Anita has just been driven out of her home because a stalker threatened to rape her to death and kill her family. I can't imagine how she "deserves" that for having said things about sexism in video games... that would be an overreaction for basically anything she's done short of murder someone herself.

(And she gets constant messages about how she's an ugly bitch who deserves to be raped, plus MUCH worse stuff. Again, that's not an adult's response to someone who makes an argument they don't like. Nor is it "derision" or "criticism"; after all, would it be legitimate criticism from her if she had called a male developer an ->-bleeped-<- who deserved to be tortured to death? If not, it's not fair to say that's a "criticism" of her either.)

Quote from: Jenna Marie on August 30, 2014, 10:18:07 AM
Anita has just been driven out of her home because a stalker threatened to rape her to death and kill her family. I can't imagine how she "deserves" that for having said things about sexism in video games... that would be an overreaction for basically anything she's done short of murder someone herself.

(And she gets constant messages about how she's an ugly bitch who deserves to be raped, plus MUCH worse stuff. Again, that's not an adult's response to someone who makes an argument they don't like. Nor is it "derision" or "criticism"; after all, would it be legitimate criticism from her if she had called a male developer an ->-bleeped-<- who deserved to be tortured to death? If not, it's not fair to say that's a "criticism" of her either.)

Yeah but that picture looked really fishy.  I mean I don't doubt that she gets real death and rape threats, but if it's as bad as she says it is why not post things that don't look extremely suspicious? 

Quote from: VeryGnawty on August 30, 2014, 05:23:21 AM
Actually, she does deserve the hatred that she gets.  She does make some good points, sometimes, though.

Thunderf00t has made some good video responses explaining why she deserves the hatred that she gets.  Her gross dishonesty is unforgivable.  For example, Anita claims in one of her videos that one of the Hitman games promotes violence against women because you can kill strippers.  She shows footage of Agent 47 dragging a dead stripper around.  The problem with this is that the game doesn't promote violence against women.  Most of the characters in the game you are likely to kill are men, and in fact the game DISCOURAGES you from killing the strippers because you are rewarded for not attracting attention and you lose points for killing civilians.  Anita never mentions any of these other facts even once in her video.  However, she does spend a lot of time talking about how you can kill the women and about how gross it is that you can kill the women.

Basically, it's "sexist" just because it's POSSIBLE to kill a woman in a game.  I guess she wants all video games to be made to where the female characters have a magical shield which makes them invulnerable to any and all attacks.  I guess that's the reason that she's a "pop culture critic" rather than a game developer coming up with new and groundbreaking games based on radical feminism where female characters could never be the victim of any kind of violence.  Those who can't act, talk.

Anita is the worst combination of confirmation bias, intentional misrepresentation, and willful ignorance.  So, yes, she does deserve the hate that she gets.  Her only redeeming quality is that she does make some valid arguments sometimes, and every now and again she'll make a really good point.  But, that doesn't excuse the obvious confirmation bias and the blatant dishonesty.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day.  She needs more than a few valid points to be excused from the derision that she rightfully deserves.  When you are a critic who is as biased as she is, you should expect to be criticized yourself.

I'm saying that people should simply criticize her, refuse to associate with her, talk about what a lying horrible excuse for a human being (and I'm seriously censoring myself here) she is instead of sending her threats.  She also stole fanart to use in a banner and refused multiple times to credit the original artist even though she raised something like 158000 dollars with the campaign that used said banner.  She is disgusting, not because of what she discusses but because she is an entitled con artist.  If I am to be perfectly honest about how I feel about her, I despise her with every fiber of my being.  I would still never send her death or rape threats.
EDIT: And yes, she does want it to be impossible to kill any female character from what I can understand, although it's kind of difficult to have a good unkillable female character that isn't a damsel in distress or a character in a game where nobody can be killed.  She wants a female character who is traditionally feminine while still defying gender roles.  She wants you to give her tons of money so she can continue to whine about things she doesn't even care about.

So, we have a woman who is calling out violence against women who is herself treated violently with language and threatened with acts of violence. That she's threatened in this way shows that there is something to talk about here and to my mind makes her media worthwhile.

Where does the anger for what Anita showcases come from? I mean, lies and theft aren't exactly rare things: Illegal file sharing and politics (<- con-artists too and with the ability to impact all our lives via laws they write). Michael Moore and James O'Keefe. Sampling in rap music. The money obsession is also interesting. I mean, she just used Kickstarter for what it's for. I got taken for $2,000 thanks to a sham book doctoring operation. No one cried injustice over me, thankfully.

