My Response to Someone on Another Site (Part 2) - Naruto Forums: The first and best Hollie forum!
Welcome to the Naruto Forums: The first and best Hollie forum!. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


Go Back   Naruto Forums: The first and best Hollie forum! > Blogs > Mixed Bag
Mixed Bag

The Mission of This Blog:

I 'm not getting any younger, but as I go along, I recognize the need to be more observant of my surroundings. I am honing my typing, writing, and analytical skills as well. As I do research, it is not enough to just read the material, but to do something with it.

I have loved reading Op-Eds and opinion pages for some time now, and I thought that it was pretty cool that NF had set up this blog function. As much as I am interested in reading the opinions of others, I am more excited about the prospect of sharing my own.

I suck at making up titles and many of my entries will be edited from time to time because I am human, after all (and a bit of a perfectionist).
Rate this Entry

My Response to Someone on Another Site (Part 2)

Posted 03-16-2013 at 05:45 PM by CrazyAries
Updated 03-17-2013 at 11:14 AM by CrazyAries
Continued from here:

Originally Posted by the Person on Another Site

Yes, being bombarded by a whole host of misogynistic comments and then showing them to people only “supposedly” highlights the ignorance of her detractors while it’s actually a calculated decision.
It was a calculated decision, as I will explain below.

Because she should have mind controlled people into not doing misogynistic things to her, or should have hidden it, or at least not mentioned it, or something.

It fascinates me that people don’t actually need to wait for her to actually complete her project (and in many cases, even start releasing any of it) before going off about she “made out like a bandit.”

1) How in the bloody hell would you know? Where did you get your information on what she’s done and how much it cost?

2) Do you think that “making out like a bandit” is somehow a bad thing? Are we going to whack on Dawkins for making lots of money off of the God Delusion?

3) You talk about “even if she did purchase more video games” as if that’s somehow in doubt. Are you claiming that she didn’t?
I posted my thoughts on the first video of the series. What, no one is allowed to do so?

1) Do you have any idea how much games cost or how many she actually bought? Many games on Xbox and PS3 are around $60-70, with price jumps if they come with accessories or downloadable content. Also, games could cost less if she rented them, with Redbox having a-dollar-per-day rentals. Additionally, would she even need to buy enough games to equal tens of thousands of dollars? From the looks of her announcement video, it looked like Ms Sarkeesian already had access to a good number of video games. And not all games in any library of the Big 3 game consoles would be in the “offending” category in terms of objectifying females.

2) “Making out like a bandit” is not good in this case because Sarkeesian gained the money by manipulation, which I will explain that below. In any event, we have to see how the series turns out and chances are that she did not need all that money to do her research, let alone to produce her videos.

And are you seriously comparing Anita Sarkeesian to Richard Dawkins? I do not find the two situations comparable. Sarkeesian asked for money to in order tell people something they already knew.

3)”Even if she did” was not the beginning of a statement of doubt that video games were purchased at all. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

And please, for the love of squid, don’t go on about how she got way more money than you think was reasonable for the project. People freely decided to give her the money. If you think it wasn’t worth it, take it up with the masses.
Sarkeesian made significantly more money than she otherwise would have once she let everyone see the offending comments. It was a stark change from her previous stance of moderating all comments and disapproving the coarsest opposition to her arguments.

Look at her video in which she talked about the mission of Feminist Frequency again:

She said that she wanted to provide a calm environment for her supporters, hence why she moderated the comments. Why did that have to change for her kickstarter video?

Before the Kickstarter video was released, Sarkeesian had a good idea of the type of hate she faced and that some misogynists would not use self-control. She initially asked for $6,000, but made 25 times that due to how much the comments rallied her supporters and offended even those who were neutral to her. That looks calculated to me.

Anita Sarkeesian: Mind controlling psychic. Not only is she at fault for the way people treated her, but she knew it would happen!

She should just stick to picking lottery tickets. She’d make a fortune!
Most of this snippet is filled with other strawman comments.

The misogynists are 100% responsible for acting like potty-mouthed children, but Sarkeesian cashed in and even fanned the flames. She went on 4chan to stir up a controversy there. Sarkeesian's IP address was verified for Anonymous, which is even able to find personal information about people who only show their faces on camera.

The only part of your post that truly recounts my argument is that Sarkeesian knew that she would be verbally attacked. She moderated her comments, so that meant that she would not approve all and chances are that she saw some pretty abusive comments along the way. If there is a comment box for one of her videos, just about any misogynist would type into it. Do you think the fact that not everyone would see those offending comments would stop them? Sarkeesian would still see those comments and she is the main target of their ire. I think that you are giving some YouTubers too much credit. Just think about what you typed there.

Now, let me state this and read well: I do not view Anita Sarkeesian as a true feminist, but as a fraud. First, her website touts her accomplishments, raises money, but does nothing really to lead visitors to an overall view of feminism. Second, most of her arguments in her videos lead to an overall overanalysis of relatively innocent or banal elements in media without solid research at certain points without really addressing societal issues that lead to the fictional tropes she discusses. Third, Sarkeesian welcomed and partly manufactured the controversy surrounding her Kickstarter project. She pitted her supporters and detractors against each other to make as much money as possible. Finally, Feminists would be better served if more women educated the public about the roots of the movement and expressed why feminism is still important today. From what I have seen from her, Sarkeesian has not done this. In fact, she has done the opposite. She has seen the degree to which Feminists have been pigeonholed since the beginning of the Second and Third Waves of Feminism, and her video commentary only serves to reinforce that.
Posted in The Internets
Comments 3 Email Blog Entry
Total Comments 3


They were talking about Richard Dawkins, not Charles Darwin. Two different people...
Posted 03-17-2013 at 08:09 AM by Endless Mike Endless Mike is offline
Posted 03-17-2013 at 11:15 AM by CrazyAries CrazyAries is offline
i'm so eager to meet that broad and reconstruct her face with my fists.

really eager.

you want to be treated like a man ? you ASKED FOR IT !
Posted 03-17-2013 at 01:16 PM by butcher50 butcher50 is offline
Total Trackbacks 0


Quick Style Chooser
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.    

Design(s) Provided By: Neado Designs Addicting Games