FSTDT Forums
Community => Society and History => Topic started by: Ultimate Paragon on November 16, 2014, 11:11:57 am
-
Because I think this is necessary.
I just want to set some ground rules: this is specifically about Anita. You can compare and contrast her with others, but this is about her, her associates, and her "creations".
-
pls no lets not
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
(http://i.imgur.com/VHqF7i2.gif)
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
(http://i.imgur.com/VHqF7i2.gif)
This is not about GamerGate.
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
(http://i.imgur.com/VHqF7i2.gif)
This is not about GamerGate.
So what non-GG things have she and her associates done to invoke your ire?
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
(http://i.imgur.com/VHqF7i2.gif)
This is not about GamerGate.
So what non-GG things have she and her associates done to invoke your ire?
How about this?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QvK5MrIS--8/VEuxmyTUhJI/AAAAAAAAAys/RChXbVRL2Sk/s1600/anitacover.png)
-
How about this?
Meh.
If anything it looks like you should be focusing most of your attention on Mr. Dr. Johnson (he has a pH.D. in sociology) since his work seems to be the inspiration and created the paradigm Anita works within.
-
How about this?
Meh.
If anything it looks like you should be focusing most of your attention on Mr. Dr. Johnson (he has a pH.D. in sociology) since his work seems to be the inspiration and created the paradigm Anita works within.
Who's Dr. Johnson?
-
It should be pretty obvious if you actually took the time to look at the image you posted.
-
But that would take away from the outrage.
Ironbite-and we can't have that!
-
It should be pretty obvious if you actually took the time to look at the image you posted.
I don't know much about him. If he's a sexist scumbag, then I'll go after him too.
-
It should be pretty obvious if you actually took the time to look at the image you posted.
I don't know much about him. If he's a sexist scumbag, then I'll go after him too.
Then why is that picture even there?
-
It should be pretty obvious if you actually took the time to look at the image you posted.
I don't know much about him. If he's a sexist scumbag, then I'll go after him too.
Then why is that picture even there?
Because Anita used a tragic shooting to plug a book that quoted her.
-
Because I think this is necessary.
While I have little respect for Anita Sarkeesian as a public personality, I do not recognize her as someone worthy of either mockery or admiration, much less hatred. Therefore, I see no reason to have a topic specifically for her as an individual.
*snip*
Okay. How are we supposed to react to this?
Get outraged over her claim that school shootings are ALWAYS commited by men? Sure, she did state in another tweet that "only" 98% of school shooters are male, something you know very well since it was present in the image you coincidentally edited out (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3pyhjtj-6iY/VEuFxrTBFOI/AAAAAAAAAyQ/eFMTQiC3MaI/s1600/femfreqsexism1.PNG)... but I guess a sweeping generalisation in a format limited to 140 characters is still an unforgivable crime.
Perhaps that book she's promoting is one we are supposed to know and hate? Apparently not, since you claim not to know the name of its author Dr. Allan Johnson..
What about her thesis that "ideas of toxic masculinity" are to blame for school shootings? I guess you could construe that as misandry...
Or maybe it's the very use of the word "patriarchy" that should have us up in arms.
Because Anita used a tragic shooting to plug a book that quoted her.
... oh.
I mean, self-promotion in a perfectly relevant context is already such a HUGE breach of ethics. But promoting a book because she appears in the cover of the latest edition, therefore increasing her visibility to people that are already following her? The fiend! The witch! She should be burnt at the stake for this!
-
It should be pretty obvious if you actually took the time to look at the image you posted.
I don't know much about him. If he's a sexist scumbag, then I'll go after him too.
Then why is that picture even there?
Because Anita used a tragic shooting to plug a book that quoted her.
Wow, that's sooo much worse than what the NRA does in those situations.
Then again, maybe she was mentioning the book because it talks about masculinity and violence and thought it addressed in detail what she was bringing up in her tweets. I somehow doubt she brought the book up because she stands to get gobs of royalties for her one paragraph blurb if it sells well.
-
Because I think this is necessary.
While I have little respect for Anita Sarkeesian as a public personality, I do not recognize her as someone worthy of either mockery or admiration, much less hatred. Therefore, I see no reason to have a topic specifically for her as an individual.
*snip*
Okay. How are we supposed to react to this?
Get outraged over her claim that school shootings are ALWAYS commited by men? Sure, she did state in another tweet that "only" 98% of school shooters are male, something you know very well since it was present in the image you coincidentally edited out (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3pyhjtj-6iY/VEuFxrTBFOI/AAAAAAAAAyQ/eFMTQiC3MaI/s1600/femfreqsexism1.PNG)... but I guess a sweeping generalisation in a format limited to 140 characters is still an unforgivable crime.
Perhaps that book she's promoting is one we are supposed to know and hate? Apparently not, since you claim not to know the name of its author Dr. Allan Johnson..
