Someone craps on Feminist Frequency with a bunch of phamplets at E3 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Uzbekistan;48043072]Now, I'm not exactly her biggest fan, but regardless there seems to be a few things here that have taken several cycles through the rumor mill Regarding Colbert, he didn't exactly pressure for the answer, now I'm not sure if the 5 minute clip on youtube is the full thing but it seemed like just a small tangent The whole cancel colbert thing seems to be a little blown out of proportion, she used the hashtag once on tumblr, using a hashtag doesn't necessarily mean you support the views it expresses, this article explains it somewhat better than I can [URL]https://srhongamergate.wordpress.com/2014/10/30/anita-sarkeesian-never-supported-cancelcolbert-debunking-the-latest-gamergate-lie/[/URL] The thing about her not writing her own stuff seems a little tinfoil and there doesn't seem to be any hard evidence (although I only really skimmed it so feel free to pick up anything I missed) I feel like there's probably a whole lot more to it than 'SHE'S A LIAR AND A CHEAT AND A CHARLATAN' honestly, I mean we could throw around links to tweets and videoclips and tumblr and reddit posts all we want, but it's fair for people who plays games to not consider themselves as part of gamer culture and the like[/QUOTE] You're missing the point, and she was even less cogent or on target in the full interview, because she has no actual platform. She has literally lied in her videos in at least four instances, three of those with contradictory objective evidence literally playing behind her. [quote] more [/quote] She is a documented liar (by her own hands) and she is a bonafide tax fraud (failure to disclose earning and holding in multiple years). She's directly associated with two fraudulent marketing schemes before she happened onto gaming, one of which was using absurd handwriting analysis [B]to pick up women[/B], how's that for feminist. She also doesn't write the tweets attributed to her, tweets containing such amazing insights as: the US economy should be an agrarian folksconomy; that Japan, a 20,000 year old roughly contiguous culture suddenly invented western sexual roles after World War 2, and that despite the fact she wants to be a public figure, no one should ever take pictures of her she doesn't authorize, even at e3. (granted there could be genuine issue here, but she also took issue with angry joe and maddox filming her when she came to the venues they were already at, already filming, and a game that doesn't have a sole female protagonist is not actually feminist) [quote] stupid [/quote] You're absolutely right, it's completely fucking stupid. A guy who blogs about games who doesn't even have a journalism degree nor any other lauded accreditation has pretty much no business telling someone with several degrees in the actual field they work in, how to do their job, that would be completely fucking stupid. A failed stage actress in charge of vetting content for the largest game design repository in the world is pretty goddamn obtuse. Absolutely agree. Stating what you like and don't like cogently and with facts is one thing, that is not what games journalism is and pretty much never has been since about 1990. Yet here we are.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48044091]Using other peoples footage without permission gets other peoples youtube accounts suspended, they'll lose their income from that through it. Yet, you're saying, the argument that she's a fraud using footage she has no rights to is irrelevant? I don't get it.[/QUOTE] You can get away with using footage you don't actually own under some circumstances. Fair use policies exist, so as long as she hasn't monetised the videos (I have no fucking idea tbh, AdBlock and junk) she might be able to get away with it. Others getting their accounts shut down for doing the same could easily argue the same thing if they really wanted. If she has monetised the videos, then sure she's in the wrong. But using somebody else's footage when "game footage" wasn't something you were offering in return for funding (I believe she was offering "game critique", not "let's plays", right?) doesn't make you a fraud. Doing it without permission just makes you not too great a person.

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;48044112]What the fuck are you even talking about?[/QUOTE] If you generally speaking, use footage without the rights to use that footage, you're going to get a strike against your youtube channel, or if it's on television or movies, you can get sued. She's got footage she doesn't have the rights to use in her videos. Some people have come forward about this. This seems to have been swept under the rug entirely.