It does seem to be the intersection of her and video games that brings out something particularly nasty in some people. What's being protected here? What ideas are so threatening as to give rise to such vitriol? I do not question that those mad at her see lies and theft but the intensity of the reaction tells me there is more motivating them that is not being said. Or, they don't actually care and she's just a favorite troll target.

Well for starters as an artist I am extremely offended by what she did, stealing and profiting off of someone else's artwork.  That is not fair use.
Second, this woman who has said on record that she isn't into games because she doesn't want to go around shooting people and ripping off their heads has actual influence in the gaming industry.  Someone who says something so ignorant about video games (why yes, not all video games are first person shooters!  Holy crap, and not all metal is about worshiping Satan?) has influence on gaming.  And of course, when people make legitimate criticisms of her, others attempt to silence them by screaming about how they're just a bunch of neckbeard fedora-wearing misogynists.

Quote from: OreSama on August 31, 2014, 06:12:13 AM
Well for starters as an artist I am extremely offended by what she did, stealing and profiting off of someone else's artwork.  That is not fair use.

That work was not yours then. If it was wouldn't you sue? Have the artists in question sued her and won? If they won, the matter is solved. If this is just a bunch of accusations, it's just a bunch of accusations and so that does not explain the intensity of your response. Also, if there is merit behind the assertion of theft and the artwork doesn't have legal protection well, it doesn't have legal protection and Anita then did nothing wrong.

Quote from: OreSama on August 31, 2014, 06:12:13 AM
Second, this woman who has said on record that she isn't into games because she doesn't want to go around shooting people and ripping off their heads has actual influence in the gaming industry.  Someone who says something so ignorant about video games (why yes, not all video games are first person shooters!  Holy crap, and not all metal is about worshiping Satan?) has influence on gaming.  And of course, when people make legitimate criticisms of her, others attempt to silence them by screaming about how they're just a bunch of neckbeard fedora-wearing misogynists.

You clearly are afraid of her influence in video game development and what that influence might cause to happen. Why? What is so dear to you with these depictions of women that you take such a righteous stand against Anita? If she wasn't going after something real, then nothing could be fixed and there would be nothing to be afraid of. That the nerve is being touched with you and others, that's interesting.

And in the interest of honesty, you yourself are not criticizing Anita. You are attacking:

Quote from: OreSama on August 30, 2014, 11:43:49 AM
She is disgusting, not because of what she discusses but because she is an entitled con artist.

By calling her disgusting or calling her a con artist, you abandoned civil discourse and went on the attack. Given you are attacking a woman with such passion, given you are attacking a woman who is trying to do something about violence against women, that can paint a certain picture for others. Not that I think what you claim to be your reasons aren't to your knowledge your actual reasons. But provided you are not just a troll, then there is still something deeper inside you haven't admitted to or you may well not know about that is motivating your intensity because:

Quote from: OreSama on August 30, 2014, 11:43:49 AM
If I am to be perfectly honest about how I feel about her, I despise her with every fiber of my being.

That level of hate doesn't jive with the preceived wronging. I'm also not particularly interested in your motivation myself, but I think you would benefit from knowing more about yourself because I've had my own battles with out of bounds anger. I've had my tirades. The opportunity for self analysis those became for me, well, a lot of good came out of it. So, you can carry on as you have been or seize the opportunity of this moment. The choice is there and the choice is yours.

Quote from: Jenna Marie on August 30, 2014, 10:18:07 AM
Anita has just been driven out of her home because a stalker threatened to rape her to death and kill her family.

Boohoo.  She received death threats from anonymous trolls online.  Big deal.  Someone once threatened to come to my home with his gang and beat me until I was dead.  That was years ago.  I'm still alive.  I'm still in my home.  In fact, nobody has showed up at my door except for magazine salesmen and members of the Church Of Latterday Saints.

If she has a CREDIBLE reason to believe that someone is going to kill her, the correct response is to go to the FBI.  After doing that, if she doesn't believe that the FBI can fully handle the situation, that is when you decide whether or not you need to move to a more secure location.  Moving out of your house because some anonymous troll on the internet threatened you seems like a publicity stunt, and not a realistic reaction.

QuoteAnd she gets constant messages about how she's an ugly bitch who deserves to be raped, plus MUCH worse stuff. Again, that's not an adult's response to someone who makes an argument they don't like.

Tons of people get called mean things online.  The correct response is to IGNORE them, because in 99+% of cases they are just trolls looking for attention.  Like I said, if she gets a credible threat, then the correct response is to go to the FBI.  Plenty of people have received death threats.  I've received death threats.  The more well-known you are, and the more public you are, the more likely you are to be targeted by trolls.

