intentionally structuring his rhetoric this way. This guy talks about "Angry jack" like the majority of Anita hate is only "FIRE BAD, CONFLICTING WORLD VIEWS MAKE ANON ANGRY". While it's possible that this is the source of some of the haters, it doesn't account for all of them. From what I understand, the majority of hate for Anita comes from: -Being famous wrong (As discussed by his video on Phil Fish) -Being seen as using a hot-button topic to expand personal wealth. -Being disingenuous about liking games (As evidenced in that one video of her giving a lecture to other feminists that I do not have the link to) -Using footage of games without permission from the user that recorded it. -Oversimplifying dissent to the vocal extremists.(While the extremists are fucking childish and their actions are inexcusable, some feel like she groups in anyone who disagrees with her into the same bin as rape threats [I personally have no evidence of this].) -Displaying contrast between emotion and action. (Displaying negative reaction to the harassment and then intentionally structuring tweets to provoke reaction [I personally have no evidence of this].) -Using bandwagon to reinforce her stance. -Waving off objections with "Saying I don't play games? Wow sexist much?" And on top of all that, she was being PRAISED by games journalism, despite displaying such faults. But yeah, the video series doesn't talk about this much in the first three soooooo, I'm gonna say biased author.
I watched only 3 of these, but from what I gathered, he seems to imply that people don't like Anita Sarkeesian because she is right. And if you say she's wrong then you're in denial, you sexist pig
Watched the whole thing and it isn't good as Phil Fish video was. It's too bias and simplified.
made it to the fourth one not giving this guy any more views
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;48244485]I watched only 3 of these, but from what I gathered, he seems to imply that people don't like Anita Sarkeesian because she is right. And if you say she's wrong then you're in denial, you sexist pig[/QUOTE] No, what he's saying is that the hate she and other feminists get within this space is extremely disproportionate. The reaction has been far more than simple disagreement with her points. People somehow see her as a threat. That's what this profile is about. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Pappi_man;48244508]Watched the whole thing and it isn't good as Phil Fish video was. It's too bias and simplified.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, but the whole series is already over an hour long. You're never going to cover everything that happened.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48245224]No, what he's saying is that the hate she and other feminists get within this space is extremely disproportionate. The reaction has been far more than simple disagreement with her points. People somehow see her as a threat. That's what this profile is about. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] Well yeah, but the whole series is already over an hour long. You're never going to cover everything that happened.[/QUOTE] When people say your favorite things are problematic and harmful to society, they tend to feel attacked. It's the exact same shit as the moral panic of the 90's, with much the same reaction from the people feeling threatened. This isn't new, it isn't specific to Anita because she's a woman or because she's talking about a certain kind of way in which video games are eroding the moral fabric of society. The only thing that makes this situation any different is that she found a way to capitalize on the outrage. Should people send death threats and hurl insults? Probably not. But it wasn't a gender issue when it happened to Jack Thompson, so I don't see why it should be now.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;48245328]When people say your favorite things are problematic and harmful to society, they tend to feel attacked. It's the exact same shit as the moral panic of the 90's, with much the same reaction from the people feeling threatened. This isn't new, it isn't specific to Anita because she's a woman or because she's talking about a certain kind of way in which video games are eroding the moral fabric of society. The only thing that makes this situation any different is that she found a way to capitalize on the outrage. Should people send death threats and hurl insults? Probably not. But it wasn't a gender issue when it happened to Jack Thompson, so I don't see why it should be now.[/QUOTE] Jack Thompson didn't suffer that same kind of outrage. Jack Thompson also had no support whatsoever from within the gaming community. He was ridiculed by the press. He was outright trying to ban games, a lone clown that eventually got himself barred from ever practising again. Anita wasn't doing any of those things. She promised a critique of gaming from a specific lens, delivered that, but ended up with a hate mob that painted her as disingenuous and capitalizing-on-the-outrage as you put it. Everyone from the industry that supported her where thrown together as if it they were in some kind of cabal, simply because the other side couldn't possibly accept that she might be genuine. No, with feminist critique it's a lot more personal for the gaming community it seems.