[QUOTE=Conscript;48043688]im not pretending that though, as i've repeatedly stated there is a dichotomy of individual and systemic racism (and yes I at least use the word 'racism' for both, just unlike the right, MRAs, GGers, etc. the left's view of it isn't a blanket equivalence). I don't pretend there isn't racism/prejudice against jews, but to act like this revelation somehow throws a wrench in the left's or the feminists' theories on the matter is pretty dumb. it's a sad strawman. some people prefer to refer to individual racism as 'chauvinism' rather than 'racism', though, because the latter has an institutional connotation to it (at least thanks to popular memory of shit like the 60s). it has its merits, i guess.[/QUOTE] Speaking of stupid, the majority of GG is left leaning, you were saying what again, exactly? [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=hexpunK;48044123]You can get away with using footage you don't actually own under some circumstances. Fair use policies exist, so as long as she hasn't monetised the videos (I have no fucking idea tbh, AdBlock and junk) she might be able to get away with it. Others getting their accounts shut down for doing the same could easily argue the same thing if they really wanted. If she has monetised the videos, then sure she's in the wrong. But using somebody else's footage when "game footage" wasn't something you were offering in return for funding (I believe she was offering "game critique", not "let's plays", right?) doesn't make you a fraud. Doing it without permission just makes you not too great a person.[/QUOTE] She has monetized the videos. [quote] pile of games [/quote] You have a problem with rampant and unsolicited violence yet have a copy of MK and two copies of twisted metal. riiiiiiight.

You're arguing the wrong thing HumanAbyss. Because now you're entering "Can you copyright gameplay footage without commentary?" territory.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48044124]If you generally speaking, use footage without the rights to use that footage, you're going to get a strike against your youtube channel, or if it's on television or movies, you can get sued. She's got footage she doesn't have the rights to use in her videos. Some people have come forward about this. This seems to have been swept under the rug entirely.[/QUOTE] You said this will get the other people's accounts suspended. That's not how Youtube works.

[QUOTE=27X;48044136]You have a problem with rampant and unsolicited violence yet have a copy of MK and two copies of twisted metal. riiiiiiight.[/QUOTE] What's your point? If you're going to critique something it generally helps to have that something at some point to see what's actually going on in there. You'd complain if she had no games. Don't complain that she has the games (even if she may not have used them). [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=27X;48044136]She has monetized the videos.[/QUOTE] Then that's something the content owner and Youtube need to get on top of. But it's still not something that utterly destroys her arguments. It just makes her a not too great person.

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;48044164]You said this will get the other people's accounts suspended. That's not how Youtube works.[/QUOTE] then how does the whole strike system work because I've heard a number of fairly recent explanations. Enough strikes, and yes, you're more or less suspended from monetizing films.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48044174]then how does the whole strike system work because I've heard a number of fairly recent explanations. Enough strikes, and yes, you're more or less suspended from monetizing films.[/QUOTE] For them to actually get a strike against their channel, Feminist Frequency would have to personally flag their channel (and risk perjury charges since she doesn't own the content).

[QUOTE=hexpunK;48044123]You can get away with using footage you don't actually own under some circumstances. Fair use policies exist, so as long as she hasn't monetised the videos (I have no fucking idea tbh, AdBlock and junk) she might be able to get away with it. Others getting their accounts shut down for doing the same could easily argue the same thing if they really wanted. If she has monetised the videos, then sure she's in the wrong. But using somebody else's footage when "game footage" wasn't something you were offering in return for funding (I believe she was offering "game critique", not "let's plays", right?) doesn't make you a fraud. Doing it without permission just makes you not too great a person.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure what she does wouldn't be considered fair use because she isn't commenting on the content within the let's player's video. She ripped their edited video and used it as if she had edited it, herself. That's just stealing other people's work. In my opinion, the biggest problem with her using other people's video is that she pretends as if she had played the game extensively and used her knowledge to come to her conclusions. The fact that she doesn't have her own video makes me seriously doubt that she even played much, if at all. At best she's lazy as hell, and at worse she's a charlatan.

