Anita Sarkeesian to appear on the Colbert Report - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;46364755]In her arguments that the purpose of having women in games is to attack them and "derive a perverse sexual pleasure" from it.[/QUOTE] can you show me where she makes this argument?

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];46368118']can you show me where she makes this argument?[/QUOTE] It was in one if her tropes vs women in video games videos

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];46368118']can you show me where she makes this argument?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;46368368]It was in one if her tropes vs women in video games videos[/QUOTE] To expand on this a little, it's specifically the "Women as Background Decoration" video. The part where she's talking about Hitman: Absolution at the mission where you're in a strip club. She says something along those lines and that supposedly you're encouraged to kill the strippers when in reality you're not (sorry if the last point sounds like a broken record at this point).

What a horrible person to invite on the show. Rather then someone who isn't making bullshit claims like Sarkessian, someone who does their research and can actually inform the public while being entertaining. Colbert actually pointed out the real reason of what #gamergate is about, and it's disappointing that his line that "the public should not be listening to Anita Sarkessian" was only just a joke. She spewed shit the whole time.

Lotsa neckbeards making a big deal about this. What's the big deal about her showing up on TV?

[QUOTE=archangel125;46369063]Lotsa neckbeards making a big deal about this.[/QUOTE] Epic zinger bro

To be fair, I'm not a fan of Anita myself, as her views are too narrow and sensationalist, in my opinion. It's really difficult, in this day and age, to set a standard for what is sexist and what isn't. You could make a decent argument that games like Terra and Scarlet Blade are. That doesn't mean you can go on saying any game that depicts women being sexualized, like a strip club in Hitman: Absolution - is sexist at all, as the whole point is to convey how sleazy the club is. In defending, for example, what a strong female character should be, you must be careful not to tell women what they can't be if they so choose. If a male or a female happens to enjoy sleeping around or being openly sexual, that's a lifestyle choice - It's not oppression.

Is it just me, or she completely distorted what GG is all about? She essentially denied any corruption between devs and journalists and said it was only about "boys not liking girls playing games"

[QUOTE=archangel125;46369063]Lotsa neckbeards making a big deal about this. What's the big deal about her showing up on TV?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=archangel125;46369063]Lotsa neckbeards making a big deal about this. What's the big deal about her showing up on TV?[/QUOTE] The big deal is the one sided narrative was bad enough without pretty much THE voice of left-leaning youth helping to further poison the well.

[QUOTE=ThatSprite;46367100][/B] Of course he is, have we come to expect anything else from the master of drive-by zingers[/QUOTE] He is known to be a bit of a ponce.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46369159]Is it just me, or she completely distorted what GG is all about? She essentially denied any corruption between devs and journalists and said it was only about "boys not liking girls playing games"[/QUOTE] that is all anti GG is, deflecting any kind of argument with sexism because no one wants to be labeled as sexist or misogynistic. [editline]30th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Mingebox;46369178]The big deal is the one sided narrative was bad enough without pretty much THE voice of left-leaning youth helping to further poison the well.[/QUOTE] doubt it, just made people look at GG tag and see that 90% of the tweets are neutral or positive while condemning attacks left and right.

I thought Anita was taking over the Colbert Report after Colbert went to the late show. Now that would have been a shitstorm. She's just on one episode? Guys, take a chill pill.

[QUOTE=ThePanther;46369431]I thought Anita was taking over the Colbert Report after Colbert went to the late show. Now that would have been a shitstorm. She's just on one episode? Guys, take a chill pill.[/QUOTE] When people are scared for their free market you can't tell them to calm down. It might really not mean much at all, but there can be also a domino effect of sorts that will snowball her way into positions which will allow her to dictate the western market. And nobody wants anyone in such a position.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46369159]Is it just me, or she completely distorted what GG is all about? She essentially denied any corruption between devs and journalists and said it was only about "boys not liking girls playing games"[/QUOTE] This is the entire point behind the anti-GG movement. It's literally spawned to spread mis-information on what GG is about to disarm its legitimacy and make people like Anita and Zoe Quinn look more legitimate, since the entire crux of GG was exposing them for the frauds they are. But apparently because you are feminist and have connections, you are immune to criticism and scrutiny because otherwise you are sexist, conservative, anti-progressive and worship the patriarchy. They are playing HARD on that card to disarm GG from exposing them and its sadly working.