Quote from: VeryGnawty on September 01, 2014, 06:27:54 AM
If she has a CREDIBLE reason to believe that someone is going to kill her, the correct response is to go to the FBI.

According to Twitter "Authorities" have been notified. Still situations like this are complex. Going more broadly, I know a woman who was raped and who has distrust of both her perpetrator and the authorities. It seems to be easy to end up trusting no one and believing no one has your back.

Quote from: VeryGnawty on September 01, 2014, 06:27:54 AM
Tons of people get called mean things online.  The correct response is to IGNORE them, because in 99+% of cases they are just trolls looking for attention.

That may be the correct response for you and your life. How she feels she should react is how she feels she should react. Given that it's her life at risk, to me she seems to be the best suited to figure out how to protect it.

I fully support feminism, but Anita Sarkeesian doesn't receive/deserve my support, and here's why:

Quote from: VeryGnawty on January 23, 2014, 02:01:38 AM
Here are the facts:

1)  Many people have a problem with Anita not because the points she makes aren't valid, but because her points are buried by her gross dishonesty.

2)  It appears that Anita hasn't played many of the games that she critiques, even though all the money she raised for her "research" should allow her to do so fairly easily.

3)  Anita deliberately delivers one-sided arguments that present evidence for her conclusions while she omits male characters, sexism against men and male characters, and similar content that would reveal a fuller context to the problems of sexism in general (including sexism against women)

4)  Anita openly admits that she doesn't care about the context of the characters in the games that she critiques, and that she is only interested in how people might view such characters in a "larger cultural context"

5)  Nobody, Anita included, is going to achieve equality of genders by focusing only on one gender.  This goes for the MRA crowd, too....

I agree wholeheartedly with this.  It's true that she gets a lot of hate from misogynistic dip->-bleeped-<-s (and there's nothing quite as embarrassing as seeing members of my birth sex behaving in a petty and, frankly, unmanly manner), but she also gets a of harsh criticism from reasonable folk and feminists for the reasons you highlighted.

Didn't she criticise The Last Of Us?  Because we know that 14YOs can remain stoic in the face of terrifying situations where they are forced to brutally murder for their survival.  Riiiiiiight.  There are other examples but I don't have the time/motivation to fish them out, especially if that means going out of my way to get agitated.

She has no right to call herself a feminist.  She's a trolling ->-bleeped-<-.  She does raise some good points and the treatment from some of these guys is disgusting beyond measure, but still.

EDIT: and the MRA crowd is just downright horrible.  It's sad because there are legitimate groups and charities like The Good Men Foundation who actually DO things for men whose rights are compromised.  And where this is nowhere near as widespread as it is for women, their rights are still important, as are the rights of everyone.  Looking at their site, they seem to have overlapping interests with feminists.  It's sad that their good actions are overshadowed by dip->-bleeped-<-s.

Quote from: OreSama on August 31, 2014, 06:12:13 AM
And of course, when people make legitimate criticisms of her, others attempt to silence them by screaming about how they're just a bunch of neckbeard fedora-wearing misogynists.

Newsflash: some of my female feminist friends are neckbeard fedora-wearing misogynists!

Quote from: Misato on September 01, 2014, 08:02:47 AM
According to Twitter "Authorities" have been notified. Still situations like this are complex. Going more broadly, I know a woman who was raped and who has distrust of both her perpetrator and the authorities. It seems to be easy to end up trusting no one and believing no one has your back.

That may be the correct response for you and your life. How she feels she should react is how she feels she should react. Given that it's her life at risk, to me she seems to be the best suited to figure out how to protect it.

I honestly don't believe she actually alerted the authorities.  If she had, one of the things they tell you to do is, "Do not respond to the person in question."

Anita is just the feminist version of Jack Thompson.

This article is well worth the read if you have the time:

http://nastythingssaidabout.wordpress.com/2014/08/26/the-terrible-misogyny-in-the-games-industry/

The point on Jack Thompson is well taken. I also get the very few gamers argument.

However...