[QUOTE=eirexe;48043086]She also got this. [t]http://i.imgur.com/tRhy7HE.jpg[/t] and a guy from kotaku got a female character that he had criticised in his press pass too[/QUOTE] The funny thing is, she could have actually thrown that away instead of complaining it's apart of her badge.

[QUOTE=Rossy167;48042824]The worst case was when she called Max Payne 3 sexist because in slums you wander into a brothel to cut a deal with the gangs. She completely forgot to mention that Max notices the women are being held against their will, says 'fuck this' and takes on the entire gang controlling it and attempts to free the women. Well no, the worst case was with TW3 but I'm taking about just in her series.[/QUOTE] Don't forget that one case where she criticized Hitman: Absolution for being sexist. She claimed that you were encouraged in the game to kill strippers in a strip club and to play around with their bodies, when in actuality it actually punishes you for killing an innocent person, including those strippers.

Anita Sarkeesian is a fraud who figured video games was a good and relatively untapped market for generating drama and making dosh based on misguiding people. It's been three years since she started out the whole thing and the sad truth is that she actually found an audience of gullible idiots.

Requesting pic of ASark's twitter post literally proving she is against equality by saying it was a bad thing that Dishonored 2 had a girl & guy protag instead of just girl protag.

[QUOTE=CreeplyTuna;48042731]So they're pissed that she's a feminist, and we're pissed that she's a [I]bad [/I]feminist, right?[/QUOTE] She's not a feminist. She's a radical. Every single feminist I've ever met and had the discussion with has been a sane and reasonable individual that supports a reasonable and noble cause. The Twitter/Tumblr-breed of feminists are a vocal minority and even Jezebel/The Mary Sue are heightened forms of media created to generate outrage clicks among feminists and those who don't identify as feminists alike.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48044584]She's not a feminist. She's a radical. Every single feminist I've ever met and had the discussion with has been a sane and reasonable individual that supports a reasonable and noble cause. The Twitter/Tumblr-breed of feminists are a vocal minority and even Jezebel/The Mary Sue are heightened forms of media created to generate outrage clicks among feminists and those who don't identify as feminists alike.[/QUOTE] You can't blame this on twitter/tumblr feminists. Sarkeesian is lauded across the academic sphere as a great feminist doing important work. She's been invited to speak at universities, been given awards, etc. You may not agree with her, but you can't deny that a whole lot of people do.

[QUOTE=sgman91;48044775]You can't blame this on twitter/tumblr feminists. Sarkeesian is lauded across the academic sphere as a great feminist doing important work. She's been invited to speak at universities, been given awards, etc. You may not agree with her, but you can't deny that a whole lot of people do.[/QUOTE] Lauded how? I mean is she being lauded by actual people who have proven themselves in academics and fields? Or is she being lauded by people like her? Being invited at universities is not prestigious at all really. It would take some professor from any class ever to just ask and her to be like "okay" which means just really a fan, probably someone in a woman studies class, maybe some others. In Anita probably looked for some to go to as well, its not hard to go and use a university for a talk. I only remember one of her awards that almost had some merit, one from Harvard. But it was from some tiny no name nothing group and wasnt this big thing at all, it was a glorified star sticker iirc.

[QUOTE=sgman91;48044775]You can't blame this on twitter/tumblr feminists. Sarkeesian is lauded across the academic sphere as a great feminist doing important work. She's been invited to speak at universities, been given awards, etc. You may not agree with her, but you can't deny that a whole lot of people do.[/QUOTE] As usual, the devil is in the details and she's being applauded for starting a discussion about gender representation in media. Again, a noble thing but any reasonable person that follows her on Twitter or watches her videos that actually plays games will see right through it. Also, it's arguable she's earning humanitarian awards and getting invited to academic settings due to the harassment she endures.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48044584]She's not a feminist. She's a radical. Every single feminist I've ever met and had the discussion with has been a sane and reasonable individual that supports a reasonable and noble cause. The Twitter/Tumblr-breed of feminists are a vocal minority and even Jezebel/The Mary Sue are heightened forms of media created to generate outrage clicks among feminists and those who don't identify as feminists alike.[/QUOTE] [url]https://youtu.be/im25MN5AwIc?t=23m20s[/url] Vocal minority? We have rooms filled with hundreds of people cheering for rules that demand that women speak first and that no event takes place without a woman present.

