[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46364495]Hopefuly, she'll actually be asked about the shit behind all this gamergate drama of lately, and actually shown the dumb shit going on behind the anti-gg side instead of "oh look at you big gurl fighting interweb misoginy monsters, go get 'em! heres more money!"
Not holding my breath on it.[/QUOTE]
Well no. Because to the common man, some shitfest about ethics in games journalism or a few poorly constructed points in a critique about video games aren't even NEAR the severity of an entire gender being under assault in the biggest entertainment industry on the planet.
The issues GG says its about are eclipsed by the ones it lays bare.
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;46364519]She grew because of the hatred she got. Worrying about her "leaking into the real world" is the result of the controversy people caused over something that didn't need it.[/QUOTE]
I believe that even though the internet hate machine created a big problem when the series first started and even is part of the reason she gained over a 100 grand, and caused her to gain sympathy, money, and attention and that's only become more true as time has gone on, even though this is true, I seriously believe that the hatred that exists now partly persists from lack of discussion caused directly from the extreme polarization of the issue.
People who support anita do not generally allow criticism of her in any form and often ignore criticisms of her argument, mirroring anita's manner of dealing with criticism. This makes me mad, so i'm sure it makes other people mad. Other people may not deal with their anger as well as I am on this topic. But I certainly find it aggravating how I cannot have a real discussion on this issue and I find it even more frustrating that at an industry level, there won't be much of a discussion about this either so we have a serious problem here in my opinion.
Saying a show is ruined because it has someone on it you dislike is kind of exaggerating, I really don't get why people hate her so passionately. If you don't like her videos, don't watch them. I'm really excited for the episode though, I'm a fan of her stuff and love Colbert.
[QUOTE=Clavus;46364541]Well no. Because to the common man, some shitfest about ethics in games journalism or a few poorly constructed points in a critique about video games aren't even NEAR the severity of an entire gender being under assault in the biggest entertainment industry on the planet.
The issues GG says its about are eclipsed by the ones it lays bare.[/QUOTE]
Except that there is no evidence an entire gender is under attack.
Why is Jade Raymond not under attack if that were the case? Why are people like her, being supported by GG if GG is just a so called misogynist hatefest?
[QUOTE=quinaquin;46364558]Saying a show is ruined because it has someone on it you dislike is kind of exaggerating, I really don't get why people hate her so passionately. If you don't like her videos, don't watch them. I'm really excited for the episode though, I'm a fan of her stuff and love Colbert.[/QUOTE]
If nickelback goes on Colbert, I wouldn't watch. I dislike their stuff, but I wouldn't really mind.
If a racist, anti-immigration teapartier goes on colbert, where he will likely be cast in a positive light, I care because I don't want to add any legitimacy to his ideas.
Same deal with Sarkeesian. Politics are like playing with fire. It can get out of control
[QUOTE=Daemon White;46364517]I think we should wait and see what happens on the show before fighting over whether it's ruined or not.[/QUOTE]
That depends on if it's live broadcast or pre-recorded (I don't know which it is, I've only seen reruns of the show). If it's live GG can have a little optimism, if it's already been recorded then her positive tweets about it are pretty much a sign that this is going to be another anti-GG slander piece.
The Colbert Report has had Ann Coulter on atleast twice that I know of. Sarkeesian and her video game criticisms are far less socially relevant.
Of course this is the same board that legitimately thinks EA is worse than Bank of America so maybe I just don't understand video games as well as I thought I did.
[QUOTE=quinaquin;46364558]Saying a show is ruined because it has someone on it you dislike is kind of exaggerating, I really don't get why people hate her so passionately. If you don't like her videos, don't watch them. I'm really excited for the episode though, I'm a fan of her stuff and love Colbert.[/QUOTE]
well I dislike her personally because she is lazy, doesn't do her own research, doesn't do very much work for her videos, she constantly and persistently uses things out of context to make her arguments, and she uses her victimhood(Which is undeserved) to boost her message and make people take her more seriously.
