... Okay, really?Do you really think she got all that money from horny men that want to fuck her instead of thousands of feminazis out there with money to spare that would love to see their points validated by an internet celebrity?Or do you think that only men have money to donate to causes they deem relevant to their interests?
No, feminists do.Hint : not all feminists are women. Why would you even act like it's limited to women when everyone is saying FEMINISTS, not WOMEN.
Only feminazis do. And feminazis can be both male or female.She clearly isn't defending a feminist stance on her videos, since she disregards the improvement and the positive examples we had in recent games, such as the Double Dragon Neon ending.
RobotMonkeyHead said, March 26, 2013, 12:29:40 amIced said, March 26, 2013, 12:21:06 amRobotMonkeyHead said, March 26, 2013, 12:14:12 amDid anyone even read the article? Or any of it?did you read this thread? the same one where you were claiming gamers here were supporting her because she was hot first? ( hint, you didnt, no one supported her ) I'll take that as a no. and i will take that as "I was and am making comments about how people are reacting without actually reading their reactions "That the situation can happen doesnt mean it happens in all cases, its even less likely in a case like this, obviously majorly feminist driven.Being charismatic, well spoken, well presented, etc ( the executive example i gave before ) led her to the position where she could head that mini part of the movement, that is not the same as "shes hot and people want to fuck her, so they listen to her points after being attracted by the hotness", which is a major objectivization of her.I might disagree with her on a ton of points, but I wouldnt objectify her like that. It implies that as long as you are pretty every skill you have is put in question.
DKDC said, March 26, 2013, 12:43:07 amNo, feminists do.Hint : not all feminists are women. Why would you even act like it's limited to women when everyone is saying FEMINISTS, not WOMEN.Because I misread. It happens. No shouting is required.
Capital is for emphasize, not necessarily shouting. And I did well since those are precisely the words you missed.
LMAO Titlin for that link on the other page. lol Ok i see hot women all the time, i work with them at my job too. but i be damned if they cam,e to me and asked me for money that i would blindly give them money . LOL Her being " attractive" has no bearing on her having a cause to raise money unless that was the whole motivation to do so. Use her beauty to get money. I can name hundreds of women i personally would deem far more attractive than her and i still wouldnt give them money based on their beauty. If your attractive then your attractive. Now if you use it to sell something then that is totally different ( example ..models that advertise clothing and such ) . I haven't seen anything about her that she is selling herself ( body , sex, etc) to anyone ( cause women could have donated money as well and not just men) that she would go out and bang people that gave money or any kind of exchange of any kind of service for the money. Her being "hot" really isnt part of the reason for the discussion and has zero bearing on the topic unless those that can't find any reason other than why Men ( if exclusively talking about just Men) find her hot and dont care about the subject she is presenting and just threw away money is the only reason they can think of. lol. If smart people really researched her and what her standpoints and views have been when asking for donation ( see iced links from previous pages ) then they wouldn't be giving her a penny wether she was pretty or not. I think she is exploiting both Kickstarter, the people who donate and the feminist community by scamming innocent folks out of their money by starting causes she herself dont truly believe in and behave in such ways as exploiting her own kids for a camp for her daughter that this woman can pay for herself with ease. think about this.. she asked for a donation in full of 800 odd dollars... she got 20 grand.. so what happens to all the rest of the money after the 800 is paid for the daughter to attend the camp? Once she got ther 800 , hmmmm why she just didnt cut it off and say thanx for donations instead of letting it build to such a ridiculous level of money for something so small and personal? She is a scam artist. If this has worked before then she will continue as long as people will toss money at her causes without being logical about the entire thing as a whole and see the real deal.
