Support NeoGAF

[Galactic Fork]

It's interesting you'd say that because she mentions in this video how the style of her other videos changed.

I get the feeling there's no right answer for some people

Sure there is. It's silence.

 

[MrBadger]

I'm not saying that if she changed her tone or way of presenting her views, that it would completely stop the dislike, hate or harassment she receives. It's obvious that would still continue no matter what simply because of what she's talking about.

But a part of it, however much or little that may be, stems from how she presents her views and cause.

I won't deny that there are legitimate criticisms for her works. However it's also true that people hated the idea before the first video came out and a lot of people would have latched onto anything negative about it to discredit her point.

As an example, people will cite that same Hitman example time and time again all the while criticising her for cherry picking.

 

[marrec]

Agreed 100% if you by "how", you mean, female.

"How", in that context, can be interpreted as "with boobs while talking".

Meaning no offense to the original poster, of course.

 

[chrominance]

I'm not saying that if she changed her tone or way of presenting her views, that it would completely stop the dislike, hate or harassment she receives. It's obvious that would still continue no matter what simply because of what she's talking about.

But a part of it, however much or little that may be, stems from how she presents her views and cause.

Surely you can see how this leads to an impossible situation for her, or anyone in her place? You're basically saying that in order to be taken seriously, it would be better for her to change the way she communicates her message. The problem is, who gets to decide how she changes that message? You? Me? Random trolls on the internet? Whose standards are the right ones? Because we certainly aren't all going to agree that if Anita Sarkeesian does X, Y and Z, then she'll be completely beyond reproach. If she adjusts her message to suit me, there's a decent chance someone else will think she's made a change for the worse. You're basically asking her to chase an impossible dream: a style of communication that somehow pleases everyone perfectly. Even if you narrow that down to eliminate trolls from your audience, that's still practically impossible.

People are, of course, free to criticize the way she communicates her message. But don't mistake that for a critique of her arguments, any more than saying "I vehemently disagree with GG harassment" automatically means you don't give a shit about "ethics in game journalism." As long as she's being reasonable in her approach--which I think she absolutely is--there should be no reason why her methods of communication should be used to discredit her.

 

[POWERSPHERE]

I cannot see why she gets attacked asides for insecure males protecting their pathetic turf, its really baffling and sad, but it's shed a lot of light on the way women are treated in society in general, and especially online. It's shone a light on the fuckwits who attack her, and that's a positive thing, it's just a shame it is at her expense.

 

[Chaos17]

It's crazy that people think it's okay to use a computer or a phone or a forum as a shield when it comes to the way they act or treat anyone while using the internet. IT'S NOT OKAY TO BE AN ASSHOLE.

I agree, whenever you're female or male please threat other with respect.

 

[Lime]

I wonder if all the energy and attention towards GG takes away focus of other sexist problems and less controversial resistances to changing the status quo. Everyone can agree that harassment and terrorism are bad things, but what about affirmative action, equal representation, reviews containing social viewpoints, conference policies, and other measures that seek to curb structural sexism (or racism, ableism and transphobia for that matter). I.e. things that a "diet bigot" would oppose.

GG and online terrorism should obviously be combatted, I'm just wondering what things fly by us while we are trying to fix blatant bigots. It's like only talking about the KKK while Mr. & Mrs. Diet Racist strolls around perpetuating racism without being blatant racists.

Of course, it could be argued that GG and these extreme things push us towards taking the appropriate measures to fight bigotry, thereby making the argument void.

 

[FF Seraphim]

It's crazy that people think it's okay to use a computer or a phone or a forum as a shield when it comes to the way they act or treat anyone while using the internet. IT'S NOT OKAY TO BE AN ASSHOLE.

Okay see it is perfectly acceptable to be an asshole if you are prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions. This is where the problem comes in, there is no real consequence to being an asshole online. In the real world you can be an asshole and you have to deal with the blowback, on the internet there is no real blowback.

 

[TheSlySoul]

I agree, whenever you're female or male please threat other with respect.

You think "Don't be an asshole" would be the first rule for most people, but I guess that is not the case.
While they are free to do so, they should be punished for being one.

