Yes, I still found it pretty hilarious.

It's pretty awesome, yeah. Can't wait for the eventual shitnado in this comment section.

yes, only "insecure men" and "nerds" can possibly have a problem with the arguments presented by Sarkeesian, no one can legitimately find her reasoning to be specious, or riddled with inaccuracies, or cherry-picked points, or just plain misleading "facts", and there is no proof she has ever used other peoples' Youtube footage or artwork for her videos either. No it's all just a bunch of paranoid sexist creeps who think she's salted her Kickstarter earnings away in a Cayman bank account and is getting ready to flee to a non-extradition country any second now.

Yeah, she's an auto 5 for me even though it's usually a 3 star presentation of 4 star material at best, because of the reactions.

Forgot the stars. Now they go to her unpardonable crime of art thefting people's OC gameplay footage OH NO.

That's the only reason people submit these videos, which is annoying. This one in particular is basically a high school level Powerpoint presentation and maybe a step above reading the Wikipedia article. Insecure rapists or not, everyone here already knows what the Bechdel test is.

To be honest, I did post the previous one basically just to "troll" reactions from people.

But as far as this particular video is concerned, I found the video itself to be pretty funny in an autistic kind of way.

Ol'Zirc we're not just that she's steeling footage. Its that she claimed the money would be for buying and thus playing games for research. Instead its clear that she hasn't played most of the games she's critiquing and I find that to be extremely intellectually dishonest.

You know, I also get a strong spergy vibe from this person. It's what makes the presentations so odd and offputting. Men: this is what spergy you looks like to the ladies. Cave, frater!

Anyone can disagree with Anita Sarkeesian, or find her reasoning flawed. It's the persistent and fevered attempt to portray her as an evil instead of merely wrong that sets my faggot sense a-tinging. And, of course, the rape threats.

I also think that a lot of criticism against her is just wrong. If she points out something sexist in a game, and you can think of something that isn't sexist in a different game, I don't think that's relevant. It's like a critic attacking an author, and you take it as an attack on "books".
'

Five stars for how much rage insecure men cause Change.

I'm inclined to agree with OZ's metric: Sarkeesian isn't very interesting in and of herself, but POEsters do enjoy talking about her, so that's something. I just wish we could keep our discussions civil, without all the fighting and name-calling... unless we know for sure that the person we are typing at enjoys fighting and name-calling! Then I guess it's OK, because some people like being angry and indignant and passing judgement on each-other. Friendship can manifest itself in many strange and unexpected ways! :nods:

>>Anyone can disagree with Anita Sarkeesian, or find her reasoning flawed. It's the persistent and fevered attempt to portray her as an evil instead of merely wrong that sets my faggot sense a-tinging. And, of course, the rape threats.

Mr Holmes - I think part of the problem, at least as far as PoE is concerned, is that we do a great deal of projecting. I don't think anyone here believes she's literally *evil*, or would like to rape her. On the flip side, I don't think anyone here actually takes her arguments seriously - or whatever you'd call them, as she doesn't really advance arguments, and she takes great pains to avoid making direct, falsifiable statements. "Insinuations", maybe. Anyway, it's mostly just us projecting whatever wild position we believe to be Other, into the minds and mouths of our fellow netizens.

Youtube, however, is indeed full of faggots.

I think it's actually joy that Change gets out of insecure men. There's often a lot of weird self back patting that goes on in these threads. Otherwise I agree that the vitriol is lame.

"autistic" haha now I can't stop thinking of her as that Onion reporter

Also Mr Holmes, re: the examples of sexism. That's pretty much the whole point of cultural criticism, don't you think? The question she wishes us to discuss is whether or not sexism is rampant in video games; examples and counter-examples are perfectly relevant to this.

While I do agree that cherry-picking examples of sexism/notsexism is a bit silly (this is all Sarkeesian does, and if it's silly when she does it, it's silly when anyone else does it), I think the point these critics are trying to make is that sexism is not actually all that common in modern gaming, and that the alleged examples cited by Sarkeesian are not representative of gaming as a whole. While I certainly believe that a good deal of progress can still be made in offering gaming choices to all gender-identities (although I rather suspect that many of these strides would be too radically progressive and not welcomed by Sarkeesian), the sad fact is that she herself doesn't really bring anything to the discussion other than disinformation and provocation.

