This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

The Anita Saarkesian Thread

edited March 2013 in Video Games
This topic keeps seeping into other threads. I figure that if we're talking about it as much as we are, we ought to have a dedicated thread for it. Anyway, in case you didn't know, Anita Saarkesian is a person who did a Kickstarter

And now is doing things on Youtube

And is getting lots of attention

All I really have to say is that I don't like how she disabled video responses, because it meant I had to click 10 or 15 times to get those videos when it could have taken me only 3 or 4. Oh, and plaid shirts really need to be over (regarding her attire in Tropes v Women vol 1), but nothing of particular substance.

So, discuss.


  • Well thanks for putting all those videos together in one thread for me because I usually couldn't find fucks to give to find the drama, but if it's conveniently laid out for me...
  • You're welcome. I should say that I don't know if these videos are representative of the response, since I have watched none of them. I copied the first reaction video from the ToYD thread, and the other two semi-randomly from related videos. I only just finished watching the first Tropes v Women.

    She's not wrong, but she really annoys me and I disagree with her separate from that. Love me I'm a liberal/10, would not watch again.
  • I dislike her disabling of comments. I like plaid shirts.
  • I approve of disabling the comments. I am ambivalent about plaid shirts.
  • I approve of and encourage disabling comments. I dislike her earrings.
  • edited March 2013
    I should clarify (before there are any heated arguments on the subject) that, while I like plaid shirts, it's not a type of clothing I would wear and there are some people who shouldn't wear it either.
    Post edited by Victor Frost on
  • I disliked her disabling comments, but after the amount of legitimate and scary threats she received, I can understand wanting to end the discourse before it begins. When you've had that message sent to you I imagine thousands of times, it would honestly be frightening, and I could imagine wanting to stop it.
  • I wanted to comment on the video that the first Mario vs. Donkey Kong game was actually on the GameBoy Advance, not the DS.
  • Besides, it's not that she is censoring discussion; people are discussing it everywhere. We are discussing it right now. But honestly I totally understand not wanting to have to deal with that shit on your doorstep if you could avoid it.
  • You can always tweet at her.
  • I strongly disagree with disabling comments on any YouTube video. Otherwise, that video was quite long and surface level, there isn't much to be said about it.
  • NO.

    Literally the only place where one can discuss this on the Internet is in her comments. THIS WILL NOT STAND.
  • Literally the only place where one can discuss this on the Internet is in her comments. THIS WILL NOT STAND.
    It is the most appropriate venue.
  • I can certainly understand why she would want to disable comments, I just disagree strongly with the practice. In the past it has been indicative of being unable to defend your beliefs in the marketplace of ideas.
  • The idea that Youtube comments are an appropriate venue for discussion in any context is lulz-worthy. I have that "herp derp" ad-on installed because I cannot stand to look upon them (for to gaze into the comments is to see the raw, unfiltered stuff of the internet stare back. It's like warp travel in Warhammer 40,000.), and the structure is absolute shit for actual discussion and debate anyway. Also, you should try to find that big picture of the comments that were there before the disabling occurred; it was gross on a whole new level.
  • edited March 2013

    sorry i get really all-capsy when people defend youtube comments
    Post edited by trogdor9 on
  • edited March 2013
    I have never seen an intelligent, civil discussion underneath a YouTube video.
    Post edited by Walker on
  • edited March 2013
    I am almost certain that Youtube comments are not posted physically, but instead generated from the worst of the raw impulses of humankind as they go about life, appearing spontaneously. Again, like the warp. Any continuity there is merely knots of emotion and thought which have taken on semi-sentience in the service of the four dark masters of the internet; Bigotry, Conspiracy, Extremism, and pure, unfiltered Stupidity.
    Post edited by open_sketchbook on
  • edited March 2013
    She did not just disable comments, she also disabled ratings and blocked anybody from replying to her videos. Comments are ancillary at best, but video responses are how a real discussion and debate gets going, and ratings are the metric for determining which argument has greater popular support.