 

[Trickster]

Surely you can see how this leads to an impossible situation for her, or anyone in her place? You're basically saying that in order to be taken seriously, it would be better for her to change the way she communicates her message. The problem is, who gets to decide how she changes that message? You? Me? Random trolls on the internet? Whose standards are the right ones? Because we certainly aren't all going to agree that if Anita Sarkeesian does X, Y and Z, then she'll be completely beyond reproach. If she adjusts her message to suit me, there's a decent chance someone else will think she's made a change for the worse. You're basically asking her to chase an impossible dream: a style of communication that somehow pleases everyone perfectly. Even if you narrow that down to eliminate trolls from your audience, that's still practically impossible.

People are, of course, free to criticize the way she communicates her message. But don't mistake that for a critique of her arguments, any more than saying "I vehemently disagree with GG harassment" automatically means you don't give a shit about "ethics in game journalism." As long as she's being reasonable in her approach--which I think she absolutely is--there should be no reason why her methods of communication should be used to discredit her.

Isn't that kinda the opposite of what I'm saying? I've been saying in my posts that yes, no matter what she does, there will be assholes who keeps harrassing her, no matter what she does.

But there's also some people who just don't like her based on her arguments or oppinions. For instance I'm sure a lot of people don't particularly agree with her oppinion of Bayonetta.

 

[Mman235]

They hate them? Maybe, but it also could be that they only know strawman representations of them. Similar to the way racism is prevalent in less diverse (or heavily segregated) areas. I think if we allow for civil conversation (on both sides) then we can actually work to show that criticism is not the damnable offense some people think it is. GG may be misguided, but I don't think witchhunts are ever a reasonable response. I have encountered people who are just honestly naive and misplace their belief that games journalism is corrupt (a belief that is not altogether misguided) and therefore get swooped up into the narrative of GG.

Multiple people have tried to have civil discussions with GG members (especially in the early days when members were comparatively less invested in it), it almost always ended in them getting dogpiled and insulted, or worse.

 

[aeolist]

But there's also some people who just don't like her based on her arguments or oppinions. For instance I'm sure a lot of people don't particularly agree with her oppinion of Bayonetta.

if these people are expressing their disagreement reasonably then they are not the problem

if they aren't then her changing the tone of her criticism won't make a difference

 

[Galactic Fork]

Okay see it is perfectly acceptable to be an asshole if you are prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions. This is where the problem comes in, there is no real consequence to being an asshole online. In the real world you can be an asshole and you have to deal with the blowback, on the internet there is no real blowback.

There's also the fact that a lot of people don't see being an asshole on line as being real. As if because they can't directly see the person, their actions aren't really hurting others. And they can convince themselves they aren't the horrible people they are.

 

[Bit-Bit]

I'm doing as much as I can to report all of the hate and vitriol in the comments of some of her videos.

By not doing anything about it whenever we see it, we're sending a message that we're ok with it.

And I'm not ok with it.

 

[Peltz]

Agreed 100% if you by "how", you mean, female.

You have a point. If I - a 28 year old straight male - created the same videos as Anita, I don't think anyone would harass me. It would merely spark an academic discourse.

I think many men have a problem with a woman who stands up for what she believes is right and it makes them feel threatened. Where I would be considered "assertive" in a positive sense, Anita is deemed "in your face" or "demanding" in a negative sense solely due to her sex.

Obviously, people who feel threatened by Anita and threaten her in response not only misinterpret her message, they actually have a warped view of women on a very fundamental level. They are dangerously insecure people.

By all means, engage in the discourse. It's healthy and it's how we learn. Heck, I've both learned from the discourse myself, and my perception of tropes are evolving with this movement.

But no matter where you stand, I think we can all agree that the level of vitriol Anita is facing is 100% inexcusable.

 

[oni-link]

But there's also some people who just don't like her based on her arguments or oppinions. For instance I'm sure a lot of people don't particularly agree with her oppinion of Bayonetta.

