game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-02-2015, 10:59 AM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(11-02-2015 03:26 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(11-02-2015 01:31 PM)Ace Wrote:  http://www.gamebreaker.tv/news-main/pc-2...arkeesian/


the hell is going on, she is a nightmare to gaming

Grow up.

(18-02-2015 01:07 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(17-02-2015 02:08 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Anita has a clear bias agianst men and uses her platform to attack a hobby enjoyed by mostly men.

And why do you think that the hobby is enjoyed mostly by men?

That is the key point here. If you can understand that you may begin to understand where Anita is coming from.

Until then you will continue to see it as an attack on you personally. Which it is not.

So come on, let's really explore this point.

Why is gaming a hobby mostly enjoyed by men?

Many reasons that it is mostly male

1.) Gaming used to be seen as hobby for social outcasts and nerds.
2.) Lack of interest in gaming in general.
3.) The type of games. I know of very few woman who play simulation games such as Microsoft Flight Simulator X, Star Citizen, Elite: Dangerous. But many who play Games like the Sims.

As to why there is a push back to people like AS?

Remember that time Fox News called Mass Effect a rape simulator? And the person doing so had never actually played the game?

Remember when Jack Thompson tried to have games changed due to his belief that games caused violence?

When you criticize something that you have never actually taken the time to play/read/watch, and assert your opinion as fact you will get push back.

No answer me this did you actually look at the evidence I posted as you requested?

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2015, 11:02 AM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 01:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(18-02-2015 01:07 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  And why do you think that the hobby is enjoyed mostly by men?

That is the key point here. If you can understand that you may begin to understand where Anita is coming from.

Until then you will continue to see it as an attack on you personally. Which it is not.

So come on, let's really explore this point.

Why is gaming a hobby mostly enjoyed by men?

And why is attacking it soooooo deathly terrible? I mean jeez. It's like... Those guys who fly kites. Not a lot of women fly kites. In fact there was this chick who made youtube movies about the fact that not a lot of women fly kites and she fucken suuuuuuuuuuucks. Fucken hate her. She's a fraud and a man-hating bitch. How dare she criticise flying kites.

Take something you enjoy doing in your spare time. Have someone who has no actual interest in it, make blanket statements condemning your hobby, labeling it as hating woman and promoting violence. Have said "critic" defended to the death in the face of evidence that the "criticism" was a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Then come back to me.

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2015, 11:04 AM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 05:17 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(17-02-2015 02:12 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Such logic. Much argument. So wow.

'cause what I'm hearing here is:
blah blah blah no true christian, blah blah blah how dare she criticise the pope, blah blah blah I'm a serious catholic and those protestants are all going to hell.

blah blah blah trolling blah blah straw man blah blah blah don't dare criticize a woman because they can do no wrong blah blah I can't here anything wrong with this.

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2015, 11:13 AM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(17-02-2015 03:16 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(17-02-2015 03:00 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  I have provided evidence, her only question was why did I not think AS is a gamer, I have stated it multiple times.

The rest of her post was not a question but an assertion as to why I said something. And for the record, I have posted multiple time about my anti-theistic worldview, so calling into question whether I believe in a god or not A.) had absolutely nothing to do with the arguments presented, and B.) this is an atheist forum, where theists are generally not welcome due to their world view being in direct conflict with the purpose of the forum. So what other use could that little tidbit be?

Also thank you for not jumping on the bandwagon and actually asking about my view on this issue. I am bowing out for the night, its late, I have a headache and a long day ahead of me at work.
For reference:

Poisoning the well

This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person.

You're again failing here by not taking communication that was given in it's way. You're making assumptions. You shouldn't ignore her question on your strawman arguments in the previous post highlighting the typical trollish behavior that occurs here..

She never asserting you were a theist. That's why I said read it over and over. Is it poisoning the well/prodding, yes I already said I think it is so. That's not the same as asserting you are something. Maybe when you are not with a headache at another time; if you read it, you will understand the line of communication.