    Disabling comments is merely symbolic, but it is a real shame that she also refuses to allow responses and ratings.
    Post edited by Lord Mordrek on
  • Real talk though, where you even going to look at any of the video responses? Do people actually do that? They are 9 times out of 10 poorly though out video blog responses anyway. Hard for me to claim it's a "real shame".
  • I have seen intelligent Youtube comments. I have made them and taken part in intelligent discussion. While 99% of them are awful, Scrym's rule of everything applies.
  • I have never seen an intelligent, civil discussion underneath a YouTube video.
    But have you also never seen an intelligent and civil opinion stated in the form of a comment, without it being in response to someone else?
  • Nah, but since they weren't responding to anyone the comments weren't relevant.
  • edited March 2013
    Does anyone here remember the time when youtube was used as the primary battleground for debate between Creationists and Evolutionists(here used for the sake of brevity)? There were massive series of debates and discussions being carried out in video response form all over the place. It was the common trend that the Evolutionists kept their videos completely free and open for response and criticism, and boy was there criticism. Conversely, many creationist youtubers locked down their videos as much as possible, with some going so far as to comb through all of the comments, and only allow those which agreed with their views. They claimed, like Sarkeesian, that they were merely blocking out abusive comments and insults. In reality they had done it because they lacked the capacity to defend their views openly and fairly, because logic and reason were not on their side.

    I see a lot of that censorship streak in Sarkeesian, and I don't like it.
    Post edited by Lord Mordrek on
  • You mean like Thunderfoot - who has essentially been exiled from the mainstream skeptics movement for being "That guy" with a vindictive streak, essentially - debating the cringe-inducingly named VenomFangX, or that old guy he had a hate-on for?

    Those wern't debates, nor were most of the similar videos. That was people fulfilling a smug sense of self-importance and yelling at people they saw as inferior. It wasn't debate, it was ego-stroking in a pretty dress and makeup.

  • Ego-stroking? No more so than what you are doing right now sir.
  • Ego-stroking? No more so than what you are doing right now sir.
    Really? Really?
  • edited March 2013

    sorry i get really all-capsy when people defend youtube comments
    SciShow, PBS Idea Channel, CrashCourse, SixtySymbols, Vertiasium... all hosts to erudite and interesting YouTube comments.
    Post edited by Victor Frost on
  • I should also bring up the fact that she didn't start disabling of YouTube comments on her videos after her Kickstarter thing took off. She was engaging in this before as well. It has been part of her Modus Operandi for a while and is not a direct response to the trolling after the Kickstarter project.

    There is btw. also the option of requiring approval by the channel owner for comments before they appear, which is pretty much as orwellian as disabling them completely, but at least lets actually serious people try to provide an argument. I attempted to do so on her Sucker Punch video, but the comment has never appeared. It may be that the entire discussion about Sucker Punch is "closed" for her, or that she simply hasn't looked at the comment at all though. However, this ambiguity is what annoys me.

    Anyway, I strongly disagree with her disabling youtube comments. If there's really a bunch of reprehensible morons posting rape threats and so on, they can be removed afterwards, or if they remain standing they will serve nothing other than encourage sympathy for her and showcase the stupidity of the commenter. If really worse comes to worse, people will simply ignore the comments anyway because they are YouTube comments and don't exactly have a large standing in terms of social media.
  • edited March 2013
    I haven't seen much of her work other than the first Tropes video, but something just doesn't sit right with me. That video seemed far to drawn-out and she sort of just said the same thing over and over. And I agree that the whole damsel in distress thing is sexist and everything but its also just cliche and lazy writing. Plus I'm not sure about the Star fox example she gave. Sure the overly sexualized female character is bad but I don't think they made the game into a Star Fox game because of some sort of male superiority complex. Over and over game companies take the safe route and make games in established franchises rather than new ones. The did the same thing with Star Fox Adventures because they probably thought that would sell better than a one-off Dinosaur Planet game.

    Plus I don't like her her earrings and something about the way she talks annoys me.
    Post edited by ninjarabbi on
Sign In or Register to comment.