This is fine, but its too often used as evidence she is wrong and what she is saying is wrong, implying there isn't any issue with how women are represented in games and treated in gaming culture

I don't agree with every single example she uses to back up her points, if she gives 10 examples of damsels, maybe 2 or 3 are less so in the context of those specific games, but that doesn't undermine her point that it's a trope that is used in gaming (and all media) and that it (along with hundreds of other tropes) may be an influence on how women are treated in gaming, and in society as a whole

 

[Peltz]

This is fine, but its too often used as evidence she is wrong and what she is saying is wrong, implying there isn't any issue with how women are represented in games and treated in gaming culture

I don't agree with every single example she uses to back up her points, if she gives 10 examples of damsels, maybe 2 or 3 are less so in the context of those specific games, but that doesn't undermine her point that it's a trope that is used in gaming (and all media) and that it (along with hundreds of other tropes) may be an influence on how women are treated in gaming, and in society as a whole

I think the tropes of female game characters are both a symptom of the problem and a source of the problem at the same time. It's a self-fueling monster in many ways.

 

[Yrael]

I see the same people in these threads every time they pop up, I'm not sure you people do it. I last a few pages before I have to disengage because it just becomes so overwhelming.

I have to admit that this is why I haven't posted as much as I'd like to in these threads - because after a while it becomes incredibly demoralising and draining.

 

[Fuchsdh]

It's interesting you'd say that because she mentions in this video how the style of her other videos changed.

I get the feeling there's no right answer for some people

That part struck me as odd, because humor was something I never picked up on being a big part of her early videos (or at least the games one—I guess the LEGO stuff had a bit of snark in them.)

The bit about having to watch what you say is pretty much "Welcome to the Internet, You're A Public Figure Now, Surprise!" There's all these people who essentially have to mind what they say like they were a politician because there's no telling when the internet will megaphone their comments or funnel anger or mischief or trolling back on them (like the random "I wanna do Youtube videos about books" lady above). Tumblr-cofounder Marco Arment recently wrote a piece critical of Apple that got turned into a "Apple is doomed" piece by the press, and he expressed shock that it would get picked up and warped that way, when usually his blog is a sedate place. Likewise I'm sure Sarkeesian could produce something totally innocuous unrelated to the tropes stuff, and it might still draw flack by association. It sucks, but I'm not sure what you can do about it. At the very least it helps Sarkeesian in that she keeps her issue in the spotlight, and generates donations and views from people who otherwise would have ignored her work. For some people it's just pointless dreck that pushes them out.

 

[Michanical]

With just some adjustments to her tendency of negative generalization and somewhat combatant rhetoric I think she could've gotten "everyone" to join her side. I don't think she is that kind of self-aware though, and it's perhaps too late, which is a real shame because her cause is at the bottom a really good one.

The vast majority of people that disagree with her were never going to agree with her. Your comment ignores the fact that there is legitimate sexism and a whole movement that wants to A) keep games exactly where they are and B) boycotts and harasses any writer that attempts to view games from a feminist point-of-view. Some of these writers are tame, but that doesn't keep people from being horrible to them.

 

[Peltz]

I have to admit that this is why I haven't posted as much as I'd like to in these threads - because after a while it becomes incredibly demoralising and draining.

It does get emotionally draining for me too. Part of me wants to write a longer essay where I can air out my thoughts about Anita for publication on some sort of website or journal. I just need to find to the time.

I think it would feel cathartic for me. Although NeoGAF represents a bastion for the healthiest form of this discussion on the internet (I applaud our moderators and community), it still feels like I'm often banging my head against the wall.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

The video was taken down. Can I still watch it somewhere? Why was it taken down?

 

[Peltz]

The video was taken down. Can I still watch it somewhere? Why was it taken down?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhgEuY64ECw

It's also at the bottom of the OP (which has been edited to reflect the change in links).

 

[Opto]

The video was taken down. Can I still watch it somewhere? Why was it taken down?

Comments were enabled. They probably did not want to give her harassers a podium right below her. Not only was there your expected vile precipitation of misogynistic shit, but there was a huge number of anti-GAF posts.

 

[oni-link]

Comments were enabled. They probably did not want to give her harassers a podium right below her. Not only was there your expected vile precipitation of misogynistic shit, but there was a huge number of anti-GAF posts.