And asking you why you feel "attacked" is actually a question on the actual topic. I here assumed you would understand that reference as you seem aware of the topic by posting videos about it. That's a point about you defending and holding this opinion of "what a gamer is" and why do you think it matters? Why do you feel this value on who is or isn't a gamer is relevant? Why do you feel being questioned is an assertion against you? These are topics coming out by your responses that seem interesting to get responses about.

I feel attack because any argument put forward contrary to the belief that AS can do no wrong is labeled a straw man. Because evidence posted is ignored in favor of the narrative being pushed.

Because I cannot criticize a community I have no experience in! That was the point I was making. She has not been part of the larger gaming community until she decide to push the hypothesis that games cause sexism, that all male gamers are sexist towards woman, and that it should be forced to chance to conform to her world view.

Lets use examples : Person A read Harry Potter and the Goblet of fire. Person A then delivers a criticism on the book, pointing out flaws and inconsistencies.

Person B does not read the book, takes parts out of context and then uses those as a platform to say that all books are sexist and promote violence.

See the difference?

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2015, 01:07 PM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 11:02 AM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Take something you enjoy doing in your spare time.
Running

Quote:Have someone who has no actual interest in it, make blanket statements condemning your hobby, labeling it as hating woman and promoting violence. Have said "critic" defended to the death in the face of evidence that the "criticism" was a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Then come back to me.
Well, I dunno. But actual medical doctors and a lot of other randoms routinely come out with crap about how it's bad for your knees and heart disease and and and and so forth. Sometimes people write long-winded articles about how race and gender aren't fairly balanced in the running community... which they pretty much are - it's the most egalitarian sport there is.

Does it matter to me? Well, of course, I am happy to argue over that shit, but I don't feel the need to *dislike* the buggers. Or make ranty youtube response videos. Or try to smear their reputations. Or to issue "joke" rape and death threats. *That* shit, is why gamers as a whole are getting an image of being a bunch of pimply teenage boys. If you guys are not, *prove it*. Disagree properly, in a grown up fashion Wink

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
18-02-2015, 01:19 PM (This post was last modified: 18-02-2015 01:37 PM by Mathilda.)
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 10:59 AM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  
(18-02-2015 01:07 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Why is gaming a hobby mostly enjoyed by men?

Many reasons that it is mostly male

1.) Gaming used to be seen as hobby for social outcasts and nerds.
2.) Lack of interest in gaming in general.

1) Why was gaming originally seen as a hobby for social outcasts and nerds?
2) Why do you propose that there a lack of interest in gaming in general?



For 1) and 2) could it possibly be because the depictions of women and female characters in games turned girls off gaming? As for example, as highlighted by Anita Sarkeesian?














I didn't bother replying to point 3 because it was irrelevant.

I play games myself. I would play a lot more if there were games that were actually interesting. I have spent ages looking on steam for games trying to find one that isn't made especially for boys. I'm not talking about the Sims, I'm talking first person shooters. And yes girls and women do play these, they also want to play them, but the majority of what the industry produces is for boys.

I've found one or two that I enjoy and I have spent many thousands of hours playing them. Take Left 4 Dead 2 for example. You wouldn't think that a zombie game would appeal to women and the vast majority don't. But the co-operative gameplay, the sense of humour and the scripted the banter means that it has a good gender ratio.

Borderlands 2 is another one. They have female characters. The game play is co-operative and there are plenty of women playing that.

I've played Counter-Strike since 2001. I know other women that play that and are happy to do so. There is no misogyny in that game. You could argue it's because all the characters are male, but it wouldn't be realistic having a female counter-terrorist and at least the hostages are also male. Basically gender is not an issue.

I have also spent hundreds of hours playing Total War. Again, gender is not an issue there because it is realistic.

Now compare that to how historically the majority of games have been targetted towards men whilst portraying women in an unrealistically negative light. We know that the audience has been there because of how many women now play on their tablet.