anita is like the worst possible example of modern feminism today, and i hate how she acts like she's the posterchild for feminism in video games is it needed? yes, in a lot of places, same with movies and all forms of media but anita takes it to extreme levels and is only in it for the money

[QUOTE=Grimhound;48043259]Because feminism at large has been taken over by female supremacists.[/QUOTE] No it hasn't.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48043664]it's a little disingenuous to compare simple gameplay mechanics and the applications there of, and the thematic and tonal design of a game and it's story.[/QUOTE] But I thought the main argument against Sarkeesian is that the tropes in games don't matter because they don't affect the game. Surely if one believes this then a criticism of quicktime events or DLC is a far more scathing one than a criticism of perceived misogynistic themes.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;48044870]Lauded how? I mean is she being lauded by actual people who have proven themselves in academics and fields? Or is she being lauded by people like her? Being invited at universities is not prestigious at all really. It would take some professor from any class ever to just ask and her to be like "okay" which means just really a fan, probably someone in a woman studies class, maybe some others. In Anita probably looked for some to go to as well, its not hard to go and use a university for a talk. I only remember one of her awards that almost had some merit, one from Harvard. But it was from some tiny no name nothing group and wasnt this big thing at all, it was a glorified star sticker iirc.[/QUOTE] Here's straight from her Wikipedia page: "Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency blog was [B]highlighted by Feminist Collections and Media Report to Women.[/B][15][66] In 2012 Gamasutra considered the harassment and success of Feminist Frequency a catalyst that led to new attention on the importance of diversity and inclusion in the gaming culture and industry. They named this call for inclusion one of the "5 trends that defined the game industry in 2012".[54][67] In 2013,[B] Newsweek magazine and The Daily Beast named Sarkeesian one of their "125 Women of Impact"[/B].[68][69] She also [B]received an Honorary Award at the 2013 National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers (NAVGTR) Awards[/B] for her "Damsel in Distress" videos.[70] In 2014, Sarkeesian[B] received the Ambassador Award at the 14th Annual Game Developers Choice Awards[/B] for her work on the representation of women in video games, becoming the first woman to receive the award.[71][72] She was also [B]nominated for the Ambassador Award at Microsoft's 2014 Women in Gaming Awards for her work.[/B][73][74] After the Utah State University death threats, [B]Rolling Stone called her "pop culture's most valuable critic,"[/B] saying that "the backlash has only made her point for her: Gaming has a problem".[75] In December 2014,[B] The Verge named her as one of "the 50 most important people at the intersection of technology, art, science, and culture"[/B].[76] In April 2015, [B]Sarkeesian was chosen to be in the Time 100, Time Magazine's annual list of the 100 most influential people in the world.[/B][77] In May 2015, Cosmopolitan included her in its list of the "50 Most Fascinating People on the Internet".[78]" ([URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian[/URL]) [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] Radicals don't get that kind of acclaim and recognition.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48045567]But I thought the main argument against Sarkeesian is that the tropes in games don't matter because they don't affect the game. Surely if one believes this then a criticism of quicktime events or DLC is a far more scathing one than a criticism of perceived misogynistic themes.[/QUOTE] No you clearly and purposefully ignored my clearly worded "main argument" against her if that's what you think Also, your mock argument there isn't even on point. People who do complain in that vein so so saying the tropes don't influence the player into internalizing them as Anita insists

[QUOTE=sgman91;48046110]Radicals don't get that kind of acclaim and recognition.[/QUOTE] They do when they have money, and piss enough people off.