The channel put up really good and interesting debates, I doubt they were expecting the huge number of vile comments on that vid, so they deleted it and re-uploaded it without the comments enabled

 

[A Link to the Past]

One thing I noticed is that GG kind of forces its critics into weird positions. I disagree with Anita on Bayonetta, but I don't like to be critical of her video about the character because it creates fuel for GG. Same with opposing Polygon, except Polygon I really don't like more often than I do.

 

[Weltall Zero]

Good thing I said most and not all, eh?

But yes, please quote rational wiki as an authoritative source on discourse.

I don't see what that particular wiki has to do with anything. Are you suggesting both of the above aren't universally recognized fallacies?

Also, I love how any and every thread about Sarkeesian, without exception, turns into a discussion of the validity of her message or methods. "I'm not saying she deserves it, but let's beat on the dead horse for the 1000th time rather than the actual news.".

 

[Palculator]

One thing I noticed is that GG kind of forces its critics into weird positions. I disagree with Anita on Bayonetta, but I don't like to be critical of her video about the character because it creates fuel for GG. Same with opposing Polygon, except Polygon I really don't like more often than I do.

Well, this isn't a binary issue, though. Far from it. If there's good reason for you to disagree with any critic, you shouldn't stop yourself because of some insensitive assholes.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Well, this isn't a binary issue, though. Far from it. If there's good reason for you to disagree with any critic, you shouldn't stop yourself because of some insensitive assholes.

But there is a good reason - when feminists were critical of her Bayonetta video, that got misused to shit by GamerGaters and gave them more fuel to attack Anita.

 

[Pantsuit Apologist]

Welp. Time to donate more money to Feminist Frequency!

 

[Weltall Zero]

This is also kind of the thing I'm talking about..Just because I didn't arrange my words perfectly (perhaps because english isn't my native language, maybe becausr I'm posting from my phone..) there's an odd strong reaction that i can't reall fathom..
..Instead of f.ex. just acknowledging that I'm, at the bottom.. on your side.

"combative"

You are saying that there is sexism but that it should be said in a way not to inconvenience. You are far from being "on her side"; there are many more than two sides. It's basically a matter of priorities, and many people (myself included) believe that sexism literally can't be exposed or corrected without upsetting someone. By padding you message with "maybe" or "in my opinion" or "it's no big deal, but", like so many seem to be asking, you'e diluting it into nothingness. There is no polite way of describing how sexist media and particularly videogames are, and the only way you can think that is if you think they're "not all that sexist" to begin with.

 

[Palculator]

But there is a good reason - when feminists were critical of her Bayonetta video, that got misused to shit by GamerGaters and gave them more fuel to attack Anita.

Sure, I was aware of that and you do have a point. But I never got the impression that GG'ers are just sitting there waiting for people to give them some possible flaws in her videos so they finally have a reason to attack Anita. They usually do it anyways and with much more toxic content than any well reasoned criticism of her analysis. Most harassment she receives is entirely unprovoked and unreasonable so actual criticism isn't "fuel" to them -- they run on something different apparently.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Welp. Time to donate more money to Feminist Frequency!

Just need to verify real quick. Is this post intended to suggest that the existence of a donation page means that she is trying to profit off of being a victim?

 

[theshape31]

No, do not avoid the comments.

Look at them.

Look at them.

This is what the current state of our hobby has bred. This is the new generation that represents our hobby, formed by the media they consumed.

Look at them.

You want to change this, stop supporting what creates them. And actively rebuke it, and them.

Do not cover your eyes and ignore it. Anita sure as hell doesn't have that luxury.

Hell. Fucking. Yes.

Well said, thank you.

 

[YourMaster]

Isn't that kinda the opposite of what I'm saying? I've been saying in my posts that yes, no matter what she does, there will be assholes who keeps harrassing her, no matter what she does.

But there's also some people who just don't like her based on her arguments or oppinions. For instance I'm sure a lot of people don't particularly agree with her oppinion of Bayonetta.

It's more then just a few assholes, and I think you're beyond an asshole when you think it is OK to threaten to rape or kill somebody and her family for criticizing an aspect of a video-game. Before the youtube vid with comments was taken down you could see it was not just a few assholes in a see of reasonable people who may or may not agree with her but overwhelmingly hateful people or people having to argue the hate.