So what exactly is your problem with someone pointing out the specifics of how an industry is not reaching out to an untapped audience?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
18-02-2015, 01:35 PM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(17-02-2015 01:20 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Oh look unable to assert a point you resort to Ad Hominem attacks, attack the person when you cant attack the argument. Brilliant Mathilda, your bias is showing.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Quote:means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments.


You very rarely try to counter what she has actually said, at best just alluding to things that we have to take your word on. Instead you attack her personally. You are the one guilty of ad-hominems.

For example

(11-02-2015 02:44 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  She is a con artist and Professional Victim. Her arguments are flawed beyond belief, and sexist to boot.

She should not be given any airtime. She gets targeted by trolls, but blames the gaming industry. Any criticism of her or her work( or lack there of) is labeled as harassment, by her and her supporters.


(11-02-2015 03:29 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  She lied to make her points and get her money.

(11-02-2015 04:17 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  She never responds to any criticisms, ever. She never has and never will.her arguments are made of bullshit.

(11-02-2015 04:17 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  I refer to her video where she states he is not a gamer, never played games and does not particularly like games, but is doing this because there are not enough woman in gaming.


(11-02-2015 04:17 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  ... but I am something she is not. I actually am a gamer.

(16-02-2015 03:17 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Anita is of the school of Feminism that says that anything a man does in inherently bad. The patriarchy is to blame for all the evils of the world and woman can do no wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mathilda's post
18-02-2015, 02:04 PM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 11:13 AM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  
(17-02-2015 03:16 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You're again failing here by not taking communication that was given in it's way. You're making assumptions. You shouldn't ignore her question on your strawman arguments in the previous post highlighting the typical trollish behavior that occurs here..

She never asserting you were a theist. That's why I said read it over and over. Is it poisoning the well/prodding, yes I already said I think it is so. That's not the same as asserting you are something. Maybe when you are not with a headache at another time; if you read it, you will understand the line of communication.

And asking you why you feel "attacked" is actually a question on the actual topic. I here assumed you would understand that reference as you seem aware of the topic by posting videos about it. That's a point about you defending and holding this opinion of "what a gamer is" and why do you think it matters? Why do you feel this value on who is or isn't a gamer is relevant? Why do you feel being questioned is an assertion against you? These are topics coming out by your responses that seem interesting to get responses about.

I feel attack because any argument put forward contrary to the belief that AS can do no wrong is labeled a straw man. Because evidence posted is ignored in favor of the narrative being pushed.

Because I cannot criticize a community I have no experience in! That was the point I was making. She has not been part of the larger gaming community until she decide to push the hypothesis that games cause sexism, that all male gamers are sexist towards woman, and that it should be forced to chance to conform to her world view.

Lets use examples : Person A read Harry Potter and the Goblet of fire. Person A then delivers a criticism on the book, pointing out flaws and inconsistencies.

Person B does not read the book, takes parts out of context and then uses those as a platform to say that all books are sexist and promote violence.

See the difference?

Simply you defending yourself with ideas like thinking others are of this, Oh she can't do wrong debacle is a point nobody has made. In attempt to defend yourself of a strawman argument, you've made one.

YOU put these distinctions up of Gamer community or the term gamer with an element of thinking they matter. WHY? What causes you to think it deeply matters and defend this idea to some high degree?

Do you have measure for demands that everyone evaluating concepts needs to get to before they can critique something? You can knock the points but the idea of them doing it shouldn't be criticized and feared. Every critic including her and coutnless other people who have analysed games in various manners have made mistakes or been mistaken about ideas.

It's what needs to exist, especially in video games if you ever want them considered a medium the same way music/movies are. Is there a standard for how much of a movie fan a person needs to be before they start noticing and acknowledging patterns and trends in movies? I don't believe so. You bicker about some time she said some label she doesn't agree with, which doesn't mean much of anything. She also stated and put in the time to play games and research them to gather info to create and edit videos about.

Yes I see the difference, and see the lack of objective sensibility with how the claims were formulated in that anthology. Your analogy is not fitting at all to the situation. A better attempted at it would be saying someone who read books 2 and 5 of Harry Potter was then making claims about the entire book series.

