From “Damsel in Distress: Part 1 – Tropes vs Women in Video Games.”
So Anita Sarkeesian, who apparently didn’t run off with all her Kickstarter money to found a Misandist Gynarchy in the wilds of Canada, has released the first video in her Tropes vs Women in Video Games project. (I’ve embedded it below.)
Naturally, this is causing great consternation in certain corners of the Internet (*cough* Reddit *cough cough* everywhere else that misogynistic nerds congregate *cough*). In the Man Boobz forum, Katz has started a contest to see who can find “the whiniest, brattiest, most entitled response” to Sarkeesian’s video on the Internet. So far Katz and Myoo have found a couple classic comments from irate Sarkeeianaphobes:
[H]ow does one go about stating that genders and gender roles are social constructs? I mean is evolution nothing to her? Does the patriarchy make male peacocks dress provocatively?
Yes. Yes it does.
And:
I’m gradually losing respect for the opposite sex. I’ve unfollowed people on tumblr who talk about how great she is, because it actually causes bile to rise in to my throat.
Yeah, that’s a totally reasonable response to a woman making a video about video games.
So anyway, I’m thinking we should bring the contest over here.
See what you can find! Consider it a sort of scavenger hunt.
Here’s my contribution, from the Men’s Rights subreddit, complaining that Damsels in Distress are the truly privileged ones:
Amazingly, this acutally got called out on r/mr as being pretty damn stupid.
Also, I have another question, to add to the stack of other questions I’ve been asking lately: Just why do you think so many guys get so angry when girls and women invade what they consider a male sphere, like gaming? (Also, why do they consider gaming to belong to boys and men?)
Oh, and here’s the video that’s causing all this hubbub:
RE: Clifford
Logically, you’d think that it would be a golden opportunity for her to engage the idiots in a debate and beat them, and make herself look good. Instead the comments are disabled. Hmm. Maybe they aren’t so incoherent?
Clifford, this might shock you, but web creators are not in fact required to debate with every single asshole who claims we should kill ourselves. We’re artists, not fucking Argument Dispensers.
I mean, we do that here with dumbasses like you and NWO because we WANT to. It’s a hobby, not an obligation.
RE: Shiraz
I know, right? I mean, what is she supposed to say? “Well, you see sir, I should not die because according to Kant every human life has worth unto its own, and boiling people down to their anatomical parts is rather hateful, because it assumes that’s all the worth we have.”
I mean, I know every troll I’ve used that on has been nothing but polite and generous after that!
Cliff, comments like “Die cunt, die” don’t exactly qualify as Jedi debating skills.
“I see your point, sir, about the inevitability of death; truly we shall all inescapably meet our end at some time, but I do submit to you that I am not a cunt. Perhaps we could discuss this further offline? We could meet in a secluded place for coffee for a meeting of the minds!”
*Giggling*
LBT, Bagelsan, you guys are killing me.
No wait, can we just back up the “maybe the death threats weren’t incoherent” bus? Because HOLY FUCK!
They’re death threats — you don’t debate with death threats, you don’t reason with death threats, they’re death threats! This isn’t “why do you say that?” or “please explain why you think that” this is “die cunt, die!” — option 1) ignore it, perfectly suitable if it’s one lone idiot; option 2) block the idiot(s), if possible; option 3) block everyone if you can’t block the idiot(s); option 4) disappear from the internet.
So, which was she supposed to do when boatloads of people where threatening her life in public forums she had no control over? Debate with each and every one because failing to do so gives them (the death threats, you know, those things saying “you should die” and “I want to kill you”) legitimacy?
In what fucking world do death threats ever have legitimacy?!
No one is required to do anything. But if Sarkeesian wishes to impress her audience, I would think she would take the opportunity to fisk the idiots. Unless MRA are more potent than you think.
No, you guys have all the impact of a limp noodle. Sarkeesian doesn’t have to impress anyone. You fools, on the other hand…
Obviously they are very coherent, sensible, and totally reasonable death threats. The MRM, ladies and gentlemen!
RE: Clifford
Unless MRA are more potent than you think.
That’s right, sweetheart. The only reason for ignoring someone is because they’re powerful. Spambots secretly control the universe, and that is why I block them from my website.
You shame my gender, dude. You really do.
When someone in a nice suit walks past a homeless person and ignores them as if they don’t even exist, it’s definitely because the homeless person is powerful.
But are they death threats at all? We will never know, because, Sarkeesian blocked them. They may have been logically rebuttals like this:
Or, maybe not. They could be incoherent death threats- that’s another perspective.
My point is we can’t know, because Sarkeesian blocked them. That’s her error.
Responding to threats and insults often gives them a veneer of legitimacy. It also feeds the trolls. Not doing that is the smartest option.
Nothing that she does with the comments on her own channel is an error, because it’s her channel and she can do whatever she wants with it. If she wants to post nothing but Nyan Cat for the next month, well, I don’t want to watch that, but she has every right to do it.
