When the news broke that Anita Sarkeesian would be appearing on the Colbert Report, social media burst it's banks that this would be a key moment in the GamerGate conflict.But was it? MWEB GameZone's Zaid Kriel is of the opinion that Sarkeesian's guest added nothing to either side of the debate.
Boogie2988 recently appeared on the H3 Podcast, and before long the conversation turned to social issues and politics. Unfortunately for Boogie, the internet took exception and he once again found out that no good can come of this.
I like how Twitter took a 13 second CUT of an answer which made him look bad yet everyone rolled with it.
I mean...let's not pretend those clips are just devoid of context. He's literally doubled down on his argument of gays should wait to receive equal rights under the law until the country was just more comfortable with it. And, even if in the abstract, trying to tie 'videogame feminism' of Sarkeesian to what some violent alt-righter did in Charlottesville by PLOWING into a group of peaceful protestors is straight-up loony. Who cares if the interviewers just rolled with it? Doesn't defeat how absurd he sounded in some of those highlights.
His bad analogy doesn't erase the fact Anita Sarkeesian is part of the problem, her ridiculous positions and assaults on anyone who disagrees with here feeds the Alt-Right, many of them are famous because of her.
By this logic who isn't part of the problem that has some kind of a public platform? This implicates basically any "SJW" channels as well, just b/c certain figureheads of that movement constantly produce response videos to the worst ones. "Oh if certain people just stayed silent they wouldn't inflame this destructive, opposing ideology." Having a more milquetoast composure didn't do much for her when she simply announced the Tropes v. Women In Videogames series, so I'm not so sure how much would've changed had she stayed that course.
Friendly reminder: the optics of this aren't really in your favor. Still trying to parse blame on someone who's just been unfairly connected to the traumatic death of another person? It's true you acknowledge that boogie made bad analogy; however, hand-waving that part away and then subsequently going "but..." isn't the best approach. It's kinda despicable.
"Oh if certain people just stayed silent they wouldn't inflame this destructive, opposing ideology"
see this is the problem, I didn't say anything like that, but you shove me into it as to put pressure on me. why would you do that? can we argue within the boundaries of our comments please.
"By this logic who isn't part of the problem that has some kind of a public platform?"
Anita Sarkeesian is consistently bad, Boogie is no Alt-right nut but she turned him into an antagonist because she attacked him for disagreeing with her, and her followers constantly target him since then.
respectable discourse is not much to ask and will help her cause and ignoring it hurts
no... he's saying you need to take this in steps... you don't convince people on your point of view by shoving it down their throats... Only a person who is to emotionally attach to the problem can't see that.
@NewMonday
-What are you talking about? My "Oh if..." rebuttal is taking the inverse of what you just stated previously.
You: "her ridiculous positions and assaults on anyone who disagrees with here feeds the Alt-Right."
Therefore: "...if certain people [such as Sarkeesian] just stayed silent they wouldn't inflame this destructive, opposing ideology." Even if being condescending, that is not an unfair rebuttal to present against your first response, especially when taken in the context of that whole paragraph. Still within the boundaries, just to boundaries you're perhaps uncomfortable with.
-"Boogie is no Alt-right nut but she turned him into an antagonist because she attacked him for disagreeing with her, and her followers constantly target him since then."
I don't condone how she conducted herself after that discussion. But to my recollection: it seems like they had a short spat then things cooled off and they went their separate ways. I know nothing of what harassment and/or criticism he's received from her fans since then; however, considering how he recently made this Anita/Charlottesville connection (EVEN IF just to abstractly discuss the fears of political escalation) on a popular podcast I'd expect her fans to rage. Also, how much responsibility should she have for what her fans do--IF not directly commanded by her to target him? If we're going to go down that rabbit hole, then so too must you acknowledge every other anti-SJW/alt-right/etc. channel for its nastier fans targeting her as well. It's a two-way street in which neither side is sinless.
@Cueil
...you just restated what I said in a different way, and it's still an ignorant take of how equal rights have been historically pursued. Read up on the Stonewall Riots for example. Countless parades and gatherings have happened since then, which has resulted in changes to law. Whether a large cluster of people are still uncomfortable with it or not, it's the principle that should matter. The argument for incrementalism was also something MLK faced from fellow clergyman back then ('we support equal rights for blacks but perhaps you shouldn't rile people up'). I think you'd find his response to that rather enlightening.
Games and politics definitely don’t mix. Just make good games. Stop trying to use entertainment as a front to push political agenda.
Agreed. I'm not against devs making whatever they wish though, they are free to create whatever. But if it has that peculiar scent of forced politics to it, I don't want a part of it.
I agree. Make what you like but don't be surprised that people don't purchase your product. I enjoy video games mostly for escapism. The last thing I am entertained by is some game director pushing their own moral code regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Sure they're free to make social commentary but don't be surprised when customers stay away.