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48246574]Jack Thompson didn't suffer that same kind of outrage. Jack Thompson also had no support whatsoever from within the gaming community. He was ridiculed by the press. He was outright trying to ban games, a lone clown that eventually got himself barred from ever practising again. Anita wasn't doing any of those things. She promised a critique of gaming from a specific lens, delivered that, but ended up with a hate mob that painted her as disingenuous and capitalizing-on-the-outrage as you put it. Everyone from the industry that supported her where thrown together as if it they were in some kind of cabal, simply because the other side couldn't possibly accept that she might be genuine. No, with feminist critique it's a lot more personal for the gaming community it seems.[/QUOTE] are you kidding me did you just forget the entirety of the 90's [img]http://badwebcomics.wdfiles.com/local--files/ctrl-alt-del/CAD4.jpg[/img] it was extremely hostile and extremely personal and even when every single person with sense was ridiculing him as the bungler that he was people still felt motivated to tell him they wanted to beat the shit out of him He came after games and people got defensive, anita did the exact same thing and people responded in the exact same goddamn way. The only difference is that when people criticized [I]her[/I] for being an ignorant out of touch nitwit who doesn't know jack shit about video games, that got turned into "you just don't like her cause she's a feminist!!!"
[QUOTE=Clavus;48246574]Jack Thompson didn't suffer that same kind of outrage. Jack Thompson also had no support whatsoever from within the gaming community. He was ridiculed by the press. He was outright trying to ban games, a lone clown that eventually got himself barred from ever practising again. Anita wasn't doing any of those things. She promised a critique of gaming from a specific lens, delivered that, but ended up with a hate mob that painted her as disingenuous and capitalizing-on-the-outrage as you put it. Everyone from the industry that supported her where thrown together as if it they were in some kind of cabal, simply because the other side couldn't possibly accept that she might be genuine. No, with feminist critique it's a lot more personal for the gaming community it seems.[/QUOTE] You have to be wilfully deluding yourself if you think she's genuine. "Painting her as disingenuous" she kind of did that to herself when she made up a load of bullshit about Watch Dogs and Hitman Absolution, saying they reward you for harming women while the footage behind her fucking contradicted everything she said. In fact there are tons of rebuttal videos to her series which tear apart any 'criticism' she puts forth. Also, I find it funny that the people supporting her are completely willing to ignore her lies and mistakes while putting her videos up as an academic criticism, when she's as far from academic as you can possibly be. She doesn't define her terms, she doesn't outline her position, and she doesn't explain her reasoning. She just spouts off a load of tosh about how games are terrible and it's gobbled up by 'feminists' who want to pretend they're changing the world but can't be bothered to actually do anything.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;48247336]You have to be wilfully deluding yourself if you think she's genuine. "Painting her as disingenuous" she kind of did that to herself when she made up a load of bullshit about Watch Dogs and Hitman Absolution, saying they reward you for harming women while the footage behind her fucking contradicted everything she said. In fact there are tons of rebuttal videos to her series which tear apart any 'criticism' she puts forth. Also, I find it funny that the people supporting her are completely willing to ignore her lies and mistakes while putting her videos up as an academic criticism, when she's as far from academic as you can possibly be. She doesn't define her terms, she doesn't outline her position, and she doesn't explain her reasoning. She just spouts off a load of tosh about how games are terrible and it's gobbled up by 'feminists' who want to pretend they're changing the world but can't be bothered to actually do anything.[/QUOTE] I don't agree with all her statements or examples either. But that didn't mean I disregarded the point she was trying to get across, or claim she had other motives. It's an essay, she isn't obligated to respond to all criticisms. It's up to to viewer to decided what to do with it. Basically harmless, good food for discussion. But that's not what it turned into, it turned into a culture war. [i]The reaction was disproportionate[/i]. Hence the "why are you so angry?" question posed by the video. Internet hearsay and "we did the thinking for you" analysis videos that were all targeted at character assassination everywhere. People that actually met her, people from the games industry that I respected called to support her. That showed me something wasn't quite right with gaming culture more than Anita's videos ever did.