@Clifford
I don’t think misogynists would be impressed with Sarkeesian no matter what she did. But lots of other people are cool with her. ;P
Um, clifford. She was getting death threats before she made the video. They were kind of all over the place. It’s not a secret. And I fail to see why you care so much about her comment section.
No! Do not be shamed! From what I’ve seen of you, you are too awesome 😀
@CassandraSays
I would totally watch nothing but Nyan Cat next month!*
*Well, not really, but I an easily amused.
Poor Clofford has a rage boner about everything, but especially about women with opinions wanting nothing to do with him. AW.
RE: Clifford
It is my perspective that you, sir, are a cockbite.
Clofford? Hahahaha
Only if there are variations. Death metal Nyan Cat? Sign me up!
Cliff, are you the only person who doesn’t know that MOST YouTube comments are sewage anyway?
How dare Sarkeesian not want to talk to him and his friends! She should be punished. With more death threats, which she won’t read. I suspect that this cycle will repeat itself for a while.
This amused me way more than it should have XD Maybe it’s time I should go to sleep…
RE: Marie
You flatter me. Me and my husband shall simply have to pump out more awesome to make up for it.
Yes, death threats are such a good way to get people to talk to you.
Then Sarkeesian could ignore the trash comments and focus on the ones of substance. But she chooses to ban them all. It does not reflect well on her, in my opinion. It stinks of insecurity.
They should start teaching that in PUA classes.
“Hey, baby, I’d kill an HB10 like you any time!”
Cliff, quick! You need to debate LBT and insist you are not a cockbite! To not do so is suspicious and makes you look bad.
@LBT
Yay for more awesomeness 😀
Um, didn’t happen yet?
This totally never happened and neither did this
cliff, it’s hard to have a nice, thought out comment debate when half of them are trash…
Review that second link!
And if you think we don’t see your little game of trying to set us up to have to respond or prove you have a point all of the following apply:
* you’re a fool
* you think us fools
* you vastly underestimate us
It reflects well on her, in my opinion, and you must keep in mind that there are two sides to every argument. 😉
RE: Clifford
You still haven’t rebutted my perspective that you are a cockbite. It does not reflect well on you, in my opinion. It stinks of insecurity.
(PS: if you say my comment is not of substance, may I remind you that that’s just YOUR perspective.)
Cliffy: you stink of sock. To not refute this is suspicious and makes you look bad (worse).
Sturgeon’s Law says that 90% of everything is terrible. But we still make progress in a free society.
So 90% of physics is bad, but we don’t want to ban all physics, because then we would never have the good physics. 90% of philosophy is bad, but we don’t ban philosophy. 90% of math, music, books, are bad. But we don’t ban those.
But Sarkeesian banned her youtube comments.
Wait, cliff, first you have to refute LBT calling you a cockbite! If you don’t it makes you looks bad.
Death threats, totally the same as flat earth theory!
In my opinion not even bothering to engage with people whose opinions you consider worthless stinks of confidence. OMG, now there are 3 sides, what are we going to do?
Cliffy: only a complete dolt compares physics to youtube comments. YOUTUBE COMMENTS.
Therefore, you, sir, are a dolt. And a cockbite.
True fact: I am not “secure” enough to listen to masses of people tell me I should be killed or raped or worse without having it affect me. I guess that makes me a hyper-emotional girl. WOW.
90 % of physics is bad. Sound waves? Those are terrible, shouldn’t exist, but light waves, those are in the good 10%.
Wait, what? 90% of physics is shit? WHAT?
Good rebuttal, Clifford. I retract my former comment and offer a revised argument:
You are a cockbite. And you’re a maroon.
Thus rests my perspective.
@Viscaria
I don’t think I am either. Cliff’s too wrapped up in his own bubble of privilege to even try to think about what it feels like (which I don’t know, because I haven’t received any, it’s just like he doesn’t even give a crap).
I think we need a laugh track for this thread. Regulars are getting off some good ones here.
Thanks for the inspiration, Cliff.
This thread just keeps getting more entertaining XD
Didn’t mean to imply that I am Anita Sarkeesian. Because I’m, you know… not Anita Sarkeesian.
90% of all colors are terrible. Mustard? Why is that even a thing? Only red, green, and black are worth acknowledging as colors.
Geez Clifford, if someone threatens to kill you the bestest idea is to keep giving them openings to threaten you.
Because no one escalated from simple threats to action. Not ever.
Also, half of my comments on my webcomic are spam. Not even trolls, just spam trying to sell Nikes and crap.
THAT is enough to make me seriously consider turning off comments. So OF COURSE I’D TURN THEM OFF IF I GOT FUCKING TROLLS AND DEATH THREATS.
What, does this mean I’m kowtowing to spambots or something? Causing societal downfall through my tyranny? Jesus.