Since the dawn of man, entertainment in all it's forms has been used to push a political agenda, get over it.
He’s still going too. It’s crazy to look at some of his older vids, and compare to even now.
I love how the author of the article says that Boogie shouldn't talk about politics since he runs a youtube channel about video games, whilst simultaneously commenting on Boogie's political commentary on a website about video games. Hypocrisy at its best. Also, yikes, calm down before writing a rebuttal. It was really difficult to follow what he was actually trying to say. I had to read it twice and I still don't know. Also I'll never get those minutes back in my life again.
Feminist Frequency founder Anita Sarkeesian and managing editor Carolyn Petit break down the gender dynamics in all of the games revealed at E3 2017.
Imagine not only having this much free time but actually getting idiots to *pay* you to write about crap like this.
I really hope that big nosed cunt and that butt ugly tranny fuck off from games forever
I'm not a girl gamer, and this is my story. -New article coming winter 2017.
Please be excited and don't forget to crowd fund it so I can pocket that cash right after!
"Arkane co-creative director Harvey Smith said that it was critic Anita Sarkeesian’s analysis of Dishonored, which she offered through her web series Feminist Frequency, which promoted the studio to re-evaluate how it portrayed women in the series."
This is something I will not agree with this. Anita started a gamergate in 2012 which was small, but until 2014 thing out of control fast when she completely succeeded created the conflict between both sides. I remember correctly she hate her dad because he voted who she hated the most (politics).
GamerGate wasn't created by Anita, it was started as a result for the shit Zoe Quinn had been doing which exposed the corrupt journalism and going ons within the industry. As people dug deeper they found new things out and when the heat was getting too hot the majority of game sites banded together and used Zoe Quinn as a victim to show how GamerGate was about abusing, attacking and mentally crippling women for no reason. Why? Because they didn't want any more snooping and would have rather made gamers in general look bad then accept any responsibility for what they did behind closed doors, they were afraid more things came to light if they dug any more. They thought making all gamers look like misogynistic, sexist, women hating pigs would be better then all their shady stuff coming to light and hurting their reputation, things which could cost them their jobs.
Then when things got going people like Brianna Wu and Anita latched onto it to promote their stuff. Anita to sell her kickstarter shit because she's a con artist and Wu because she probably got a lot of shit off people in her past being transgendered, possibly even being bullied as a child and decided she wanted to go on a mighty crusade to hurt all those evil Cis men.
and who bought the dishonored 2 ??? with all these shoved to our throats diverse things inside ....i say nobody )i know it went bad in sales -and they blamed other games for it) .....the game proved to be completely forgettable and generic as hell...if you cannt develop a game ...is nt the lack of homosexuals or female protagonisst that hurt the game, is that you r by default incompetent ....also shoving things inside just because Anita says to , you make things worse
Now people know why Dishonored 2 have female protagonist because of Anita Influence. I will say this again, she is the false feminist who doesn't belong to feminists community. She completely ruined their image and reputation.
Anita is shadow developing alot of games, the new Uncharted and TLOU games come to mind. Something about an angry woman beating up a room full of men without getting so much as a scratch brings them joy. I would love to see their reactions if the genders were reversed.
Actually, of course that can bring one joy! Don't pretend you don't like the idea of kicking the shit out of people in games either, am sure you do! That's why we watch movies, read books and play games, don't we?
and I bet you are all tears when playing as an angry man beating up a room full of men. "I'm sorry guys - this is hurting me more than it is you. This brings me no joy." sob, punch, sob, punch, punch....
Yeah people like Nadine were a direct result of Neil loving Anita and wanting to please her
Not really, there are exceptions, but generally they are weaker than men. I remember seeing one time they had the world's strongest woman go to a bar to do some arm wrestling. She went up against average built guys and everyone of them beat her. It's just biology, and as I said, there are exceptions to the rule.
@meka
I also remember the woman with world's biggest/heaviest boobs knocking a guy out while dancing on the dancefloor, with her boob. So that doesn't mean anything.
I'd pay to see average built guys fight female cage fighters. I'm really fascinated by the bubble some of u guys live in.
Your username fits like the glass shoe fit Cinderella, just change "annoyed" to "annoying" Also, was your last sentence sarcasm because i'm pretty sure what you describe is really 99% of movies and games.
In my opinion I would like to see some roles reversed. Eg: Chris Redfield's gladiator skin in RE5 was total fanservice to those attracted to men, I would pay to see more DLC like this, a la Dead or Alive, but with men in skimpy outfits and big bulging pecs.
just brings the issue to a bigger audience and people will ask questions and find out the truth. pleas keep it up.
I don't think it means "nothing" as the author implies. The public needed to hear her perspective on the GG movement. A lot of people still don't know or are confused about the real issues.
This will not end well...
Colbert: Name 3 games that objectify women
Anita: Uh ah uh ah uh ah.
Oh Sarkeesian you are such a conartist.
Go to Topsy and see