What about her thesis that "ideas of toxic masculinity" are to blame for school shootings? I guess you could construe that as misandry...
Or maybe it's the very use of the word "patriarchy" that should have us up in arms.
Because Anita used a tragic shooting to plug a book that quoted her.
... oh.
I mean, self-promotion in a perfectly relevant context is already such a HUGE breach of ethics. But promoting a book because she appears in the cover of the latest edition, therefore increasing her visibility to people that are already following her? The fiend! The witch! She should be burnt at the stake for this!
The "toxic masculinity" thing is another major reason to be upset. I mean, imagine somebody blaming pedophilia on "toxic homosexuality". Fact is, most men don't commit mass shootings.
-
It's toxic gun culture, not toxic masculinity (though the two can overlap in theory).
Why start a thread about this, though? This is clearly going to devolve into another GamerGate thread, so why not just keep it all there?
-
So it took you this long to make a topic about the third pillar of Gamergate eh?
Ironbite-why does this movement hold such appeal for you?
-
The "toxic masculinity" thing is another major reason to be upset. I mean, imagine somebody blaming pedophilia on "toxic homosexuality". Fact is, most men don't commit mass shootings.
In gender studies the processes that reproduce both masculinities(sic) and femininities(sic) are criticized. I read Sarkeesian's tweet as referring to the toxicity of admiring the capability and readiness for violence in most masculinities. Yes, she could have formed her tweet better if this is the case but she only has 140 characters. This is related to something that I've started paying attention to thanks to a FB friend who often links stuff from the MRA sites. When a feminist doesn't remember to carefully define or explain the terms they use for people who are not familiar with them people seem to interpret them as most offensive way they can based on the premise that the person is a raging misandrist. (As a sidenote: most victims of violence are also men so men also stand to benefit from the feminists criticizing this aspect of reproduction of masculinities.)
I don't care much about Sarkeesian because of her dishonesty but in this case she didn't say anything worth outrage.
-
The "toxic masculinity" thing is another major reason to be upset. I mean, imagine somebody blaming pedophilia on "toxic homosexuality". Fact is, most men don't commit mass shootings.
You're just catching at straws at this point. But hey, look, I can do this too! You said that blaming school shootings on men is comparable to blaming pedophilia on homosexuals. But the fact is that an overwhelming majority of school shooters ARE male, while most child molesters are not homosexual. Therefore, you are a homophobe for making this comparison. See how fucking stupid it was?
I feel like I'm stating the obvious but... when Saarkesian addresses "toxic ideas of masculinity", she is not blaming maleness in itself, but cultural constructs around it that she qualifies as "toxic". Your comparison implies that she holds senseless, largely unprovoked killing sprees as something inherent to the nature of men, when in fact she's stating the exact opposite.
Heck, the entire point of her "Tropes vs. Women" series is to point out what she sees as the expression of "toxic ideas of femininity" in video games.
It's toxic gun culture, not toxic masculinity (though the two can overlap in theory).
School massacres are not limited to shootings.
-
Murdoch Spawn, you do make my hate boner so obvious right now.
Also, didn't Lizard already make this damn thread already? I motion for merge.
-
Murdoch Spawn, you do make my hate boner so obvious right now.
Because I took UP's obvious bait, or for some other obscure reason?
If this is because of my "positive" comments about Sarkeesian... honestly, I can't believe I'm defending this artwork-stealing, footage-stealing, can't-be-bothered-to-play-the-games-I-criticize hack. Or rather, I wish I could say that, but the batshit insanity of most of her "critics" is just impossible to ignore.
-
No, it's because you didn't use the cane on UP by page 2. We could have prevented this all with a good old fashioned vaudeville hook.
-
Murdoch Spawn, you do make my hate boner so obvious right now.
Because I took UP's obvious bait, or for some other obscure reason?
If this is because of my "positive" comments about Sarkeesian... honestly, I can't believe I'm defending this artwork-stealing, footage-stealing, can't-be-bothered-to-play-the-games-I-criticize hack. Or rather, I wish I could say that, but the batshit insanity of most of her "critics" is just impossible to ignore.
"Most" of her critics? Do you have any evidence to back up that claim?
Murdoch Spawn, you do make my hate boner so obvious right now.
Also, didn't Lizard already make this damn thread already? I motion for merge.
No, he made a thread about female representation in video games. This is a different subject matter.
-
...artwork-stealing, footage-stealing, can't-be-bothered-to-play-the-games-I-criticize hack...
Now those sound like some good reasons to dislike someone.
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
This is not about GamerGate.
So what non-GG things have she and her associates done to invoke your ire?
How about this?
*tsunami of paint*
Bloody hell, you asked him that?
-
The "toxic masculinity" thing is another major reason to be upset. I mean, imagine somebody blaming pedophilia on "toxic homosexuality". Fact is, most men don't commit mass shootings.
