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

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48046482]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] I've never seen her make that argument in her videos. All she does is point out tropes as she sees them in games. I don't believe I've every actually seen her make an argument about them.

i kind of feel like saying "hey we're going to make 5 videos on 5 different topics!" then delivering 6 videos on 3 topics, of which half of those were spent on one topic, is kind of lying even if it is technically more than what was originally offered. it would be kind of like ordering a burger, a medium soda and a small fry and getting three large fries and a large soda. sure you got more and some of it you wanted but it just isn't the same [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] for real though if you can only make 6 22 minute videos with some pretty basic production value on $160,000 then you have some shaferesque money hemorrhaging problems

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48046482]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] you're just swapping out one baseless assertion for another, harder to falsify baseless assertion

[QUOTE=sgman91;48046110]Here's straight from her Wikipedia 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] [editline]24th June 2015[/editline] Radicals don't get that kind of acclaim and recognition.[/QUOTE] She lies in all of her videos. I'd say the people who hand out these awards are fucking idiots.

[QUOTE=sgman91;48046110]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] So hitler wasn't actually a radical because he got a shitload of acclaim and recognition in Germany and other countries during his rise to power and years afterwards? I would argue that radicals generally are the ones that get the most acclaim and recognition among people because their ideas are in such strong contrast to the norm and more heavy hitting. It's often the radicals that get into our history books and change the way a country or even the world works. Helen of Anjou was probably seen as a radical by many when she established schools for women, yet not many people today would argue that women shouldn't be educated because Helen of Anjou and other radicals changed the norm. The point is that acclaim and recognition is not a measurement of how radical a person is and radicality (is that even a word?) is not a measurement of how good/bad or right/wrong a person is.

[QUOTE=sgman91;48046110]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] and iggy azalea was nominated for best rap album awards aren't exactly proof of positivism

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;48046876]and iggy azalea was nominated for best rap album awards aren't exactly proof of positivism[/QUOTE] They're proof that a lot of people agree with her, which was my point to begin with. She's not some edgy feminist radical. She's a mainstream feminist with a lot of support in normal society. [QUOTE]So hitler wasn't actually a radical because he got a shitload of acclaim and recognition in Germany and other countries during his rise to power and years afterwards?[/QUOTE] No, he wasn't a radical in WWII era Germany. Lots of people loved and agreed with him. It's one of reasons he was even able to do what he did to the Jews.

not taking any side here but keep in mind most people outside this "games culture" or whatever only heard about a woman fighting for equal rights being threatened and nothing else related to it

[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] if you think anita sarkeesian qualifies as a radical, your head would probably explode if you ever encountered genuine radical feminist thought

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;48046582]you're just swapping out one baseless assertion for another, harder to falsify baseless assertion[/QUOTE] It isn't baseless since her assertions are accompanied with videos that show what she's talking about. You can disagree with the assertion and that the base for her assertion isn't good, but it's literally not baseless. [editline]25th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;48046522]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[/QUOTE] [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropes_vs._Women_in_Video_Games#Episodes]The playlist doesn't have them all for some reason[/url]

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48046995]It isn't baseless since her assertions are accompanied with videos that show what she's talking about.[/QUOTE] You mean footage that directly contradicts her statements? IIRC there's a video where she says that in Watch Dogs you're rewarded for letting female pedestrians be assaulted, while in the background you can see gameplay footage of the player standing around doing nothing while an NPC is attacked and a big flashing red sign saying 'INTERVENE' pops up. [QUOTE]You can disagree with the assertion and that the base for her assertion isn't good, but it's literally not baseless.[/QUOTE] If I publish a thesis and back it up with documentation that directly contradicts my point, is my claim not baseless? Why would it be any better than not backing it up at all?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;48046995]It isn't baseless since her assertions are accompanied with videos that show what she's talking about. You can disagree with the assertion and that the base for her assertion isn't good, but it's literally not baseless. [/QUOTE] It baseless because the foundation of her argument is invalid.

[QUOTE=sgman91;48046110]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] None of those awards are anything worthwhile in the slightest except possibly the GDCA award yet her compared to the other winners makes it laughable. Its essentially someone who liked her added her into some story or just gave an award. These arent the type of awards that are prestigious in the slightest. If you notice most of your sources are "top #" lists which are some of the lowest form of journalism. Being in a top 50 list on cosmopolitan/verge/newsweek/daily beast/time are already half her recogniztion and that isnt prestigious at all. Its some fuck, probably some pal, just writing for her. Like the National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers is not some big award, its a nothing award, I dont think those NAVGTR are even anything anyone talks about. Two ambassador awards, and the Microsoft one being laughable. Like these arent grand things, and a big reason I find these things dont matter even more is the fact Anita is part of a PR group called Silver String Media which is probably a big reason why she is even getting noticed anywhere in publications. Her PR firm is probably reaching OUT to these places so they write about her, which is the most likely thing since thats a big part of what PR is doing these days. For those awards to matter at all, or her status, the game industry as a majority would need to be recognizing her, thats when it would matter. Most devs probably think shes worthless and not someone worth listening to, same as the majority of people I see that play games and know about her. So those things she got dont matter at all.