Beyond that even if you disagree with her opinion on that game, that is STILL no reason not to like her. She seems like an all round friendly and well articulate person who fights for the medium we all enjoy. Even if her view was completely wrong, the most logical position to have would be: "What a nice person, too bad her examples do not support her cause." and not "What an awful woman for demanding change to the things I like."

The comments don't support the notion of this being just/mostly about her opinions on games, if it were there would be hateful trolls calling her dumb, stupid, evil or ignorant, a fraud or whatever. However, being a tramp, a slut or 'sleeping around with men to get what you want' seems to be the go-to criticisms, which displays a fundamental problem with views on woman and sexuality besides simply lacking good judgement of being polite to people you disagree with..

 

[Atomski]

That was a damn good speech.

 

[patio_peter]

It's more then just a few assholes, and I think you're beyond an asshole when you think it is OK to threaten to rape or kill somebody and her family for criticizing an aspect of a video-game. Before the youtube vid with comments was taken down you could see it was not just a few assholes in a see of reasonable people who may or may not agree with her but overwhelmingly hateful people or people having to argue the hate.

Beyond that even if you disagree with her opinion on that game, that is STILL no reason not to like her. She seems like an all round friendly and well articulate person who fights for the medium we all enjoy. Even if her view was completely wrong, the most logical position to have would be: "What a nice person, too bad her examples do not support her cause." and not "What an awful woman for demanding change to the things I like."

The comments don't support the notion of this being just/mostly about her opinions on games, if it were there would be hateful trolls calling her dumb, stupid, evil or ignorant, a fraud or whatever. However, being a tramp, a slut or 'sleeping around with men to get what you want' seems to be the go-to criticisms, which displays a fundamental problem with views on woman and sexuality besides simply lacking good judgement of being polite to people you disagree with..

There a lot of things to dislike about her. We can discuss her stances and opinions without being over sensitive pussies or raging lunatics.

 

[A Link to the Past]

There a lot of things to dislike about her. We can discuss her stances and opinions without being over sensitive pussies or raging lunatics.

This post is proof that you - not general you, you, patio_peter - cannot discuss this matter as a valid contributor or even an adult.

There is very little about -her- that is dislikable, and it's weird and disturbing how so many people have escalated from hating her views to hating her so gosh darn quickly.

 

[Opto]

There a lot of things to dislike about her. We can discuss her stances and opinions without being over sensitive pussies or raging lunatics.

 

[patio_peter]

This post is proof that you - not general you, you, patio_peter - cannot discuss this matter as a valid contributor or even an adult.

There is very little about -her- that is dislikable, and it's weird and disturbing how so many people have escalated from hating her views to hating her so gosh darn quickly.

Ok, see what you just did. I don't hate her at all, just saying she has said insensitive things and has radical views on video games. She isn't free from criticism, she's a public figure who has a big impact on the video game industry. Why can't we discuss things like adults and agree to disagree. Thanks for being open minded.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Ok, see what you just did. I don't hate her at all, just saying she has said insensitive things and has radical views on video games. She isn't free from criticism, she's a public figure who has a big impact on the video game industry. Why can't we discuss things like adults and agree to disagree. Thanks for being open minded.

"She ... has radical views on games"

Liiike...?

 

[Illucio]

You have a point. If I - a 28 year old straight male - created the same videos as Anita, I don't think anyone would harass me. It would merely spark an academic discourse.

I think many men have a problem with a woman who stands up for what she believes is right and it makes them feel threatened. Where I would be considered "assertive" in a positive sense, Anita is deemed "in your face" or "demanding" in a negative sense solely due to her sex.

Obviously, people who feel threatened by Anita and threaten her in response not only misinterpret her message, they actually have a warped view of women on a very fundamental level. They are dangerously insecure people.

By all means, engage in the discourse. It's healthy and it's how we learn. Heck, I've both learned from the discourse myself, and my perception of tropes are evolving with this movement.

But no matter where you stand, I think we can all agree that the level of vitriol Anita is facing is 100% inexcusable.

Actually if a man would take Anita's place and give out the same information that Anita has, it would still be criticized by intellectuals who would had disagreed with the information that Anita would had made to begin with. I believe it was Fem Frequency (but I could be stand corrected) that made a video that had men stating the same reasons or views that they had, and the point of the video is that by them saying so people were more easily able to agree with them. For me personally I digressed and tested this with a few of my friends (majority being female from 2 to 1 male.)