None of the violent language is excusable, but context is everything. I used to be able to turn to my male friend and say, "Did I ever tell you how much you suck?" while whooping each other up in a Tekken sequel and it was taken as good natured raillery. I was in a meeting and one male co-worker turned to another who had just said he's not the best developer and said, "That's right so-and-so you are so NOT the best developer," again as good natured ribbing. I had to explain to a female colleague who saw the exchange that they were kidding around. If someone else said she wasn't good, even if she gave them the springboard, she would be devastated I have no doubt. Now, while it is entirely possible that a male would be devastated too, he wasn't raised in a society where he was told he wasn't good at math or science. Add to that, she would be being told "you're not the best" by someone that is perceived to be more powerful because of his gender. Some mix of things like that, changes the impact and it's because of those changes which is why we need feminism, and yes a focus on the guys side too without the advocacy for the status quo. They would be best complementing, not competing. And a focus for African Americans. Etc...

If we try to solve this problem at the people level, the details are at risk of getting missed. If we let those who feel the details in their day to day lives address those details, we have a stronger start at helping people as a whole. But the focus is necessary.

I'll admit, I found the post too long and didn't finish it. But the length is interesting and reminds me of the #NotAllMen hashtag: It's a distraction from the problem at hand. Even in that link, there are lines like, "Am I saying that Anita makes no valid points, or highlights no legitimate causes for concern? Not at all, there are a few games that go too far, and there are many ways we could improve things." but those are one offs that are practically lost in the defensive cry of #NotAllGamers.

I also find it interesting that the argument seems to be pro picking on things like Donald Trump's hair instead of forming well reasoned arguments about what may be disliked about what he's doing. There's a corollary to lamenting Anita's statement that she didn't identify as a gamer, like that somehow invalidates all her points and makes her unqualified to speak on the topic of Tropes Against Women in Video Games. Trump's hair, that clip of Anita and she saying she's not a gamer, they're logical fallacies^[1] and do not support arguments against these people.

I return to if there is nothing wrong with representations of women in video games, then there is nothing to worry about because nothing can change. Can't fix a problem that isn't there after all. If there is something there, it's worth looking into and those (if any find this) whose motivation is to keep those representations of women in games, this moment might well be an opportunity to do some soul searching. As for decrying people as a**holes, in places of this world there is freedom to do that all you want and freedom of speech is a good freedom. But namecalling or trying to change the subject to something other than how women are depicted in video games which is the topic that has been raised, when either of those are done it is easy to have your intent misinterpreted by others. Those others are still in the mindset of talking about depictions of violence against women after all so the accusations of
misogyny just don't surprise me given the side still talking about depictions of violence against women could miss the change and start thinking who changed topics is revealing themselves to be pro depictions of violence against women.

I think a lot of this comes down to where using violent language (E.g. namecalling, threats) lands a speaker when used and why it might not be the best method to make your point.

[1] Logic as solid as this

It is appalling to me that people in this community, a community which is prone to verbal and physical abuse, could be so dismissive of the vitriol she is subjected to.  No matter how unprofessional she is, she is still a frickin human being.  No human deserves constant online abuse with rape and death threats for any reason, let alone for making poor youtube videos.

Quote from: Lucid on September 02, 2014, 09:27:43 PM
Anita is just the feminist version of Jack Thompson.

The difference is that Anita has been getting a lot of attention from people for the flak, ridicule, trolling, and threats that she receives.  When Jack Thompson got death threats, nobody really cared.  If anything, Jack Thompson is the one who should have been decrying sexism.  He said blatantly foolish things, got death threats in response, and people laughed at him.  Anita Sarkeesian said blatantly foolish things, got death threats, and everyone is concerned.  So, it's clear that the sexism is actually against MEN since there's little significant difference between the kind of stuff Sarkeesian proclaims and the stuff that Jack Thompson would always say.  When people make mock games where you get to beat up Jack Thompson, it's just good fun.  When someone made a mock game where you beat up Anita Sarkeesian, it is violent sexism against women.

It's a double-standard.  I don't do double-standard.  I hold everyone to the same standard, which is why Sarkeesian will have to come up with better arguments if she wants me to take her seriously.  There is an issue with sexism in society, but raising hundreds of thousands of dollars to make one-sided biased videos is not the way to address it.

Quote from: VeryGnawty on September 05, 2014, 05:34:16 PM

It's a double-standard.  I don't do double-standard.  I hold everyone to the same standard, which is why Sarkeesian will have to come up with better arguments if she wants me to take her seriously.  There is an issue with sexism in society, but raising hundreds of thousands of dollars to make one-sided biased videos is not the way to address it.

I'm so glad to see that there are still people like you in the world.