[QUOTE=codemaster85;46369414] doubt it, just made people look at GG tag and see that 90% of the tweets are neutral or positive while condemning attacks left and right.[/QUOTE] Do you really think people that just takes info from these kinds of people to actually look for themselves before condemning stuff?

[QUOTE=Rammaster;46368065]This whole Gamergate fiasco has gone on too long. The problem is that this whole thing is trying to make it seem like only one of the two main issues can actually be solved. Sexism in video games is a problem. Ethics in video games journalism is a problem. Just end the term "Gamergate" because the conversation usually goes nowhere[/QUOTE] you can change it to any other name, any other banner, have any other person leading it, the same thing will happen. white boy game journo club will spin shit like a DJ to save face, and mainstream media will run with it

[IMG]http://puu.sh/cwy4l/f19f3f4cac.png[/IMG] I fucking love this script.

I just got around to watching the Colbert interview with Anita and I have to say, Anita knows how to use her influence. She immediately got around to attacking #gamergate without having our side speak out for ourselves to tell our side of the story and how it's only a certain group of trolls doing these death and bomb threats. Quite sad really how Anita and Zoe Quinn are able to get media coverage while people who represent the good side of GG aren't getting any at all.

So what should pro-gamer gate response be? Angry twitter messages that don't explain our side well enough to convince people? I was thinking we be as formal and serious about this as possible to get a serious response and either force discussion or detach Colbert's support for either side. I'm writing a letter to him and if anyone has a better method than this address, I'll gladly use that. Stephen Colbert c/o The Colbert Report Comedy Central 513 West 54th Street New York, NY 10019 Phone: 212 649 6200 Fax: 212 649 6200

[QUOTE=Mingebox;46369178]The big deal is the one sided narrative was bad enough without pretty much THE voice of left-leaning youth helping to further poison the well.[/QUOTE] It bothers me that Stephen even went completely out of character and agreed with everything she said. That only made it even more obvious how much of a sham the whole thing was, when on a comedy satire show, there's no satire. Only a serious discussion about those scummy untermensch gamers and how we have to take gaming away from them.

[QUOTE=MajorWX;46370358]So what should pro-gamer gate response be? [/QUOTE] Total biscuit has been contacted by the BBC for one.

I thought this interview was hilarious. It specified that not ALL people who play video games are sending rape threats to people and Anita was surprisingly tame, considering she once Tweeted that that recent school shooting is because men are inherently violent. Not to mention, that utterly golden moment: [i]"Name three games." "Uhhh... What's important is..."[/i] I actually agree with Anita on some things. Death/rape threats are bad and women shouldn't have to face opposition just because they're women. I draw the line at demanding that someone's work be changed because you don't like it. There's times when depictions can be seriously fucked up. Like Custer's Revenge. There was no deep, artistic mission statement for Custer's Revenge. But when you complain about the ability to kill prostitutes in GTA or how Bayonetta is dressed, you're kind of missing the point of the game. Yes, you can kill them. You also don't NEED to kill them. Whether you do or don't is entirely up to you; if you do, you face the consequences. By doing shit like shaming Bayo 2 because of the sexualization of her character, you're giving out the idea that the human body (especially a girl body) is a gross, shameful thing that should be covered up. Most of it is rooted (I hope) in good intentions, but a lot of it is so blown-up that it loops right back around and ends up being even more sexist/racist/homophobic/etc than whatever the supposed issue was in the first place. Sorry for the essay, but it really bothers me that, in this day and age, people can get away with being horrible bigots because "I'm saying I want equality, they have privilege, that makes it okay". [editline]30th October 2014[/editline] There needs to be some sort of PSA that outlines what equality is and isn't. Equality isn't "THESE GUYS HAVE MORE SHIT THAN THESE GUYS. WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL OF GROUP A'S SHIT AND GIVE IT TO GROUP B. NOW GROUP A HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS SHIT AND GROUP B HAS ALL THE SHIT. EQUALITY!"

Colbert should have asked her something about these tweets. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/lRBKrTG.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Atrvgso.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/LlQ3tvu.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46366039]Have you even heard her talk about bayonetta...?[/QUOTE] She mentioned bayonetta at some point and said Bayonetta was a single mother. That's how much she knows about the subject matter.