That would probably be because homosexuality is attraction to the same sex and pedophilia is attraction to children, as evidenced by the fact that the victims of pederasts can be of any gender and heterosexual pederasts clearly exist so their isn't a link between homosexuality and pedophilia except insofar as both involve sex.
Masculinity is associated with aggression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculinity), at least in it's current cultural context and a mass shooting is an undeniably aggressive act. So one could indeed draw a link between the act of a mass shooting and masculine cultural expectations. Hence the link is stronger than the supposed link between pedeophilia and homosexuality.
I suspect it's a good deal more complicated than that, the social and psychological precursors to a violent act like a mass shooting probably involve a stew of factors but it's notable that a lot of mass shooters were lonely frustrated men and aggression is one possible reaction to frustration so I wouldn't rule social expectations of masculinity right out as a potential factor.
-
Oh, joy! Another GG thread!!11!!!1!
This is not about GamerGate.
So what non-GG things have she and her associates done to invoke your ire?
How about this?
*tsunami of paint*
Bloody hell, you asked him that?
All I did was hand him the rope. What he did with it was up to him.
-
So he hung himself is what I'm getting?
Ironbite-also, why the hell is this the thing he gets so up in arms about?
-
How about this?
Meh.
If anything it looks like you should be focusing most of your attention on Mr. Dr. Johnson (he has a pH.D. in sociology) since his work seems to be the inspiration and created the paradigm Anita works within.
Who's Dr. Johnson?
That is a bit of a credibility annhilating reply. I would make a quiet retreat UP.
-
How about this?
Meh.
If anything it looks like you should be focusing most of your attention on Mr. Dr. Johnson (he has a pH.D. in sociology) since his work seems to be the inspiration and created the paradigm Anita works within.
Who's Dr. Johnson?
That is a bit of a credibility annhilating reply. I would make a quiet retreat UP.
I got confused and thought Mojo was talking about somebody else.
-
Anita's a difference feminist, and most of her bullshit could be said to have a source at Gilligan.
Who the hell is Johnson?
-
So it took you this long to make a topic about the third pillar of Gamergate eh?
Ironbite-why does this movement hold such appeal for you?
Quinnspiracy
GamerGate
The Fat Neckbeard Gamer Stereotype-FA Blog Article Idea
Video game feminism woman
Where did mrdoh go?
This is My Disappoint Face
How many pillars does the Pantheon have again?
-
Serene brother, the world may never know.
-
Who the hell is Johnson?
A name explicitly mentioned twice by Anita in the image UP provided in addition to being quite visible in the photo of her blurb about how important and influential his book is to her. The two seconds it takes to Google his name or book title reveals he has a pH.D. in sociology.
-
So it took you this long to make a topic about the third pillar of Gamergate eh?
Ironbite-why does this movement hold such appeal for you?
Quinnspiracy
GamerGate
The Fat Neckbeard Gamer Stereotype-FA Blog Article Idea
Video game feminism woman
Where did mrdoh go?
This is My Disappoint Face
How many pillars does the Pantheon have again?
The Fat Neckbeard topic was started by me not Ultimate Paragon.
-
Way I see it, there's three pillars of Gamergate.
Ethics in Gaming Journalism
Zoey Quinn
Anita Sarkeesian.
Two of those pillars exist to hold up the whole thing while the third just dangles there all atrophied and unused.
Ironbite-guess which one it is.
-
So it took you this long to make a topic about the third pillar of Gamergate eh?
Ironbite-why does this movement hold such appeal for you?
Quinnspiracy
GamerGate
The Fat Neckbeard Gamer Stereotype-FA Blog Article Idea
Video game feminism woman
Where did mrdoh go?
This is My Disappoint Face
How many pillars does the Pantheon have again?
The Fat Neckbeard topic was started by me not Ultimate Paragon.
Fair enough, only tangentially related to Gamergate in that people stupidly toss that stereotype at its members.
-
Way I see it, there's three pillars of Gamergate.
Ethics in Gaming Journalism
Zoey Quinn
Anita Sarkeesian.
Two of those pillars exist to hold up the whole thing while the third just dangles there all atrophied and unused.
Ironbite-guess which one it is.
Nope Shirtstorm happened and guess who got in on the act?
And nary a videogame article in sight!
-
You know what my favorite part of the idiocy behind Sarkeesian and GamerGate: No one is telling anyone to like Sarkeesian. I don't. I can't stand her, in fact. I don't like her presentation and I feel like the results of her research are biased and rely on a number of half-truths. While I agree with the discussion she is allegedly trying to inspire, I think she's doing a terrible job of it.
I actually find the reactions to her videos more interesting than the videos themselves. As said by many before me, the comments on any statement about feminism prove the need for feminism more than the statement itself.