This is the second time JHM has used "faggot" as a pejorative in the last 24 hours.

I think John does not like us using the word sperg. John: is the word like nigger, in that only you can use it? Or is it just generally bad whomever sez it?

There are a few gay posters here and I don't think they like people using "fag" thrown around carelessly. I've stopped using it.

I had no idea that I was the only person who gets to say "nigger"! When was this decided?

I think it's wrong to use "faggot" as a pejorative in relation to sexual orientation, and if you niggers find it objectionable in any other context, that's reason enough to not say it.

Presumably of the latter form then: you see he is unable to even type the offending character sequence. Time for some radical empowerment, JHM. Can you bear the title of Sperg with Pride?

I think Mr Holmes is well within his rights to use such words, and I would strongly caution against word-shaming him. We call him a creep and a pedophile, which are pejorative terms that neither creeps nor pedophiles like to be called. Using less-harmful language SOUNDS nice, in principle... but only so long as the language we avoid is harmful towards people or groups we don't wish to see harmed.

However, if poe policy is now for us to at least be conscious about using harmful language, may I just say that I find the word "brony" to be horribly offensive and hurtful?

No no no no nope. Homer, when you're talking about something that happens sometimes, leaving out the times when it doesn't happen is not "cherry picking". It's relevant to the greater discussion, but whenever somebody is talking about something that happens, unless she says that it happens every time, you can assume that it doesn't happen everytime.

Is Ponyphile better or what is the preferred nomenclature?

The essence of poetv is trolls trolling trolls. I love Sarkeesian videos because they bring out the "best" in us.

I love how her retarded supporters always, without fail, resort to calling people with legitimate criticism of this lying scam artist and her bullshit "nerds/losers/virgins/insecure/MRAs/etc." because they have no counter argument or a figurative leg to stand on when it comes to defending her. They are mindless white knights drinking the Tumblret Kool-Aid and they don't even know the flavor.

Seriously. If you still defend this lying cunt post-2012, you are objectively a moron, and its pretty disappointing to see so many people on PoE lapping it up. I always gave you guys more credit than that.

POETV: Not up to the standards of Dairyqueenlatifah

Hey Dairyqueenlatifah are you sure you're ok? You sound a bit agitated.

I went and said people'd do a thing, and then they went and did it. :)

Try to use this power for Good, and not for Evil.

I don't get the "stealing footage" accusation. Are you really that ignorant of what "fair use" is?

Mr Holmes - Anita doesn't say sexist happens all the time. In fact, she doesn't even say it happens MOST of the time. As I stated earlier, one of the biggest problems with Ms Sarkeesian isn't that she's wrong, it's that she does not actually advance any arguments. She never "gets to the point". The *implication* is that her cherry-picked examples of sexism are indicative of a broader trend in video game sexism, because otherwise why bother bringing them up in the first place? If video games are NOT sexist, why even have the discussion? But, like many academics with a background in sociology, she is very careful to avoid making any direct statements which can be challenged and discredited. In fact, I rather suspect she is well aware that video games are by and large non-sexist, and her actual goal with all of this is simply to play the agent provocateur in hopes of getting exposure, and maybe tenure somewhere down the line; like Jack Thompson and his obviously futile crusades against video game violence, only she is trying to appeal to college radicals and men like yourself, instead of angry Christians and overprotective parents. Or maybe she's just a bored woman with a webcam who wanted to kill a few afternoons on Youtube? I don't know. At any rate, it seems that you do not disagree with me on any of these points, and your objection stems from semantic hairsplitting ("one cannot cherry-pick evidence if one has no argument to support!"), so I hope I've cleared that up to your liking.

Adham - I cannot speak for everypony as to their preferred nomenclature, but what is wrong with "man and brother"?

^Ism. SexISM. Not sexIST. Sorry, John.

"My name is Change and I'm SECURE. Also, Sarkeesian ISN'T obnoxious. Dance, motherfuckers!!"

I didn't read any of the replies yet, but I'm just going to say that I respect Anita's trolling abilities. To what extent they are intentional is another matter that I don't care about because she makes manbabies go BAWWWWBLOOBLOOBLOO.

