436 réponses à ce sujet

[Inquisitor Recon]

Not that you would know. You like hoovies don't you.

I have no idea what you mean.

[Han Shot First]

Free speech goes both ways.

 

While Anita Sarkeesian is entitled to her opinions, so are her critics. Many of the people rushing to her defense however seem to want it one way, where only she is allowed to voice her opinion and her critics are all silenced with the misogynist label.

 

I think she raises some valid points and a lot of her criticism has merit. Unfortunately she also has a tendency to occasionally cherry-pick her facts, exaggerate, or go full Don Quixote and tilt against imaginary enemies or problems. Just because someone is championing a good cause doesn't mean they shouldn't also be called on their bullsh-t.

 

That being said, intelligent criticism does not include doxxing, death threats, or juvenile insults. 

[Inquisitor Recon]

Your relationship with Luna proves otherwise.

What relationship?

[Han Shot First]

The last part of Gaider's blog post made me chuckle.

 

That is the purpose of critique. To make you think. That’s it.

 

Try it.

 

Isn't that what some of Sarkeesian's critics are also doing? Or are they not entitled to same freedom to voice their opinions?

[SlottsMachine]

Yeah, the lack of self awareness in some people is pretty funny sometimes. 

[mybudgee]

[Inquisitor Recon]

Master and slave?

What does that have to do with hooves though?

[Inquisitor Recon]

Double post.

[Vroom Vroom]

What does that have to do with hooves though?

Branding  

 

[Inquisitor Recon]

Damn internet

[General TSAR]

Meh.

 

If he wants to defend a professional victim and charlatan, that's his issue. 

[Jorji Costava]

I'll just pop in here quickly before this thread reaches the end of its shelf life.

 

Free speech goes both ways.

 

While Anita Sarkeesian is entitled to her opinions, so are her critics. Many of the people rushing to her defense however seem to want it one way, where only she is allowed to voice her opinion and her critics are all silenced with the misogynist label.

 

Just finished going through Gaider's blog post, and I didn't see him say or suggest anywhere that criticism of Sarkeesian must be silenced, or that all people who critique Sarkeesian's videos must be misogynists. In fact, he didn't even say that Sarkeesian's views are mostly correct. What he's saying is simply that the negative response to Sarkeesian is vastly overblown in proportion to the extent of the problems in her videos, and that this highly suggestive about the current state of the gaming industry and gaming culture as regards gender issues (which is, again, not the same as saying that all gamers or critics of Sarkeesian are sexists).

 

It's understandable that there's a natural defensiveness among many in the gaming community about their preferred medium. When you've been told everything from "Games cause people to become murderers!" to "Games are for overgrown manchildren!" to "Games are not and never will be ART!", you're going to be defensive in response to subsequent criticisms of the state of gaming. I get that. But speaking not strictly about Sarkeesian but about a lot of the writers who look at gender and racial issues in games, something very different is going on here.

 

You're not going to complain about representation of women in games if you think games aren't worthwhile to begin with; that would be like complaining about women being insufficiently represented among child abusers or something. So if you're concerned about gender issues in games, it must be because you think there's something worth saving in the medium. I'd go further and say that a lot of the writers who look at games from the perspective of race and gender are exactly the people most concerned to see games develop and mature as a medium, which is why it frustrates me when people automatically assume that those who care about these issues must be against all gaming or some such.

[slimgrin]

Mental gymnastics on display in his post. But that's the case with anyone who thinks Anita is relevant.

 

 

...WTF happened to that text?

[General TSAR]

Did anyone else see her recent tweets concerning a recent school shooting? Yeah screw that nutbird. 

[slimgrin]

Did anyone else see her recent tweets concerning a recent school shooting? Yeah screw that nutbird.

 

I tried. McAfee lit up like a Christmas tree, said it was infected with bias and stupidity.

 

Edit- I just read her Tweet. That is man-hating taken to a new level, holy frak. You backing this ****, Gaider?

[Han Shot First]

I'll just pop in here quickly before this thread reaches the end of its shelf life.

 

 

Just finished going through Gaider's blog post, and I didn't see him say or suggest anywhere that criticism of Sarkeesian must be silenced, or that all people who critique Sarkeesian's videos must be misogynists. 

 

There are portions of that blog post where he seemed to be doing both of those things. David Gaider on criticism of Sarkeesian:

 

 

 

Okay. Let’s pretend for a moment that, for those of you who feel this way, you’re absolutely right. My question is this:

 

Why the f-ck do you even care?

 

Is there such a profound shortage of shitty opinions on YouTube or elsewhere on the Internet that the appearance of this one constitutes a crime in the making? Have you asked yourself why it’s this particular opinion that drives you up the goddamned wall? What do you tell yourself, if and when you stop for that moment of introspection?

 

In the above he seemed to suggest that criticism of Sarkeesian is silly, because even her critics are right, she's not the only person on youtube with a 'bad' opinion. Contrast that with other sections of his blog post where he defends Sarkeesian's right to voice her criticism. It seems a bit hypocritical.

 

Gaider on the motivation behind the reaction to Sarkeesian's videos:

 

 

 

I was recently talking to a colleague who suggested a notion that’s stuck with me. It’s the idea that many of these people don’t think of feminism as a thing. Or, if it is a thing, it certainly has no bearing on them or on the game industry. It’s not real. A made-up problem.

 

He deployed the sexist card. 

 

Now maybe he was just referring to the most obnoxious of her critics, but if so, his post wasn't clear enough on that. It does come across, whether intentional or not, that he was painting with a broader brush.

[Neoleviathan]

The last part of Gaider's blog post made me chuckle.
 

 
Isn't that what some of Sarkeesian's critics are also doing? Or are they not entitled to same freedom to voice their opinions?

He was responding to that one guy, who sounded like was being a bit of a jerk earlier. Regardless of where you're coming from I think what he said was understandable. The GG thing & any talk about FF seems to bring out the worst in almost everyone & it can be pretty frustrating after a while. Too be honest I hate how distracted any convo gets when it comes to the critic... we are on a forum based around some great story tellers, creators, themes, & characters, that to me are just way more interesting than her. But the drop of her name, & the convo is lost. I have my own feelings about her, but I no longer see a point in talking about her. Kinda wish more people felt the same. Ha

[Fishy]

In this video hea's basicly doing the exact same thing Anita does. Cherry pick random clips from different movie and game and distort the reality of itfor his own agenda. Anita does exactly the same and take everything out of context.

 

[Fast Jimmy]

What does that have to do with hooves though?