Video Game Critic Cancels Speech after Threats of Massacre Violence

The problem with Justin Bieber is A) he's proven the people who don't like him to be correct in their criticisms of him, e.g. he's an asshole, and B) he's taken extensive steps to remove himself from the public, e.g. being an asshole who gets himself arrested or in trouble every other week, to the point where people simply don't want him around because he's trouble.

This also makes him somewhat rare; for someone reasonably famous, there will be a certain amount of vitriol, that's a given. However, he's pretty much neutered himself at this point. Anita Sarkeesian on the other hand hasn't; instead, her critics are actually doing her a serious favor and keeping her in the news (so, a complete 180 from the Bieber.)

I agree with @hippocoder on more points than just the hopefully-common-sense "be nice/respectful/civil to everyone". The parts of her rhetoric that I disagree with involve the more militant, misandrist undertones of her works (the bullshit about the male conspiracy to degrade women. If you know any men - or women! - who have that sort of time on their hands, they desperately need a day job.)

If we were to ignore her, and treat people with respect regardless (sort of like we did to Bieber, only 'respect' in this case involved involving law enforcement as appropriate) this wouldn't even be a thing in the first place. The people behind this are trolls. It's not Anita's fault that this is happening - she's excersizing her right to express her opinion, which is OK even if some disagree with it - it's theirs, because they're perpetuating both her militant views by justifying them, and their own counter-militancy. As a wise Ravenclaw once said, "The answer is that a circle has no beginning."

By continuing this, we're feeding said trolls a five-course meal. As citizens of the Internet, don't we know better than this?

 

I'm not sure it's actually her opinion as she co-writes it with that dude she's business partners with. But I care so little for it all, that I have completely disregarded her since I was already well aware of women having a hard time in game development. I have eyes and ears, I don't need to listen to someone who frankly partly harms the 'cause' for women's equality by having piss poor research with a clear bias.

So no, I'm not a fan of people jumping on bandwagons. I don't think it's changed anything other than annoy half the internet. So far, no good has actually come of it. There was already men and women righting wrongs against women in game development long before she came along with kickstarter, and it's still these men and women making the real difference while misguided people think its all some sort of new scandal as opposed to a general oppression of women which many fight against in real and useful ways.

Real and useful doesn't mean twisting things and manipulating, no.

 

Indeed she has an effect on what happens, because on how she expresses it, what words shes uses, why does she want to shows to all people she is a victim or think only that way ? this will only attract even more problems and people that will go that way with her.
She would better let it down and find better constructive things to do instead, the way she is taking and how she is dealing with it is not constructive and not good for her, i don't think she will benefit anything good form that.

There are many ways of expressing your opinions, she don't use a good way, she's not really aware of that. But perhaps it's her goal to make as much noise and scandal as possible ?

She should listen to hippocoder

 

Ideally, yes. But the world isn't ideal. It's all well and good for us to shrug and think "eh, I'm not part of the problem, so I'm just going to ignore it" but that doesn't change the fact that these issues diminish our industry as a whole and our culture.

I'm not saying that we should all start rallying, etc, but I do believe that healthy discussion, awareness raising, and similar are all highly valuable. For the most part people aren't contributing to the problems because they want to be jerks, they genuinely don't know any better, and it's a shame for those who do know better to willfully pass on opportunities to help others do the same.

 

I choose the third option, which is to do the right thing as far as I'm concerned. That means things like treating female employees with total respect, and equal salary. It means ignoring the politics of the issue as defined differently by many. My games won't change.

 

But that's totally the first option. What you're saying is that as long as you're personally doing the right thing there's no point putting any more thought or effort into the issue. Which, as I said before, is perfectly fine in an ideal world.

Here's the thing, right: I'd love to hire more females but there's darn few of them here to hire. That's a problem, and the state of the industry means it's likely to stay more of a problem for longer, because we're more or less encouraging skilled and talented ladies to go elsewhere. Yes, I could contentedly think "well, I'm not personally mistreating them, so it's not my problem", but that means I'm not contributing to my own desire of having increasingly mixed-gender teams. It's not even about being a feminist. It's entirely about having a better team.

 

Also, to be perfectly clear, I'm not suggesting you should change your games. It's not (just) the games that need changing.