What's wrong with being sexy?

I ain't reading this fucking thread.
Let me know when the cliffnotes come out.

>>>>Mr Holmes - Anita doesn't say sexist happens all the time. In fact, she doesn't even say it happens MOST of the time. As I stated earlier, one of the biggest problems with Ms Sarkeesian isn't that she's wrong, it's that she does not actually advance any arguments. She never "gets to the point". The *implication* is that her cherry-picked examples of sexism are indicative of a broader trend in video game sexism, because otherwise why bother bringing them up in the first place? If video games are NOT sexist, why even have the discussion?

If a feminist literary critic talks about books that she doesn't like, is she presumed to be making a point that "books are sexist"?

This is the opposite of every other instance of Anita-bashing I've ever seen. Again and again, idiots claim to have evidence that disproves her "conclusions", but her conclusions are always assumed, never demonstrated.

It's simple, it's straightforward, it in the name. It's about TROPES Vs. Women, not GAMES vs. women. She tries to identify sexist tropes in games. She talks about women in refrigerators in multiple games and claims it's a sexist trope. Maybe she's right, maybe she's wrong, but that's not cherry-picking. It's talking about TROPES.

Not everything in every game is a sexist trope. But she's leaving out things that are not tropes because SHES FUCKING TALKING ABOUT SEXIST TROPES. It's like, someone wrote a book about the Ted Bundy murders, would they be accused of cherry-picking if they didn't mention the women that Bundy DIDN'T murder?

wow looking back in hindsight i really fucking nailed it, high five, good job

Yeah this is not unlike how the PUA culture is full of dorks that need women explained to them like it were a D&D rulebook ("If the female creature pulls out her cloak of rejection, you must use the ring of infinite penetration three times").

Except here you need to run every film through a series of lab tests to figure out if it's gender biased or not.

To be fair; I've seen most of Woodys oeuvre and I'm pretty positive that every piece of dialog between the men is about a woman, or women.

I actually love this Bechdel test but it needs a little tweaking. It also needs Bechdel to present, and not this person.

Alison Bechdel has even gone public and said "That wasn't supposed to be a critical test for EVERYTHING!" but nobody listens, especially those people who apply it very selectively only to work the critic already doesn't like, and never to anything he/she does, even if they essentially cover the same ground.

Romcoms tend not to fail that "test". And then it's hilarious to watch the true Believers In Bechdel trying to establish that they fail, anyway - since Love is a patriarchal construct and thus it taints all movies that involve it.

Anita Sarkeesian's videos fail the Bechdel test.

"Alison Bechdel has even gone public and said "That wasn't supposed to be a critical test for EVERYTHING!" but nobody listens"

This reminds me of how Ian MacKaye has gone on record that he drinks socially and thinks sXe is a reactionary, vaguely cryptofascist movement. But nobody listens.

Does nobody realize that the origin of the Bechdel test was a goddamn comic strip where the whole thing was a joke about arbitrary guidelines? The character threw out Alien as passing the test because it featured two women talking about a monster instead of a man, then realized how dumb her guidelines were and said, "Fuck it."

Also failing the Bechdel test: The Princess Bride. What a exclusionary male power fantasy shitlord of a movie that was! Good luck finding any women who enjoy THAT opressive garbage.

Anita's fans are a hundred times worse than Anita. At least she's getting paid to tell every what a terrible sexist song Santa Baby is. She found a way to make money off of continuing to write term papers for her unemployable major and she's riding that gravy train. Her fans have no excuse besides being terrible vindictive people. I don't think there's a fan of her left here who hasn't straight up admitted masturbating to spouting vitrol at imaginary rape apologists.

It seems to me I used to think she was attractive, and might think so again if I could see her outside of these deer-in-headlight videos.

Yeah, I see no inherent problem with any one movie having no women in the cast, even. It's that there are so many more like that than vice versa that's a problem.

The bechdel test was supposed to be a joke, not an actual measurement. Just because it has a name and a method doesn't make it useful or even significant, just something funny to think about.

It's useful on a cultural level, but not really on the level of individual movies.