"This is Phil Fish" was full of shit. Phil [I]wanted[/I] to be important. He [I]wanted[/I] people to talk about him, yet this guy makes it out like he's some helpless little indie dev who never asked for anything from anyone. This guy portrayed the gaming media like it's some cruel and omnipresent paparazzi yet fails to mention that Phil relied on that very media to promote himself and his game. Sure, what media he uses and how he uses it doesn't make him a monster, but at the end of the day, he's getting what he wants from it, and the angry comments from people who represent nobody in particular are just a side effect.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48247565]I don't agree with all her statements or examples either. But that didn't mean I disregarded the point she was trying to get across, or claim she had other motives. It's an essay, she isn't obligated to respond to all criticisms. It's up to to viewer to decided what to do with it. Basically harmless, good food for discussion. But that's not what it turned into, it turned into a culture war. [i]The reaction was disproportionate[/i]. Hence the "why are you so angry?" question posed by the video. Internet hearsay and "we did the thinking for you" analysis videos that were all targeted at character assassination everywhere. People that actually met her, people from the games industry that I respected called to support her. That showed me something wasn't quite right with gaming culture more than Anita's videos ever did.[/QUOTE] So you're going to disregard the fact that she's a liar, that she has failed to deliver on her promised goals, and that she has said on video that she doesn't even play games, because it made you realise that there are a few dickheads on the internet?
Anita seems like a clever con artist. When she did the kickstarter she realized the potential in how much money this whole videogame feminism crusade can make and she's not afraid to take advantage of it while playing a little innocent victim for the public. Can't really blame her to be honest, it's very tempting to milk ignorant people for cash.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48247565]I don't agree with all her statements or examples either. But that didn't mean I disregarded the [B]point she was trying to get across[/B], or claim she had other motives. It's an essay, she isn't obligated to respond to all criticisms. It's up to to viewer to decided what to do with it. Basically harmless, good food for discussion. But that's not what it turned into, it turned into a culture war. [i]The reaction was disproportionate[/i]. Hence the "why are you so angry?" question posed by the video. Internet hearsay and "we did the thinking for you" analysis videos that were all targeted at character assassination everywhere. People that actually met her, people from the games industry that I respected called to support her. That showed me something wasn't quite right with gaming culture more than Anita's videos ever did.[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter because the point she argued had no basis or solid evidence backing it. Nor did it have any objectively correct information. People tried to push her videos as fact. It's ok to believe some of her statements because you can't argue against faith, but you can argue facts. And anytime anyone brought up contradictions in her statements someone throws in the misogyny card. It's really no different from the McCarthy Communist scare.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48246574]Jack Thompson didn't suffer that same kind of outrage. Jack Thompson also had no support whatsoever from within the gaming community. He was ridiculed by the press. He was outright trying to ban games, a lone clown that eventually got himself barred from ever practising again. Anita wasn't doing any of those things. She promised a critique of gaming from a specific lens, delivered that, but ended up with a hate mob that painted her as disingenuous and capitalizing-on-the-outrage as you put it. Everyone from the industry that supported her where thrown together as if it they were in some kind of cabal, simply because the other side couldn't possibly accept that she might be genuine. No, with feminist critique it's a lot more personal for the gaming community it seems.[/QUOTE] You kind of just defeated your own point. Jack Thompson was a lone clown that nobody took seriously, so of course nobody got that upset. Anita, on the other hand, is an outsider to the culture making critiques based on things ranging from disingenuous and stretched interpretations, to outright ignorance and lack of knowledge or research, and she's taken as a serious critic.
I'd only ever seen thread titles [I]about[/I] Anita and Gamergate before these videos, and infact, before i watched them i thought "Gamergate" was an american game shop, oops :v: I enjoyed the videos, they were worth watching imo, I feel that as someone who had no idea at all what the story surrounding Anita was about, this would've been the perfect thing for me to watch and i was quite pleased with how everything was talked about and set out in the different videos Also, i really don't get all of the dumbs the videos have gotten, is it just because don't like or want to hear about Anita, or is there a problem with the youtuber and his message?