 

Concealed carry. 'Nuff sed.

 

Gamergaters are about "corruption in journalism" in the same way that the KKK is about "state's rights".

 

Whenever a woman asserts herself, there will always be some men who get all butt hurt and want to put her in her place. They are usually tiny little men with tiny little... minds. We live in a world where women are in danger of acid attacks, rape, and getting shot in the face for speaking up for their rights.

 

Somehow I just can't see Sarkeesian finding a gun that goes well with her gender identifiers. (sadly I think that joke is so inside it will probably hit a batter)

 

Justin Bieber has a security detail, and they do not allow guns to be carried into his shows. The school and the police both said they would not provide security, and that they specifically wanted to ensure that attendees felt comfortable carrying concealed weapons in (Utah is a funny place), so she decided not to go. If someone said they were going to kill me, and the cops' response was that they're more concerned with making sure that lots of people bring lots of concealed guns to my speech, I'd cancel too.

 

I have to say it's kinda funny how many responses say they disagree with Sarkeesian while simultaneously saying they refuse to listen to anything she says. How do you know you disagree with her if you don't even know what she's saying?

 

We shouldn't forget the fourth option, which is to place every American under total surveillance, strip them of all of their little "gun rights", and in place of those, provide them free, unlimited access to psychiatrical services, medication, and conflict resolution services. Only then it will be safe for the average American to eat his cheeseburger, drink his coke, and watch endless violent, sexist movies or play his favorite violent, gory, sexist games.

Anita Sarkeesian is from Canada, and to my knowledge, Canadians play the same games as do the Americans, and yet do not blow up schools, theaters, or entire countries with democratically elected leaders just because someone disagrees with them. American game developers do have a responsibility to their public when at least 85% of their male population are potential or fully realized violent psychotics.

Carry on

 

I've only second hand heard one thing she said, which was criticism of an Assassin's Creed game for using the death of a prostitute as an excuse to assassinate someone. I disagreed with that because while it sounds valid out of context, when you consider the games as a whole the same thing happens to lots of people - not just females. It's about assassins being involved in a long term secret war - lots of events are predicated by someone being killed, chances of one of them somewhere being a defenceless female are high. But...

Still, I've never said I disagree with her because a) I heard that secondhand, and it may not even be correct but, more importantly, b) she's given plenty of examples, so applying the same reasoning as above here, chances of at least one of them being flawed are high. One sub-perfect example doesn't invalidate her message as a whole.

 

There is quite a difference between placing everyone under surveillance and having tighter gun control. Not that you aren't already under "surveillance" by the Internet tracking you.

 

Yeah, surveillance might actually work.

We have "tighter gun control" here. It has essentially zero effect on the people who we don't want to have guns, because those people don't care about following the law in the first place. I think in this regard culture is far more important than law.

 

85% eh? No wonder you're afraid of Americans. I would be too if I didn't know that whoever believes this is crazier than 99.9% of Americans.

 

To call you out specifically hippo, since you said you've never listened to her, how do you know she has "piss poor research with a clear bias". Also, do you think that saying one side has "piss poor research with a clear bias" counts as "steering clear" and remaining neutral?

 

I wish more people thought this way.

 

I said: I don't listen to her, as in I don't place any merit on her opinions after the initial observations proved to be driven by bad research and over the top observations. So what I mean by 'I don't listen' to her is after that fact of checking her out. In any case I am well and able to judge for myself if there is a problem. There is but I do not believe knee jerk reactions like changing your game is required, only equal employment opportunities. If we're still talking about game dev, that is.

Reading two transcripts and watching two videos was enough for me to see through it. In any case females working for equal rights and better games exist in the game industry, and it's these people who are making the real difference, as opposed to someone who lives on consultancy fees just so company x won't fall foul of a hideously biased video later.

In any case I am not a sheep, I'm proactive, I am working to better the lives of those around me and I don't see fit to mention details here.

I urge man and woman alike to make their own judgements. There's no need to become a mob mentality in either spectrum. If you treat people with respect and ensure that the proper respect goes on around you - on your terms - you will be doing the right thing. Taking up arms because a clever video shows a biased small clip which distorts reality, is not a good reason.

