Internet Sleuth Cyberstalks Anita Sarkeesian, Comes up with Scandal

If you've been on the internet for any length of time, it's petrifying what people may be able to find out about you. This has been proven today by an internet sleuth who decided to turn his eye to Tropes Vs Women creator Anita Sarkeesian. Along with a variety of pictures and posts, he's also linked her to telemarketing programs and to what he calls "junk science [and] social manipulation."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
CaptainPunch1881d ago

Even if the roles were reversed like Peach rescuing Mario or Zelda recusing Link, would it really make a difference? It's up to the developers to make strong female leads, just look at the Tomb Raider reboot. Lara kicked ass in that. I don't understand this whole feminism thing in gaming. People love to find reasons to complain.

GreatGamePlay1881d ago

Plenty Developer want to make strong female leads, but Women-hating Critics hates them.

DeFFeR1881d ago

That's the dumbest thing I've ever read.

JD_Shadow1881d ago

And how many reviewers down vote games with female leads just because it's a female lead? Controls, graphics, sound, fun factor: none of that matters to the score of a game when a female is suddenly a lead?

And if a female ISN'T playable, does that automatically mean the females aren't tough and self-sufficient?

But then again, this story was not about the message Anita is sending, it's about a possible conspiracy. If this really was going on, then why did she even NEED to raise money through Kickstarter? According to the initial source, they have enough money to travel, so if they have that much money, then why the hell do they need Kickstarter for ANYTHING?

SilentNegotiator1881d ago

Yeah, look at how poorly Mirror's Edge, Tomb Raider, etc all rated.

Clearly, the media hates female leads in games.


staticdash221881d ago


Controversy incoming!

JD_Shadow1881d ago

Uh oh!

And what is this with people thinking is wrong to discredit someone? If the evidence is clearly there that someone can be discredited, then by all means, tell us your opinion. Why has Anita become that much of an invincible person anymore?

SilentNegotiator1881d ago (Edited 1881d ago )

The modern world has an unhealthy obsession with deifying civil rights leaders and their goals.

The result; Racist black civil rights leaders like Al Sharpton. Anyone pro-border control and immigration documentation is called racist. Anyone that would expose conspiracy involving Anita is attacked. Either side of the Abortion debate you take leads to you "wanting" someone to die. The ridiculous Trayvon-Zimmermann controversy. Etc.

The world needs to learn when it isn't healthy to defend someone all of the time just because they have good intentions related to making people equal; especially when the real result of their actions are people being LESS equal.

matgrowcott1881d ago

It's fine to discredit someone. It probably isn't THAT fine to search through 10 years of internet history with a goal to do so just because you disagree with their opinion on video games.

admiralvic1881d ago

Now that is where you're completely wrong.

If you want to discredit someone, then you might need to look into a lot of things / look crazy places. If she was obviously wasting the cash / didn't believe in this stuff, then people would have posted it by now. It's certainly interesting and I think most people would agree that she hasn't thus far really proven why she needed money, much less what she was going to do with over 100,000 dollars.

The only thing that is wrong is simply pulling facts out your butt or making vague illogical claims. Like if I said I don't believe she really means this stuff, because she puts herself on the camera.

This is what leads to quality journalism and making our community / the world a better place. If she was completely clean, then this person would have just been wasting their time.

matgrowcott1881d ago (Edited 1881d ago )

"If you want to discredit someone, then you might need to look into a lot of things / look crazy places."

I didn't disagree. I said it wasn't fine. It isn't. There's no moral basis in saying "I dislike that she's knocking things I enjoy, I'd best read through everything she's ever posted online and then write-up anything that paints her in a bad light."

That's exactly what people claim she's doing to video games.

If you think that's what makes quality journalism or if that's what makes the world a better place, you're very, very wrong. This is pretty much why we had the Leveson inquiry.

Scatpants1881d ago (Edited 1881d ago )

She's just doing little news stories about feminism in videogames. What difference does any of this make? Why discredit her? I understand if it's a senator or president or the pope or something, but someone that is insignificant the only reason to discredit them is to be an asshole.

admiralvic1881d ago (Edited 1881d ago )

Because she scored over $100,000 off Kickstarter to do these "little news stories".

Scatpants1881d ago

She said that was what the donations were for and no one was forced to donate to her.

Sketchy_Galore1881d ago

I am as far from a fan of this girl as its possible to get but something about this just seems a little creepy.

Klonopin1881d ago

I couldn't help notice the uncanny resemblance