Woooaahh..  someone just had to go and bring up the Anita Sarkeesian thing, didn't they?  Do I really want to dive into this can of worms? *thinks about it* ... meh, what the hell huh? I've got nothing better to do right now lol

Ok firstly, I'm going to start out by saying I basically agree with everything Misato's saying above.  No sense in repeating what's already been said so I'll just leave it at that (just watch - I'm probably going to end up repeating half of it anyway because I'm derpy like that lol )

Secondly, I'd like to jump in and pick up on this:

Quote from: VeryGnawty on September 05, 2014, 05:34:16 PM
The difference is that Anita has been getting a lot of attention from people for the flak, ridicule, trolling, and threats that she receives.  When Jack Thompson got death threats, nobody really cared.  If anything, Jack Thompson is the one who should have been decrying sexism.  He said blatantly foolish things, got death threats in response, and people laughed at him.  Anita Sarkeesian said blatantly foolish things, got death threats, and everyone is concerned.  So, it's clear that the sexism is actually against MEN since there's little significant difference between the kind of stuff Sarkeesian proclaims and the stuff that Jack Thompson would always say.  When people make mock games where you get to beat up Jack Thompson, it's just good fun.  When someone made a mock game where you beat up Anita Sarkeesian, it is violent sexism against women.

It's a double-standard.  I don't do double-standard.  I hold everyone to the same standard, which is why Sarkeesian will have to come up with better arguments if she wants me to take her seriously.  There is an issue with sexism in society, but raising hundreds of thousands of dollars to make one-sided biased videos is not the way to address it.

So hang on a moment hun, you're saying because one person decided not to make a fuss when they were being abused, that everyone else should just "deal with it" when they suffer the same treatment?  By all means tell me if I'm putting words into your mouth here (because I don't want to do that, especially these kinds of words), but that's certainly how this post is reading to me.  And if that is what you're saying, then quite frankly I couldn't possibly disagree with you more!

Death and rape threats (etc) against *ANYONE* isn't cool, whatever way you cut it.  I agree with you that things should be equal across the board, but if I'm understanding your post correctly then I'd say you've gone in the exact opposite direction - women shouldn't shut up about it because "this stuff happens to men and no one kicks up a fuss", but rather it should be "let's kick up a fuss when this happens to men too".

Also, how "credible" these threats are is pretty much irrelevant.  At the end of the day, any threat to compromise your personal safety or the personal safety of those around you is just that: A THREAT

define: threat

Quote
A threat is an act of coercion wherein an act is proposed to elicit a negative response. It is a communicated intent to inflict harm or loss on another person. It can be a crime in many jurisdictions. Threat (intimidation) is widely seen in animals, particularly in a ritualized form, chiefly in order to avoid the unnecessary physical violence that can lead to physical damage or death of both conflicting parties.
Some of the more common types of threats forbidden by law are those made with an intent to obtain a pecuniary advantage or to compel a person to act against his or her will. In all states, it is an offense to threaten to (1) use a deadly weapon on another person; (2) injure another's person or property; or (3) injure another's reputation. [1]

The whole point is to "..communicate intent to inflict harm or loss on another person".  If someone threatens to murder or rape you, that's something to take seriously, even if it's on the internet.  You have no way of knowing if they have the capability to follow through with it, so until you know otherwise you can only assume that the threat is real.

As for your anecdote about being given a death threat that wasn't followed through - congrats, you've just fallen into confirmation bias yourself hun.  As a counter example - a guy and his friends threatened to beat me up once.  Moments later (when I continued to stand my ground and defy them), they did.  Cool story huh?  Not the only time it's happened either.  Want an example specifically regarding a death threat? Need I point any further than terrorists who threaten to blow ->-bleeped-<- up, and then do?  Or take a hostage, threaten to kill them if their demands aren't met, and then proceed to actually kill them when their demands aren't met?  (like, you know all these beheadings of western journalists that have been in the news the past week or so) ..You get the point.

Sometimes, threats are empty, it's true.  Sometimes, they're not, and your personal safety is really at risk.  Until we invent some technology to read people's minds and their actual intents, how do we know which ones are real and which ones are not?  And yes, many on the internet do like to say these things just to troll and get attention, but when you're getting a thousand of these threats every day, even if 99.9% of them are just trolls looking for attention, that's still one person every day who actually genuinely feels like that, which is a statistic that would terrify the crap out of any sane person.  And don't tell me Sarkeesian doesn't get that kinda volume of threat.  Just go to the comment section on pretty much any of her videos to see it's right up there, maybe even higher (and that's *just* the comments, never mind what she gets in PM, email, posts on all the internet forums etc out there..)

It's your opinion hun, and I respect that (kinda, sorta lol), but (assuming I've not completely misread what you're saying), I totally disagree with you.

Regardless: <3 *hugs and love to you* <3

P.S. wow, this post got really huge really quickly lol