That said, it can often be a barometer of bad writing in a film more than it is of sexism. If there are multiple women in your script and they never talk about anything but the hero, then you're probably a shitty writer who can't flesh out his supporting characters.

So... what you're saying is that all movies ever must pass the Bechdel test in order to not be sexist and you want to censor all movies that don't. Right? Ok, I'll just go ahead and argue against you as if that's what you meant.

It's not useful at all.

Unless you have pretty serious problems it's fairly easy to realize that the movie industry (and Hollywood in particular) is full of films pandering to men.

It's also easy to realize that films like The Blind Side with Sandra Bullock are racist patronizing rubbish without using specific aspie metrics.

Adham, what??
IF 'Realize that Hollywood panders to men' THEN 'not worth using Bechdel as a starter for talking about how Hollywood panders to men'??

Bechdel Test not necessary to realize obvious fact.

Do not need to check on smartphone to figure out if currently raining, just look out window.

Bechdel isn't an aspie metric. It's just a way of getting a conversation going. If the conversation itself is interesting, a knock-knock joke could start it and it'd be fine.

How Sarkeesian handles anything will make it seem obnoxious.

The Bechdel Test can be useful to detect sexism even on an individual movie basis, in that it can shine a spotlight on women being relegated to limited roles like "trying to find a boyfriend" and maybe "shopping".

The example I like to use is, imagine if in "Alien" the guys all went hunting for the monster while the women all sat around and talked about which guy was the cutest. That would be an extreme example, but it would suggest the writer has no idea how to write women characters. As it is, the original script for "Alien" had all the characters as androgynous, so when actual actors and actresses were put in the roles, it turned out that the women were written as well as the men, which was kind of a landmark achievement.

Write people first, men & women second.

But what test can I use to figure out if a movie is shit or not?

I mean I just watched Grown Ups to but metacritic is down so I don't know what to think about it is there any test that can help me figure out if it's poorly written?

I did a search for "Sarkeesian" and didn't find anything.

I think it may have died in the hopper, actually.

With the 0,000 you'd think she'd at least get a decent wardrobe for her videos.

And give her detractors one more thing to gripe about? Yeah, that'd be brilliant.

I think Cena was making a "Go buy yourself something nice, doll" joke.

:)

Also, her earrings keep falling off.

Psstt!!! Word on the street is; it was an inside job! Pass it on.

Do you think if we spam poetv with sarkeesian videos dairyqueenlatifa will have a breakdown?


Do you think they would film it?

^^^

Can I call her a scam artist without saying she should be raped, or is the rape threat still implied?

JHMF, you're just psychotic enough to do this to prove me wrong, so I ask you: Compare her videos from before the Kickstarter, in terms of both production quality and rate of output, to the videos she's released after the Kickstarter, and then explain to me where that 150k went.

It's right here, in my pants.

You're clearly psychotic if you expect me to take the burden of proof from your shoulders. Why do I get the feeling that the people who are so concerned about this aren't the people who actually sent her money? She explains what she did with the money in her Ted Talk. If you think she's lying, prove it, or shut the fuck up about it, or expect to be criticized for being a libelous sack of shit.

Boom headshot!

Okay, fine. I looked it up. She made five videos that are completely identical to her previous ones. So where did the money go?

Still in my pants.

You got anything new to say? I can do this all night.

I don't know what you looked up, but you're not referencing the Ted Talk where, I already told you, is where she explains what she did with the money.

You mean where she stands around and bullshits a bunch of naive technocrats like you?

The proof is in the pudding I always say.

>>The proof is in the pudding I always say.

Uhhuh, And what you're serving here doesn't smell like chocolate.

wow you convinced me

who cares where it went? it's kickstarter money!

>>wow you convinced me

That's very funny, because I 'm not making any claims here. If you want to claim Anita Sarkeesian is a scam artist, you're the one who needs to convince someone, and saying stuff like "the proof is in the pudding" is super weak.

>>You mean where she stands around and bullshits a bunch of naive technocrats like you?

I mean where she says "I did this this and this with the extra money", and makes actual concrete statements that are either true or false, and if you have any interest in the truth, this would be the logical place to start.

And something happened?

You talk about her output of " five videos that are completely identical to her previous ones" as if the serious was finished, and there wasn't eight more videos in the work. This is just the beginning of why you are either stupid of dishonest.