This doesn't mean problems don't exist, it means you need to be more than sheep, and have a real reason to invest, based on things you fully think through.

 

Any chance you would share what was the "piss poor research" you did watch then?

 

No, I've said my piece. It is not important to me what you think, or if you agree or disagree. It's not my job to change your mind. All I've said is people should think for themselves. I think I have.

 

I'll summarize the last feminist frequency video as she is beating dead hookers to prove her point. There was a certain tinge of irony to that video that made her argument lose pretty much all of it's impact.

The woman just can't construct an argument to save her life (did I just wrap the topic back around?). Everything she levies lacks any and all context. Worse yet is she clearly has no idea about the industry, so she has no idea why anything is the way it is.

 

What is this, an inquisition? A witch hunt? I think the essay he already wrote in answer says more than enough.

Honestly, if everyone did just that bolded bit the world would be a better place.

 

I wasn't so much trying to change your mind, as I was trying to point out that it's a little dishonest to claim that you are above it all, not engaged with either side, and not jumping on bandwagons, while simultaneously claiming that she's an uninformed piss-poor researcher and potential fraud.

 

OK I'll bite. There's a piece where she's highlighting in Watchdogs about a thug beating a woman. She uses this to construct an argument how evil the game is, when if you just look around the corner, the ai is also doing the exact same thing to men. It's by doing a tiny clip like this (which that series does all too often) and taking out of context, that made me stop following.

It wasn't the only instance, I spotted it frequently through the 2 shows I did watch.

Now hopefully you'll understand my reluctance to support this particular channel, while choosing instead to support women who are actively working in the game industry as developers.

In my opinion, it's damaging to present poor research or biased research. It causes people to argue the validity of the research and ignore the real problems, hence my choice to ignore it and support women in the way I have always done: with equality and respect.

 

His post was much shorter when I first replied. Damn the easy access to the edit post button!

 

A "witch" hunt? Why not a wizard hunt? Why do you hate women, mr penguin?

 

If you mean this one: http://www.feministfrequency.com/2014/08/women-as-background-decoration-part-2/

There is, luckily, a transcript! Which I will quote:

She even shows a scene of the guy-vs-guy random scripted event. So what is your problem with it exactly? I don't see this as "piss poor research". In fact, no offense, but if you didn't notice that she directly talked about the guy-vs-guy event five seconds later, I might call into question your own research skills.

 

I think you've got that backward. I was saying a witch hunt is a bad thing. Perhaps if it were a wizard hunt only targeting men I'd not have cared.

 

I'm not sure that calling someone whose work you've hardly even watched a "piss poor researcher" is really what I'd call respect. Also, calling everyone who agrees with her mindless sheep, and proclaiming that only those who disagree with her are thinking for themselves, is not really respectful either. That's kind of the point I'm driving at here. You're kind of saying "I respect all women equally, except the ones who think I don't respect them equally, because they're stupid idiot biased assfaces who I don't respect at all." It's a bit hypocritical to demand that your opposition treat you with respect when you're calling them mindless idiot sheep.

 

This is an episode where she spends a good chunk of the time trying to equate the portrayal of violence against women as pornographic, right? Or did I read between the lines too much?

 

I agree with what I think you're driving at with the post overall, but I don't think hippo intended anything like the words you're putting in his mouth here. He was saying people should think for themselves, and that people who don't do that are sheep. The sheep thing had nothing to do with whether or not they agree with his or anyone else's specific views.

Separately, he was giving his own reasons for disagreeing with what he's seen of the videos. Note that he and I actually have very similar experiences with them and even stated similar things... why is hippo getting an inquisition where I got likes? (The answer, as always, is presentation.)

 

Fellows,

We can debate the merits of Sarkeesian's arguments at a later date!

The more pressing issue is what you American game developers can do and in fact should do to prevent the majority of your American fan base that consists of psychotic violent Columbine, Virginia Tech variety of male gamers from acting out the violence and gore in the real world when somebody merely disagrees with them.

 

Forgive me for being curt, but you sir are an idiot. The only people who actually believe that games bare any responsibility to those events either work for Hollywood, or wish to work for Hollywood. Everyone else can cite study after study that show zero correlation between games and violence. If anything, those who play games are LESS likely to commit such acts.

 

That's enough.

--Eric