[QUOTE=medal-12;48248965]I'd only ever seen thread titles [I]about[/I] Anita and Gamergate before these videos, and infact, before i watched them i thought "Gamergate" was an american game shop, oops :v: Also, i really don't get all of the dumbs the videos have gotten, is it just because don't like or want to hear about Anita, or is there a problem with the youtuber and his message?[/QUOTE] Nothing wrong with introspection, but this guy completely misrepresents the issues people have and then tries to play armchair psychologist with his poorly crafted strawman. It's condescending, counter-productive to actual discussion, and just like the title simplifies to "y u mad tho?" It shouldn't be surprising given his Phil Fish video included "If Phil was a woman everyone would be a million times angrier" at the end. It was a completely baseless claim that relied on the assumption that everyone was a misogynist then, and it's not surprising when a situation that slightly fits his cognitive bias comes up he looks no deeper than everyone being angry misogynists.
I personally like the Autopsy on Gamergate was not only premature but gave off that "if you leave now, you're fine. If you don't, you're a hate filled fuck face." Its also entirely untrue.
[QUOTE=Clavus;48246574]Jack Thompson didn't suffer that same kind of outrage. Jack Thompson also had no support whatsoever from within the gaming community. He was ridiculed by the press. He was outright trying to ban games, a lone clown that eventually got himself barred from ever practising again. Anita wasn't doing any of those things. She promised a critique of gaming from a specific lens, delivered that, but ended up with a hate mob that painted her as disingenuous and capitalizing-on-the-outrage as you put it. Everyone from the industry that supported her where thrown together as if it they were in some kind of cabal, simply because the other side couldn't possibly accept that she might be genuine. No, with feminist critique it's a lot more personal for the gaming community it seems.[/QUOTE] Nobody has any problem with Anita critiquing video games, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as wrong as it may be. The problem is that she went above and beyond that, and started trying to take action nobody agreed with, surrounded by a group that wasn't involved in the medium, trying to change a hobby they knew nothing about. I'm willing to let the fact that she openly admits she isn't into video games all that much slide when she's merely critiquing them from a third person perspective, because what are Critics but men who have never created, but can view the medium from the outside? But her trying to tinker with a world she had no knowledge of lead to some of the biggest video game blunders in history, and while the companies wonder why, they look at their fanbase and say "Yes, it's not I who is wrong, it's them!"
[QUOTE=medal-12;48248965]I'd only ever seen thread titles [I]about[/I] Anita and Gamergate before these videos, and infact, before i watched them i thought "Gamergate" was an american game shop, oops :v: I enjoyed the videos, they were worth watching imo, I feel that as someone who had no idea at all what the story surrounding Anita was about, this would've been the perfect thing for me to watch and i was quite pleased with how everything was talked about and set out in the different videos Also, i really don't get all of the dumbs the videos have gotten, is it just because don't like or want to hear about Anita, or is there a problem with the youtuber and his message?[/QUOTE] The video is pretty biased, thats why its being rated dumb. The dude whos making these videos also cant seem to differentiate between the people who dislike Anitia and her work and the people who send her death threats and hate. As laserbeams posted above: [QUOTE=Laserbeams;48244485]I watched only 3 of these, but from what I gathered, he seems to imply that people don't like Anita Sarkeesian because she is right. And if you say she's wrong then you're in denial, you sexist pig[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=minilandstan;48249228]Nobody has any problem with Anita critiquing video games, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as wrong as it may be. The problem is that she went above and beyond that, and started trying to take action nobody agreed with, surrounded by a group that wasn't involved in the medium, trying to change a hobby they knew nothing about. I'm willing to let the fact that she openly admits she isn't into video games all that much slide when she's merely critiquing them from a third person perspective, because what are Critics but men who have never created, but can view the medium from the outside? But her trying to tinker with a world she had no knowledge of lead to some of the biggest video game blunders in history, and while the companies wonder why, they look at their fanbase and say "Yes, it's not I who is wrong, it's them!"[/QUOTE] Honestly I was/am quite distant to the whole drama, but one thing always bothered me: Is Anita, Zoe, or whoever really that powerful within the games industry? I mean why is it a big deal if they are insiders, outsiders, idiots making comments about things they don't understand or feminist crusaders trying to get rid of men? How was it that she was trying to "tinker" with a world she knew nothing about. Assuming game companies follow whatever is going to make them the most money, if the majority of their fanbase (which is mainly comprised of teenage boys anyway) does not give two shits about women in gaming what incentive do they have to add more empowered female characters. If the majority actually wants more feminism and equality in gaming then don't they deserve to have their voices heard? And aren't the game companies in the right to listen to them? Whenever it is something to do with GG, I hear a lot about lying, ignorance, manipulating the truth, misleading, bandwagons etc... etc... and I still do not understand how or why any of this makes a lick of difference. She might be a lying evil witch who is only doing it out of self interest and promotion, but none of it explains [B]why[/B] people care. Why does anyone care she promotes herself? Is it a feeling of "this will leave a stain on the pristine history of gaming culture" or "will lead to games being misunderstood" or a more simple defensive reflex when someone criticises something you enjoy and you assume that criticism is a reflection on you.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;48248027]Anita seems like a clever con artist. When she did the kickstarter she realized the potential in how much money this whole videogame feminism crusade can make and she's not afraid to take advantage of it while playing a little innocent victim for the public. Can't really blame her to be honest, it's very tempting to milk ignorant people for cash.[/QUOTE] Most of what she is saying is true, games are very often sexist and misogynist, and it should change. I still disagree with her on other things, like when she criticizes Doom 4 for being ultraviolent
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;48251710]Most of what she is saying is true, games are very often sexist and misogynist, and it should change. I still disagree with her on other things, like when she criticizes Doom 4 for being ultraviolent[/QUOTE] A few, yeah, but either way she has a pretty weird view on what qualifies as misogyny/sexism, which to her is basically sexualization of any female character.
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;48251710]Most of what she is saying is true, games are very often sexist and misogynist, and it should change. I still disagree with her on other things, like when she criticizes Doom 4 for being ultraviolent[/QUOTE] What games are sexist or misogynist? I've never seen anyone actually give a list of these so called "problematic" games.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;48253333]What games are sexist or misogynist? I've never seen anyone actually give a list of these so called "problematic" games.[/QUOTE] Isn't this the kind of thinking the OP was talking about? It's not a simple bad vs. good, it's essentially about a number of ideas that are far more prevalent than they should be. A single instance of a character that's "fridged" and also happens to be female isn't itself a misogynist thing, what's misogynist is how common it is for that to happen. That's why her series is about tropes instead of in-depth analysis of individual games.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;48253333]What games are sexist or misogynist? I've never seen anyone actually give a list of these so called "problematic" games.[/QUOTE] I can't provide a comprehensive list by any means but if you want I can certainly go over the different ways its done and their prevalence. We could go over the sexualized depictions of characters like the females of Mortal Kombat, then there's also the marginalization of female leads like what happened with Bioshock Infinite and Remember Me, if you prefer a more behind the screen approach there's the sexist practices in game advertising (like Microsoft's "I know you'd rather knit" campaign), plenty of instances of female developers getting sidelined or forced out, and the omnipresent wage gap. Like it or not, Sarkeesian is the embodiment of having a valid point but doing absolutely everything wrong in presenting it.
Another thing about "This is Phil Fish". This guy was completely unfair to FEZ's critics. How Phil reacts to his game being criticized is his responsibility. If what someone has to say upsets him it does not mean that the critic was being petty or mean spirited. Not once does this guy suggest that maybe some of the critics had a point beyond "I don't like Phil Fish", that maybe they were actually just criticizing the game. Every game gets some reasonable criticism, just as every game gets pointless statements presented as criticism. The fact that Phil reacted badly to some of it does not make him a victim.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.