You say: "I actually gave her enough credit to think that her output would be significant enough that it would be half way difficult to figure out." I think you're King Bullshit, and you haven't figured out shit, and this is how you pretend that you actually know something. You have some facts to share, do you? Some facts from you would be very refreshing right now.

oh wow eight more youtube videos!?

I wonder if we'll see the finale to Tropes vs. Video Game Women before 2018

Hundreds of thousands of TV commercials:

http://youtu.be/P6n10sv63WM

In other words, the meaning is not necessarily direct activism, but teaching feminist-oriented media literacy, to help young people, especially, young women, understand the culture they're consuming. That's really way more worthwhile than, say, smaller tits on Lara Croft.

it was always awful

Some people don't realize it's easier to just move to tumblr and spam "tears" memes?

This is the same tired crap that killed poenews before fucking off to Bo News. No discussion. No humor. No insight. Just willfully misinterpretating the other side as posters with rage issues declaring "umad?" Victory.

Shit, no one bothers pretending to care about the issues anymore. Every Anita skips straight to "I love making people angry lol tears" comments like the world's most boring punk bar.

well said, the both of yas

Oh boo fucking hoo.

>>I love how her retarded supporters always, without fail, resort to calling people with legitimate criticism of this lying scam artist and her bullshit "nerds/losers/virgins/insecure/MRAs/etc." because they have no counter argument or a figurative leg to stand on when it comes to defending her. They are mindless white knights drinking the Tumblret Kool-Aid and they don't even know the flavor.
>>Seriously. If you still defend this lying cunt post-2012, you are objectively a moron, and its pretty disappointing to see so many people on PoE lapping it up. I always gave you guys more credit than that.

I'm sorry? was I "willfully misinterpreting" this as rage?

There's plenty of discussion of the issues here, if you want to look for it, but come on, in the case of Anita Sarkeesian, the unreasoning rage spasms reverberating throughout the internet are the real issue. And it says a lot about where the internet is, and where it's going.

Last night, I tried to pin someone down onthe ACTUAL EVIDENCE supporting this idea repeated over over and over that Anita Sarkeesian is some kind of con artist bilking her contributors, and I got hard-nosed, substantive answers like "you tell ME where the money went", and "the proof is in the pudding". Whether she's a thief or you guys are libelous bags of poop is, in my opinion, a real issue", and I'd like to talk about it, but I'm not the one who has to back up his accusations.

i see someone who made a 150k in three seconds make a handful of youtube videos (exactly like the ones she had already made), and is still soliciting donations.

Anita Sarkeesian is not a cunt.

Many people of many genders are cunts. Anita Sarkeesian is definitely boring and obvious enough to be forgettable to most of the poetv crowd (woo, socially progressive hipster nigger faggots!), but calling her a cunt when she's never actually threatened anybody's livelihood or reputation by having opinions about video games (and who here can say that they don't have opinions about video games?) on the internet is a _tad_ harsh, gogurtcuntlaqueefwahhhhhh.

I don't really have much of an opinion on video games, except they're not my thing. The last game I was really into was Centipede. I also like a little solitaire. My son tried to get me into WOW, but to me it was YAWN.

I've always bashed kickstarter. I do think it's a way of bilking naive morons out of obscene amounts of money for an inevitably shoddy product.

Hell, I was calling kickstarter retarded from day one before they even finished a project. And that's when they were actually trying to produce tangible commodities! Like movies and games. Not a fucking youtube series.

Bullshit, Maru. The earlier videos were centered on TV and movies with a sprinkling of games. The later videos centering exclusively on games obviously had a larger overhead. That not EXACTLY the same.
The money was always to obtain a library of games.


I don't care what you think about kickstarter. You can't back up what you're saying about Anita Sarkeesian, and that makes you a liar. And you're in defensive mode now, and that means you're going to keep lying about this until they nail you into the box. You got no integrity, no moral compass, you're just an empty space. And that's where I'm going to leave you. Bye now.

So according to John Holmes, she spent a 150k on video games for a series of about a dozen ten minute videos.

No, according to John Holmes, you're talking out of your ass.

this place is the best.