I found that the same information being given out from the male speaker video someone may have disagreed with 1 of the statements in the video. But when I played an Anita video sharing the same points they continued to disagree and only 1 person changed their mind (the male) because the statement was more clarified by Anita.

This wasn't a study of any kind, but rather just a steady conversation with friends that I decided to show the videos out of a spur of interest.

The misogyny towards Anita is completely misplaced, although I myself tend to disagree with her choice of presentations and opinions on occasion that doesn't give me or any person a right to wrongfully threaten her. But I do believe this insecurity of these men is more so a response to fear not because of "Oh these big bad feminists want to destroy gaming and ruin gaming for men." But more so a general concern on what Feminists/Anita are asking for; judging that to themselves nothing is wrong with the content of said game and that to them it doesn't give them an idea that women are wrongly objectified in a game. Then they misconstrue Anita's words and think that she is trying to change content that they find is fair for the worse, and then wrongfully become negative towards her because they believe her videos are a point of influence that would ruin the future of gaming, rather in retrospect would be slightly better in some regards that is a matter of opinion. All while having a abstract of the thought of themselves being misogynistic, then after making their statement feminists then accuse them as being misogynists to their disbelief, which unknowingly strengthen the idea of misogyny to the people making those comments and ultimately creating confused misogynists.

What I've noticed is that a lot of people have become confused misogynists because they misconstrue Anita's words, rather then making people feminist. This is more so to do with the content of Anita's presentations and how she addresses it, and why I wildly dislike her videos because of how easy it is to misconstrue her word.
While her supporters glamor her because she is the most prominent if not one of the only feminists who directly talk about feminism in gaming, I contrary to the idea that any sort of presentation is a good presentation

I'm happy that she has been able to stand strong to the misogyny and has let it strengthen her career in terms of how much more time and thought she puts into each sentence she writes. And I have found since GameGate her words have been more clear and more careful which is something she really needed in hopes of self improvement which she wasn't getting before while she was being glamored for being the only one instead for the actual content she was trying to deliver.

What I really liked to see her do now is to hurry and make videos on a man's unfair perspective in gaming, and to see her become more clear and fluent when presenting her information in the future.

 

[oni-link]

Ok, see what you just did. I don't hate her at all, just saying she has said insensitive things and has radical views on video games. She isn't free from criticism, she's a public figure who has a big impact on the video game industry. Why can't we discuss things like adults and agree to disagree. Thanks for being open minded.

You can disagree with her but come on, radical views?

She says you can enjoy media and still be critical of it at the start of all her videos

Then she points out some tropes

How is that radical?

 

[Pantsuit Apologist]

Just need to verify real quick. Is this post intended to suggest that the existence of a donation page means that she is trying to profit off of being a victim?

lol...sorry, in hindsight I can see how it could come across that way!

I just meant that I believe she's doing good work and that this is just one of the various ways that I (and others) can support her cause.

 

[A Link to the Past]

lol...sorry, in hindsight I can see how it could come across that way!

I just meant that I believe she's doing good work and that this is just one of the various ways that I (and others) can support her cause.

Okay good

You can never be too certain

 

[MrBadger]

I've never played that game but I'm assuming this is the fabled wife arm

 

[Opto]

You can disagree with her but come on, radical views?

She says you can enjoy media and still be critical of it at the start of all her videos

Then she points out some tropes

How is that radical?

She's saying it with hoop earrings! it's the circle of radicalism

 

[A Link to the Past]

I've never played that game but I'm assuming this is the fabled wife arm

Oh wow, I was looking at it for the longest time and I never even registered that it was the wifearm, I thought it was some weird GLaDOS-looking thing

 

[Opto]

and holy shit if you think Anita's feminism in her videos or public portrayal is radical.

I've never played that game but I'm assuming this is the fabled wife arm

yes

 

[joe2187]

"She ... has radical views on games"

Liiike...?

I've been trying to find this out for myself as well.

The only conclusion I can come to is that the people that accuse of her being "Extreme" and "Radical" in her opinions and videos...has never actually seen or heard them at all.