She's a master class manipulator and a lazy researcher/documentarian. She doesn't play the games she talks about and doesn't try very hard to understand the more complex elements she lambasts, and she's an unabashed sex negative feminist and I have a great deal of trouble thinking a sex negative feminist is right.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;46364594]If a racist, anti-immigration teapartier goes on colbert, where he will likely be cast in a positive light, I care because I don't want to add any legitimacy to his ideas.[/QUOTE]
Steven Colbert is so ridiculously against the tea party and anti-immigration it's not even funny. You aren't taking him on that show at face value, are you? He acts like that to show off ridiculous these people are.
I didn't know video games was this big of a deal
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46364599]and she's an unabashed sex negative feminist and I have a great deal of trouble thinking a sex negative feminist is right.[/QUOTE]
I've legitimately never heard of "sex negative" feminism until Sarkeesian showed up and to this day the only time I see it is in context with her name.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364598]The Colbert Report has had Ann Coulter on atleast twice that I know of. Sarkeesian and her video game criticisms are far less socially relevant.
Of course this is the same board that legitimately thinks EA is worse than Bank of America so maybe I just don't understand video games as well as I thought I did.[/QUOTE]
Facepunch is not a hivemind and you've been around long enough to know that Raidyr. Those "Worst company of the year" threads are always filled with dissent and laughter at the very concept that EA is the worst company around as it's quite obvious to a lot of us that the vote is less than reasonable.
So, either way, I don't think that's a fair jibe at this board unless you know, you include yourself in your own jibe.
[editline]29th October 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364615]I've legitimately never heard of "sex negative" feminism until Sarkeesian showed up and to this day the only time I see it is in context with her name.[/QUOTE]
Well that's too bad for you but I learned that term in 2007 taking a feminism class at my local college so believing it's just a buzz word to critique Anita sarkesian is a really weak fallacy based on your own ignorance of the term.
[QUOTE=Lijitsu;46364602]Steven Colbert is so ridiculously against the tea party and anti-immigration it's not even funny. You aren't taking him on that show at face value, are you? He acts like that to show off ridiculous these people are.[/QUOTE]
people are afraid that this is going to be a soapbox for anita sarkeesian to knock down straw man arguments and perpetuate the idea that gamers hate women
why would gamers be afraid of being mislabeled and misrepresented by popular media? I mean that's never happened before
[QUOTE=Lijitsu;46364602]Steven Colbert is so ridiculously against the tea party and anti-immigration it's not even funny. You aren't taking him on that show at face value, are you? He acts like that to show off ridiculous these people are.[/QUOTE]
I understand. Its not a real situation, its just the converse of what's really happening.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46364620]Facepunch is not a hivemind and you've been around long enough to know that Raidyr. Those "Worst company of the year" threads are always filled with dissent and laughter at the very concept that EA is the worst company around as it's quite obvious to a lot of us that the vote is less than reasonable.
So, either way, I don't think that's a fair jibe at this board unless you know, you include yourself in your own jibe.[/QUOTE]
I suppose I should be been more on-point and said that it's the same people on this board who think that about EA that think Sarkeesian is going to destroy video games and the Colbert Report in one fell swoop.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;46364520]Really? I think games got considerably worse when they were no longer a niche market. I think it was the 360 that did it. Remember all the promotions for Halo 3 and Call of duty? Now it's for Destiny, but you get the idea. When everybody started playing FPS's, games got worse in general because the average person's standards aren't that high. There are, of course, good games still, but when the audience lowered the bar, publishers were no longer held accountable for good, finished content. When the general audience started playing, they were okay with day one DLC and other cash grabs, and the publishers are allowed to get away with it.
Ever notice how we complain about publishers pulling shit, but they keep doing it? It's because we're a minority.
I think indie games turned shit because of minecraft. After minecraft got big, you had thousands of games with the word "mine" or "craft" affixed to their titles, all about crafting and/or mining. But the worst contribution, other than these knockoffs, was that notch made a bunch of low-rate devs believe that it's okay to release a product "alpha" and then never finish it. Of course, there are great games that are alpha released (Rust and The Forest are my favorites), it became a huge business model for indie devs to hype a product, kickstart it, and then never finish the game since they got the money anyways.
If games were less mainstream, I think we'd have to sift through less shit to find the jewels.[/QUOTE]
So your only reasoning is that you have to do more digging to find good games? I think the games industry is now more healthy than ever. The past wasn't better. The reason you think it's better, is because you only remember the highlights.
There will always be shit being produced. As a consumer you inform yourself before you purchase something. Things like Early Access, alpha builds, and pre-orders don't change that. They're not complete products so don't buy them as such. Plenty of people learned that lesson the hard way, hence Kickstarter project successes making a dive recently. It's just a new paradigm that people need to understand, not some evil practice that needs to be stomped out. More people are given a shot at success in this industry, more will publicly fail as a result. In the end, you didn't lose more money than you did in the time spend arguing about it on the internet.
What pisses me off is she doesn't even give a shit about gender inequality, shes just doing this shit for money and all the white nights on here are falling for it. If she actually gave a fuck about it she'd be doing protests in the middle east.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364615]I've legitimately never heard of "sex negative" feminism until Sarkeesian showed up and to this day the only time I see it is in context with her name.[/QUOTE]
"Sex-negative" feminism is another term used for third-wave feminism because it contains the belief that if a woman is sexualised she is being exploited, which is bad. As opposed to second-wave feminism which contains the belief that sexualisation is neither positive or negative but requires greater context.
Not all second-wave feminists are "sex-positive" and not all third-wave feminists are "sex-negative" but the differences in ideologies tend to align that way.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364598]The Colbert Report has had Ann Coulter on atleast twice that I know of. Sarkeesian and her video game criticisms are far less socially relevant.
Of course this is the same board that legitimately thinks EA is worse than Bank of America so maybe I just don't understand video games as well as I thought I did.[/QUOTE]
I don't think anybody ever really thought EA was worse than bank of America in terms of the seriousness of the bad things they did, but people voted EA for worst company in America because they affected way more of them on a personal basis. It's apples to oranges, and if oranges tried to scam you for a little money often then you'd probably be more personally aggrieved towards them than apples who had seriously harmed some people you didn't know relatively quietly. A large percentage of facepunch is under 18 and have had no interaction with [i]any[/i] bank for their whole lives other than maybe storing their weekly allowance, why they'd care about bank of america is beyond me
Either way, the concern is more that Colbert will portray her in a positive light as someone doing a good thing when she makes no better points than a large variety of youtubers who criticize problems with games just the same and don't use manipulation and scams to further their goals
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46364620]
Well that's too bad for you but I learned that term in 2007 taking a feminism class at my local college so believing it's just a buzz word to critique Anita sarkesian is a really weak fallacy based on your own ignorance of the term.[/QUOTE]
No fallacy because I never said nor implied it was "just a buzz word" to critique anyone. Just a harmless observation.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46364631]people are afraid that this is going to be a soapbox for anita sarkeesian to knock down straw man arguments and perpetuate the idea that gamers hate women
why would gamers be afraid of being mislabeled and misrepresented by popular media? I mean that's never happened before[/QUOTE]
Her talking point always made sure to limit it to "some gamers" or a "section of the community" hate women so I doubt she will strive far from that.
She will undoubtedly rip into gamergate if that's a topic because frankly it's so easy to.
fun fact, anita sarkeesian supported #stopcolbert
[url]https://archive.today/YNnnO[/url]
[QUOTE=Manibogi;46364368]"She deserves to be harassed for not sharing my opinion and using two words, among other things"
Jesus, I thought I was mental.[/QUOTE]
She really does shove feminism where it doesn't fit though. I've used this quote in threads gone by, but this is what she said about Mirror's Edge:
[quote]I can relate to a lot of fellow female gamers who did not get into this game due to its difficult control scheme.[/quote]
In this instance, "female" is just used to slap on some sort of feminist agenda. Finding a game difficult isn't exclusive to women so why mention it? She basically said that Mirror's Edge is too hard for girls, and for a self-proclaimed feminist she's unwittingly gone against all she should stand for. In a nutshell, Anita Sarkeesian spouts a lot of uninformed garbage and makes feminism look bad because a lot of people know she's full of shit. She gains support from people equally as uninformed who fly her flag because idiots send her death threats and it makes her look right.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;46363906]Except she doesn't talk about the shitty people who play games. She says games [I][B]are inherently misogynistic[/B][/I] and uses fabricated 'evidence' to support her claims. Every time I see someone supporting her they ignore everything she says and supplant their own issues, claiming she's some amazing figurehead.
In reality she's just a mouthpiece for her shit head producer.[/QUOTE]
Where does she say this?
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];46364738']Where does she say this?[/QUOTE]
In her arguments that the purpose of having women in games is to attack them and "derive a perverse sexual pleasure" from it.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46364670]fun fact, anita sarkeesian supported #stopcolbert
[url]https://archive.today/YNnnO[/url][/QUOTE]
He's missing a wonderful opportunity to mention that, but he probably won't
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364669]No fallacy because I never said nor implied it was "just a buzz word" to critique anyone. Just a harmless observation.
Her talking point always made sure to limit it to "some gamers" or a "section of the community" hate women so I doubt she will strive far from that.
She will undoubtedly rip into gamergate if that's a topic because frankly it's so easy to.[/QUOTE]
She's been exploiting the violent white noise of the internet for profit for years, using it to squirm out of criticism and shame anyone who doesn't fall into lockstep with her absurd philosophical and sociological claims.
Gamergate is just another example of that. 95% of the tweets made using the hashtag aren't harassment, but that doesn't matter when Anita Sarkeesian can go on national television and use the five percent to tar the whole and make everyone involved look like a sexist.
It doesn't matter if she separates the gamers who "hate women" from the ones that don't when in her world the gamers that "hate women" are whoever dares to point out that she has no goddamn idea what she's talking about.
[QUOTE=Bread_Baron;46364685]She really does shove feminism where it doesn't fit though. I've used this quote in threads gone by, but this is what she said about Mirror's Edge:
In this instance, "female" is just used to slap on some sort of feminist agenda. Finding a game difficult isn't exclusive to women so why mention it? She basically said that Mirror's Edge is too hard for girls, and for a self-proclaimed feminist she's unwittingly gone against all she should stand for. In a nutshell, Anita Sarkeesian spouts a lot of uninformed garbage and makes feminism look bad because a lot of people know she's full of shit. She gains support from people equally as uninformed who fly her flag because idiots send her death threats and it makes her look right.[/QUOTE]
What I took from what she's saying is that while Mirror's Edge is a positive portayal of women in a video game, the gameplay is kind of off putting for a lot of people. I don't really know the context for this, but that's what I get from it trying to imagine why someone would say it. It'd make sense if people were asking what she thought about the game, which seems likely because it's generally considered a really good game when it comes to not shitting on women.
[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]
she doesn't say that. she says [I]some[/I] games have women in them for a variety of reasons, most of them not very good (e.g. serving as eye candy "background decoration", having them killed brutally to make the game look mature and dark, etc).
the devs aren't evil misogynists that want gamers to derive sexual pleasure from beating/killing women, they mostly put those things in games because they make for easy visual storytelling, which is what she criticizes, because while the intention isn't inherently sexist, the imagery itself still is.
[QUOTE=quinaquin;46364784]What I took from what she's saying is that while Mirror's Edge is a positive portayal of women in a video game, the gameplay is kind of off putting for a lot of people. I don't really know the context for this, but that's what I get from it trying to imagine why someone would say it. It'd make sense if people were asking what she thought about the game, which seems likely because it's generally considered a really good game when it comes to not shitting on women.[/QUOTE]
Moreover, since when was "the game is hard" a valid criticism?
Difficulty is half the point of a game. As much as I love visual novels, they're not games. A game requires a challenge, and WAY more challenging games have come out before, and since mirror's edge
[QUOTE=proboardslol;46364809]Moreover, since when was "the game is hard" a valid criticism?
Difficulty is half the point of a game. As much as I love visual novels, they're not games. A game requires a challenge, and WAY more challenging games have come out before, and since mirror's edge[/QUOTE]
Not that it's hard, just that the controls are kind of confusing and weird and take some getting used to for some people. Mirror's Edge is pretty easy once you get the hang of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