[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;46370389]There needs to be some sort of PSA that outlines what equality is and isn't. Equality isn't "THESE GUYS HAVE MORE SHIT THAN THESE GUYS. WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL OF GROUP A'S SHIT AND GIVE IT TO GROUP B. NOW GROUP A HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS SHIT AND GROUP B HAS ALL THE SHIT. EQUALITY!"[/QUOTE] She doesn't want equality. She wants vengeance.

[QUOTE=Crimor;46370082]Do you really think people that just takes info from these kinds of people to actually look for themselves before condemning stuff?[/QUOTE] Well since the show the tag's traffic has exploded so I guess most do.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46369159]Is it just me, or she completely distorted what GG is all about? She essentially denied any corruption between devs and journalists and said it was only about "boys not liking girls playing games"[/QUOTE] Again, it's back to visibility. Since all these shenanigans started, I've seen a lot of shit-flinging from either side (mostly "they're calling in death threats!" "they're faking death threats!") but there has been zero visibility on things about corruption in video games. What is Gamergate actually trying to do? Seriously asking here. I know it's about opposing corruption in video game journalism, but that's more of a vague end goal than specific steps. Is it boycotting game companies or publications? Signing petitions? Investigating connections? Apart from giving money to an indiegogo campaign that one time I haven't heard of anything that Gamergate has been up to It's not just that the jackasses threatening rape and murder are the most visible parts of the movement, it's that they're effectively the [I]only[/I] visible part of the movement.

[QUOTE=Corndog Ninja;46370951]Again, it's back to visibility. Since all these shenanigans started, I've seen a lot of shit-flinging from either side (mostly "they're calling in death threats!" "they're faking death threats!") but there has been zero visibility on things about corruption in video games. What is Gamergate actually trying to do? Seriously asking here. I know it's about opposing corruption in video game journalism, but that's more of a vague end goal than specific steps. Is it boycotting game companies or publications? Signing petitions? Investigating connections? Apart from giving money to an indiegogo campaign that one time I haven't heard of anything that Gamergate has been up to It's not just that the jackasses threatening rape and murder are the most visible parts of the movement, it's that they're effectively the [I]only[/I] visible part of the movement.[/QUOTE] The point is to expose corruption so hopefully honest developers will no longer be afraid to speak out against this sort of bullshit instead of having to deal with it. Sometimes all you need to kill an issue is to make it as public as possible, but the problem with the current industry is that it seems to be for the most part completely devoid of any legal grounds when it comes to corruption, poor work ethics and such. If it was easier to sue these people and bring them to a real court for the real crimes they're committing, the entire issue currently at hand with nepotism, lack of work ethics, corruption, defamation and harassment in the industry would be greatly diminished since a lot of the people doing those things would get sued off their ass.

[QUOTE=KorJax;46370053]This is the entire point behind the anti-GG movement. It's literally spawned to spread mis-information on what GG is about to disarm its legitimacy and make people like Anita and Zoe Quinn look more legitimate, since the entire crux of GG was exposing them for the frauds they are. But apparently because you are feminist and have connections, you are immune to criticism and scrutiny because otherwise you are sexist, conservative, anti-progressive and worship the patriarchy. They are playing HARD on that card to disarm GG from exposing them and its sadly working.[/QUOTE] But anyone that gives a read on proper sources on whats actually going on can tell that AGG is full of shit to shift attention to imaginative boogeymen (pun non intended on boogey), and yet, how are there still people on that side? [editline]30th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=joshuadim;46370294]I just got around to watching the Colbert interview with Anita and I have to say, Anita knows how to use her influence. She immediately got around to attacking #gamergate without having our side speak out for ourselves to tell our side of the story and how it's only a certain group of trolls doing these death and bomb threats. Quite sad really how Anita and Zoe Quinn are able to get media coverage while people who represent the good side of GG aren't getting any at all.[/QUOTE] How Adam Baldwin didn't go to the show and Anita did is beyond me.

[QUOTE=Charades;46367474] It's like when everyone was complaining about a series of EA titles like Spore, Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, and TOR for being low quality and having paid off reviews. We were all called Anti-LGBT homophobes because we didn't get in line and enjoy the shit games. Everyone that was here on Facepunch during those years should remember the shitstorm.[/QUOTE] I actually don't remember this at all.