Your points don't come off as someone who has or wants to view this away from their perspective oh misdoings existing, and that's pretty much not going to change it seems.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
18-02-2015, 02:43 PM (This post was last modified: 18-02-2015 03:00 PM by Blackhand293.)
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 01:19 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  [quote='Blackhand293' pid='738203' dateline='1424278798']
Many reasons that it is mostly male
1.) Gaming used to be seen as hobby for social outcasts and nerds.
2.) Lack of interest in gaming in general.
1) Why was gaming originally seen as a hobby for social outcasts and nerds?
2) Why do you propose that there a lack of interest in gaming in general?
[/Quote]
1.) That started with Table top gaming, not video games please to look into the history before dismissing it out of hand. It was seen as a waste of time and for kids.
2.) It is still seen as a waste of time by many. The fact that it is a multi billion dollar industry seems to point to it being not.

(18-02-2015 01:19 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  For 1) and 2) could it possibly be because the depictions of women and female characters in games turned girls off gaming? As for example, as highlighted by Anita Sarkeesian?














Oh look the video equivalent of quote mining is presented as evidence

Irelevant.
[quote='Mathilda' pid='738253' dateline='1424287191']

I didn't bother replying to point 3 because it was irrelevant.

So what exactly is your problem with someone pointing out the specifics of how an industry is not reaching out to an untapped audience?

So i see to demographics don't exist. So the fact that say Romantic comedies are marketed more towards woman, as the primary demographic is irelvant.
And the point you ignored? The type of game produced is marketed to a demographic. The demographic that has supported the industry, mainly consoles and PC, has been supported by male gamers. The fact that it is marketed to them does not make it any more sexist than the fact romance is marketed to woman.

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-02-2015, 02:45 PM
RE: game character based on Sarkeesian.... we're DOOMED
(18-02-2015 02:04 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(18-02-2015 11:13 AM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  I feel attack because any argument put forward contrary to the belief that AS can do no wrong is labeled a straw man. Because evidence posted is ignored in favor of the narrative being pushed.

Because I cannot criticize a community I have no experience in! That was the point I was making. She has not been part of the larger gaming community until she decide to push the hypothesis that games cause sexism, that all male gamers are sexist towards woman, and that it should be forced to chance to conform to her world view.

Lets use examples : Person A read Harry Potter and the Goblet of fire. Person A then delivers a criticism on the book, pointing out flaws and inconsistencies.

Person B does not read the book, takes parts out of context and then uses those as a platform to say that all books are sexist and promote violence.

See the difference?

Simply you defending yourself with ideas like thinking others are of this, Oh she can't do wrong debacle is a point nobody has made. In attempt to defend yourself of a strawman argument, you've made one.

YOU put these distinctions up of Gamer community or the term gamer with an element of thinking they matter. WHY? What causes you to think it deeply matters and defend this idea to some high degree?

Do you have measure for demands that everyone evaluating concepts needs to get to before they can critique something? You can knock the points but the idea of them doing it shouldn't be criticized and feared. Every critic including her and coutnless other people who have analysed games in various manners have made mistakes or been mistaken about ideas.

It's what needs to exist, especially in video games if you ever want them considered a medium the same way music/movies are. Is there a standard for how much of a movie fan a person needs to be before they start noticing and acknowledging patterns and trends in movies? I don't believe so. You bicker about some time she said some label she doesn't agree with, which doesn't mean much of anything. She also stated and put in the time to play games and research them to gather info to create and edit videos about.

Yes I see the difference, and see the lack of objective sensibility with how the claims were formulated in that anthology. Your analogy is not fitting at all to the situation. A better attempted at it would be saying someone who read books 2 and 5 of Harry Potter was then making claims about the entire book series.

Your points don't come off as someone who has or wants to view this away from their perspective oh misdoings existing, and that's pretty much not going to change it seems.

So did you at any point actually look at the evidence provided of the claims I made?

No. It appears you did not. I am done with this one sided argument. Intellectual dishonesty does not become you.

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: