[QUOTE=Raidyr;46365001]It's really important to take the time to actually read the things people say. Take for instance the fact that she never says anything about men except the initial statistic. She doesn't say nor imply that there is something wrong with men that causes them to do these shootings. She instead blames "toxic masculinity". This is how I interpreted it a few days ago when the tweet was live.[/QUOTE]
dude, it doesn't matter what the claim is if it's entirely unsupported
if she wants to bring out a study that shows a causal link between specific "masculine" traits and psychopathy, by all means. That's an actual discussion. But taking pot shots in the wake of a tragedy just to steer the discussion towards your political platform is scummy as fuck.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46365017]that "toxic masculinity" is the cause of violence,[B] and that as long as it exists all men are potential mass shooters and psychopaths[/B][/QUOTE]
The part you are misinterpreting. I have no idea how you got this from her tweet. The concept of masculinity doesn't cover every male.
I don't think sexualization is a bad thing.
I think people are inherently sexual. What's wrong with appealing to it?
I don't think this ruins the Colbert Report at all. Sadly, I think a lot of high profile activistists are probably just as dishonest as Anita Sarkeesian, and on a show like Colbert, we've probably seen a whole lot more than we realize. The only difference is that most people (here, at least) are aware of it this time. More than anything, this should be a lesson to not forget who the people you see on TV preaching about a cause really are.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46364989]what can't she say at this point
"all she said was that the story in Gone Girl was too complicated and moved too quickly for females to understand! she didn't say women can't follow complicated stories!"
the only reason nobody is offended is that she's given the benefit of the doubt, despite not once ever doing anything to earn it.[/QUOTE]
Her statement about Mirror's Edge could be taken as "girls are bad at video games" I guess if you really want it to. I think it's kind of a stretch, mostly because that is basically exactly the opposite of what her show represents. I have no idea what the context for that was, but I can't imagine it was "mirrors edge is too hard for girls teehee ;)"
No one who took even the most basic women's studies/racial studies/etc. class for general ed at a university should be surprised by anything Anita says. It's the exact same ideology taught every single day in colleges across the western world.
If anything, this is the intellectual side of feminism taught in schools finally coming out to the mainstream.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46364900]She said always first then sent out a second tweet saying 98%.
This is splitting hairs over the main point though that the vast majority of school shootings are carried out by males, which is an incredibly interesting statistic.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that currently, and by currently I mean since 2002, the idea of 'toxic masculinity' has not only been disputed heavily but many experts and scholars in gendered studies are actually stating that we don't even know what masculinity is.
And by that I mean, its definition has changed so rapidly since the 80's that its very much become like femininity and so feminists still using masculinity as a catch all are not only wrong but giving a sexist view point.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46365070]The part you are misinterpreting. I have no idea how you got this from her tweet. The concept of masculinity doesn't cover every male.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/525781140943011841[/url]
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
Again, replace "men and boys" with any other group and tell me that isn't ridiculously sensationalist.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46365130][url]https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/525781140943011841[/url]
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
Again, replace "men and boys" with any other group and tell me that isn't ridiculously sensationalist.[/QUOTE]
Or even worse.
only time ive ever wanted to watch the colbert report
I get her message but the simple fact of the matter is, if she's as smart as you say, she'd carefully choose her words and something like that?
[QUOTE=quinaquin;46365084]Her statement about Mirror's Edge could be taken as "girls are bad at video games" I guess if you really want it to. I think it's kind of a stretch, mostly because that is basically exactly the opposite of what her show represents. I have no idea what the context for that was, but I can't imagine it was "mirrors edge is too hard for girls teehee ;)"[/QUOTE]
She says the control scheme is too hard for women. She goes over this in her videos, if you support her, then personally, I'd expect you to have done your research on someone you support as best you can. Seeing as that's from her video series, I do somewhat expect a supporter to have some vague remembrance that she said they were too hard for women thus the game wasn't a good example of a strong female protagonist fronted game.
It's not a "teehee" thing. It's her seriously critiquing a game for having a supposedly gender difficulty enhanced control scheme.
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;46365012]that's the problem that she addresses, it's mostly not done for titillation, it's for storytelling and to goad the player into doing shit, aka, [I]using[/I] the sexualization and gruesome violence on women as a cheap way to advance the storyline.
people have this weird notion that what she's against is the portrayal sexualized women, but what she talks the most about by far is the way said women are used (like objects) to add certain traits to the game ("maturity" and "edginess") or quickly advance the story and then discarded never to be mentioned again.
there are better, way more creative ways to encourage the player to move forward or to set the tone for a game, and even then, the imagery sarkessian criticizes wouldn't be as big a deal if it wasn't so grossly prevalent in AAA games. so prevalent, in fact, that it doesn't even have the intended effect anymore because it's been done so many times.[/QUOTE]
Except EVERY NPC is used as background decoration or as an object to advance the plot. The only reason she objects to strip clubs and the like is because they have sexual imagery.
I'd also like to point out that the "Subject, object dichotomy" is a bullshit idea to add weight to arguments that have none. An object is anything or anyone that is being acted upon, everyone is a fucking object at one point or another, just as everyone is a subject doing the action. If I handed you a present you'd be the fucking object because you're having an action acted upon you. The "subject, object dichotomy" is just twisting grammatical rules to try to make characters dis-empowered by calling them "objects".
Also sure, strip clubs are "grossly prevalent" in games, if you're disingenuous and ignore the context. Game like GTA, Saints Row, and Watch Dogs have strip clubs because they follow horrible fucking people who commit crimes all the time, people you stereotypically would expect to find at a strip club, or have dealings with someone who frequents a strip club. Thief and Dishonored have brothels to show the opulence and debauchery of the rich and corrupt.
Context fucking matters.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;46364935]She still isn't finished making them. She releases one every 6 or so months to make sure she is perpetually in the limelight.[/QUOTE]
Anita Sarkeesian is an attention whore because she doesn't know how to stop the flow of time while producing videos in order to release them all within a few minutes of each other.
But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46365130][url]https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/525781140943011841[/url]
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
Again, replace "men and boys" with any other group and tell me that isn't ridiculously sensationalist.[/QUOTE]
It is sensationalist. It also happens to be, in my opinion, true. Whether or not she is being disingenuous we absolutely have to talk the fact that young men see violent shootings that end in their equally violent suicides occur at such stark rates as compared to women.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365157]Anita Sarkeesian is an attention whore because she doesn't know how to stop the flow of time while producing videos in order to release them all within a few minutes of each other.
But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.[/QUOTE]
you'd think having such a large amount of money, you'd either get a drastic increase in production qualities(which we didn't really see) or a larger staff being hired to help take on the burden of the project which was now larger.
Putting the words "Attention whore" in his mouth to make him sound like he's sexually attacking her, is really disingenuous of you Zeke.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46365144]She says the control scheme is too hard for women. She goes over this in her videos, if you support her, then personally, I'd expect you to have done your research on someone you support as best you can. Seeing as that's from her video series, I do somewhat expect a supporter to have some vague remembrance that she said they were too hard for women thus the game wasn't a good example of a strong female protagonist fronted game.
It's not a "teehee" thing. It's her seriously critiquing a game for having a supposedly gender difficulty enhanced control scheme.[/QUOTE]
I'm not a supporter I don't think, I just like her videos. I watched them once when they come out, but don't remember a lot beyond what she talked about and her arguments.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46365163]It is sensationalist. It also happens to be, in my opinion, true. Whether or not she is being disingenuous we absolutely have to talk the fact that young men see violent shootings that end in their equally violent suicides occur at such stark rates as compared to women.[/QUOTE]
I'm not exactly sure why people take offense at her statement there, unless people believe that the current availability of mental health services for youths, especially young men who might be too afraid to talk to their parents/peers about this kind of thing out of fear of looking "weak", isn't severely lacking.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;46365130][url]https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/525781140943011841[/url]
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
Again, replace "men and boys" with any other group and tell me that isn't ridiculously sensationalist.[/QUOTE]
She's not saying men naturally commit more shootings, but that society pressuring men to be "manly" leads to men resorting to shootings rather than some other option. She's blaming culture's idea of gender roles, not the genders themselves.
At least, that's what it looks like to me.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46365144]She says the control scheme is too hard for women. She goes over this in her videos, if you support her, then personally, I'd expect you to have done your research on someone you support as best you can. Seeing as that's from her video series, I do somewhat expect a supporter to have some vague remembrance that she said they were too hard for women thus the game wasn't a good example of a strong female protagonist fronted game.
It's not a "teehee" thing. It's her seriously critiquing a game for having a supposedly gender difficulty enhanced control scheme.[/QUOTE]
Mirror's Edge control scheme:
movement - left hand buttons
weapons - right hand buttons
camera - dick controller buttons
It's funny reading the responses to that tweet because they largely fall into two categories
"But what about mental health?!"
"But what about access to guns?!"
Both fit neatly into the interpretation of toxic masculinity I got from her tweet.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46365173]you'd think having such a large amount of money, you'd either get a drastic increase in production qualities(which we didn't really see) or a larger staff being hired to help take on the burden of the project which was now larger.