[QUOTE=sgman] Radicals don't get that kind of acclaim and recognition.[/QUOTE] Yes they do: GDCA: Implicated in racketeering, collusion to commit tax evasion, collusion to steer product placement and pricing, vice president one of the principle architects of "gamers are dead", advisor and participant in GameJournoPros "message board". Time, Newsweek and Beast spearhead contributor was Leigh Alexander, openly racist and classist fuckface currently implicated in three counts of sales collusion and 121 separate and independently verified instances of giving friends and "contributors" favorable reviews and free article space on gamasutra, and shadowbanning people she didn't approve of on the basis of their beliefs or politics. Rolling Stone: lol, not even going to bother with that one, pending lawsuits will likely say all that need be said there.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;48044123]You can get away with using footage you don't actually own under some circumstances. Fair use policies exist, so as long as she hasn't monetised the videos (I have no fucking idea tbh, AdBlock and junk) she might be able to get away with it. Others getting their accounts shut down for doing the same could easily argue the same thing if they really wanted. If she has monetised the videos, then sure she's in the wrong. But using somebody else's footage when "game footage" wasn't something you were offering in return for funding (I believe she was offering "game critique", not "let's plays", right?) doesn't make you a fraud. Doing it without permission just makes you not too great a person.[/QUOTE] to be fair in her kickstarter she said part of the funding was to go to buying the games and recording footage for the show [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] i rescind the recording footage part, as i cannot find that on her kickstarter, i have heard that before though so it might be true but hey that part may also not be true so it is up to you, i really don't feel like searching for it right now

[QUOTE=27X;48046278]Yes they do: GDCA: Implicated in racketeering, collusion to commit tax evasion, collusion to steer product placement and pricing, vice president one of the principle architects of "gamers are dead", advisor and participant in GameJournoPros "message board". Time, Newsweek and Beast spearhead contributor was Leigh Alexander, openly racist and classist fuckface currently implicated in three counts of sales collusion and 121 separate and independently verified instances of giving friends and "contributors" favorable reviews and free article space on gamasutra, and shadowbanning people she didn't approve of on the basis of their beliefs or politics. Rolling Stone: lol, not even going to bother with that one, pending lawsuits will likely say all that need be said there.[/QUOTE] I'm not quite sure what your point is. Whether the groups giving the recognition are criminals are not is irrelevant to the point.

Why do people say she didn't deliver on her Kickstarter? The campaign was for five videos. She's made eight. You can't set a funding cap so if people decide to give you more than what you ask for (she asked for $6000, ended up getting $160000) you just get it and can basically do whatever you want with it. Nobody has actually provided any proof that the money was ever used for anything other than the videos. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48046146]No you clearly and purposefully ignored my clearly worded "main argument" against her if that's what you think Also, your mock argument there isn't even on point. People who do complain in that vein so so saying the tropes don't influence the player into internalizing them as Anita insists[/QUOTE] Her premise isn't that video games cause people to become sexist, just that video games don't need to reinforce sexist ideas that already exist in our culture.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48046482]Why do people say she didn't deliver on her Kickstarter? The campaign was for five videos. She's made eight.[/QUOTE] not sure where you are getting 8 from, [URL="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLn4ob_5_ttEaA_vc8F3fjzE62esf9yP61"]as the playlist for tropes vs women in gaming[/URL] only has 7 videos, of which 6 actually are a part of the series, [URL="https://archive.is/f8Tac#selection-997.0-997.275"]and only covers 3 of the several topics she was going to discuss[/URL]. i mean, i guess she did make more than the original 5 videos she promised to make but you'd have to discount the stretch goals in which she promised 12 videos, all on different topics [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] i don't think people would be as forgiving if a game company put multiplayer as a stretch goal for a game on their kickstarter and had it reached only for them to literally never mention multiplayer ever again