Putting the words "Attention whore" in his mouth to make him sound like he's sexually attacking her, is really disingenuous of you Zeke.[/QUOTE]
But he is [I]totally[/I] sexually attacking her, why else would anyone speak ill of Anita?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;46365173]you'd think having such a large amount of money, you'd either get a drastic increase in production qualities(which we didn't really see) or a larger staff being hired to help take on the burden of the project which was now larger.
Putting the words "Attention whore" in his mouth to make him sound like he's sexually attacking her, is really disingenuous of you Zeke.[/QUOTE]
"Attention whore" is barely sexual at all, even I wouldn't make that reach.
[QUOTE=quinaquin;46365177]I'm not a supporter I don't think, I just like her videos. I watched them once when they come out, but don't remember a lot beyond what she talked about and her arguments.[/QUOTE]
then I suggest you turn a slightly more critical eye towards what she talks about and what she says because she misrepresents and takes a lot of things out of context to make her points, and while some people believe that method of arguing is valid, I think you have to turn a critical eye on those arguments in even more detail to see "Does context matter here".
[editline]29th October 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365190]"Attention whore" is barely sexual at all, even I wouldn't make that reach.[/QUOTE]
Right. Except I can't ignore the "Whore" part(which i'm sure you'd call someone a neckbeard for using to refer to anita, but it's okay for you to do so sarcastically i'm sure)
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365157]Anita Sarkeesian is an attention whore because she doesn't know how to stop the flow of time while producing videos in order to release them all within a few minutes of each other.
But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying she's an attention whore. I'm saying two possibilities exist:
1. She grossly underestimated the time it would take to make her videos, which she expected to finish within a year. The fact that she couldn't do it in her original time frame, coupled with the fact that she is hilariously misinformed in her videos, shows a mind boggling level of incompetence.
2. She finished them all a LONG time ago, possibly within her original time frame, and is dealing them out slowly to maximise the revenue and attention she gains from each video. Meaning she doesn't care about the quality of her work and is only in it for the money.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365157]
But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.[/QUOTE]
I didn't want to get involved in the shitflinging, but this kind of shit gets me annoyed. Very few people dislike Anita because "hurr liberal elitist" or some bullshit like that, they dislike her because she comes across as being an incredibly sensationalist manipulator or downright insane at times. Can you not see why people dislike someone who seriously thinks "The controls are too hard for women!" is a valid complaint?
[QUOTE=Last or First;46365180]She's not saying men naturally commit more shootings, but that society pressuring men to be "manly" leads to men resorting to shootings rather than some other option. She's blaming culture's idea of gender roles, not the genders themselves.
[/QUOTE]
Exactly this. Combine the usual pressures of being a teen in 2014 America with the inherent masculinity of firearms and the idea that "being a man" involves setting up barriers emotionally and it really shouldn't be a surprise that shooters are always male.
Personally, people harassing Anita piss me the fuck off. If it weren't for that bunch of dumbasses, she would have sunken into obscurity by now, exactly where her sensationalism belongs.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46365163]It is sensationalist. It also happens to be, in my opinion, true. Whether or not she is being disingenuous we absolutely have to talk the fact that young men see violent shootings that end in their equally violent suicides occur at such stark rates as compared to women.[/QUOTE]
using the ticking clock of impending mass shootings as fuel for your political crusade is also pretty fucking disgusting
it obscures the issue and poisons the conversation with fear and overreaction. Now no one is actually trying to figure out how to curb the rate of mass shooting, now everyone is freaking out because if they don't start tearing down "toxic masculinity" people are going to die.
there is a good fucking reason that claims need to be supported before action is taken.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365157]But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.[/QUOTE]
Although I hate using political words to describe things, The Colbert Report is one of the most 'liberal' shows on television.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;46365157]Anita Sarkeesian is an attention whore because she doesn't know how to stop the flow of time while producing videos in order to release them all within a few minutes of each other.
But seriously, I'm glad that the eagle of freedom and justice is going to swoop down and protect my video games from the liberal elite in their ivory towers.[/QUOTE]
Oh come on, of all the things you go after in this thread you go after his (very justified) criticism of the [I]extremely[/I] lengthy period between video releases she has? That's probably one of the most valid criticisms that can be leveled against her; hell, just compare it to someone like Angry Joe who manages to put out 20-40 minute long reviews every month or so in addition to weekly content.
Regardless of the amount of money she asked for, with what she ended up getting (and the quality of the videos themselves) there's no good reason I can think of that she should have had the entire series out by now.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