I think I see what's going on here. Before I read anything else about this girl, I read "girl asks for $6000 for feminist video game study and gets $158,000", and skimmed the article, so I made this joke: QuoteGirl - I want a pile of money and video games. Maybe I'll ask the internet, and tell 'em it's for research.Internet - You're hawt. Here's 26 times the absurd amount of money you asked for. How did you like the games? And the new house, car and manager?Girl - bla bla blaInternet - I find your interpretations of gender and sex in video games interesting enough to write a wall of text. Please find me and fuck me. What other castle?Yeah, that just happened. I still think it's funny, and for the most part actually appropriate, but it is a comment only on the basest notions at play. (I think her 'points' may have held on to her audience a bit, but I don't think half of that audience (feminists and gamers alike) would have given her nearly as much consistent support if she hadn't been attractive as well. That's what I was humorously calling this thread out on, because I couldn't see her stirring up the walls of texts she did had she been disgustingly and horrifyingly ugly. *Barfs on titln*. To be fair at that point I hadn't done the reading to know that she had a previously established following, and that was all just conjecture, but I don't feel like I turned out to be too far off. Then, before I read much more I made this comment:QuoteI think as a moderately attractive young woman, she's capitalizing on the same points she's railing against by appealing to a mostly male under 30 target demographic with a social life eating habit. If her picture had instead been of an unkempt overweight man in his early 40's with a long, renowned and informed video game history, how much money do you think he would have gotten for the same project? I think she's working everyone who gave her a dime or plugs her article, and now she's loaded, because she successfully stereotyped her target demographic. Cynical, maybe, but to me it honestly seems like what's going on.At this point I still hadn't given her much reading, but I did make the basic point, which I later supported with this article about physical attractiveness as it relates to success in general. The basic point I made was that she is where she is precisely because of the biases she's railing against. I'm saying she was objectivized as an attractive woman by a large portion of her audience, and given more attention and consideration as such on that basis. Whether or not her brain was able to keep her audiences attention and represent it well enough I think was far third to (and I only recently learned this) her working the damsel in distress angle for sympathy cash, whether or not that was her intention (does smell funny, I have to admit, but who knows). But it was certainly, from where I'm sitting, her gaining massive cash and publicity at the advantage of two stereotypes to which she is apparently vehemently opposed.Whatever terrible criticism she received from the gaming community for saying that their favorite past time was misogynistic (whether deserved or not) is tough to use as a reason to validate actually supporting her and her claims. It's the kind of thing I can see getting overlooked in a quick decision / knee jerk situation, but supporting her is really not a binary issue, you can just as easily agree or disagree with her points, and still say it was wrong to victimize her to that extent. And again, I think a good portion of her funding was probably a knee jerk to the damsel in distress situation, which I think also itself relies at least somewhat on her appearance anyway. Not trying to be sexist or objectivize her from my own perspective, just looking at her personal presentation the points she's making and the situation she's in, and trying to draw the most realistic assessment I can gather. What I've come to is what I said.If you all have anything new to offer for the points your making, I'm all ears, but that's where I'm at as of now anyway. Posted: March 26, 2013, 03:58:15 am@C.R.O.M Lando: I agree with most of what you just said. I think not throwing money at someone simply because they're attractive would be the intelligent thing to do. It doesn't, however, seem to be the average thing people do, at least according to anything I've read. I'm not saying she's trying to whore herself out or anything, just that I think she has capitalized on her looks, and played her roles as well, while knocking the looks and roles of video game bitches. I agree to some extent I think she is kind of a scam artist for not just taking what she needed in terms of donations, and allowing it to get to such an insane amount... though it's tough for me to imagine myself cutting it off and denying people from donating to whatever the hell I started. Either way though, I think the general sentiment is the same here. I think she worked her situation for personal cash, and probably won't give people a result even close to worth what they paid her for.
Big Sister said, March 09, 2013, 07:01:08 pmWhat a disgusting pile of console games.Console games are like the best video games ever made lolwtf 360 games? Why not ps3? The study is useless without ps3
It's only a part of the full list on that picture, she didn't take a picture of the entire pile. Beside, there are PS3 games in that picture, the second pile on the right is PS3 games.
Titiln said, March 26, 2013, 12:32:20 ammy search for "anita sarkeesian is hot" got one result in a reddit thread~what the fuck does that tell you~That you need reddit to tell you whether or not a woman is attractive? Or maybe that for the second time, even with me pointing right to it, you've failed to read the part where I said "not out loud" meaning I don't think this is a key talking point for most people (and I can see why) but I do think it's a very heavy factor none the less. Here's pretty much everything you've said in response to my point so far:Quoteshe gets money because that's how kickstarter works. she got way more than what she asked for because her project was of interest to many. she's absolutely not the first one to get money through a kickstarter while doing jack shit. if pikachu guy had some kind of talent or interesting proposal then he could get funding through kickstarter, but alas.you're, for some reason, assuming that the project was largely funded by horny men that want a blowjob from her when it was probably 90% feminists you're playing devil's advocate in a subject you have no idea abouther looks are comparatively a very small factor in the amount of money she got compared to A: being a feminist B: being someone that was on the receiving end of (mostly empty) death and rape threats. it's no secret that most people are likelier to take interest in something offered by a beautiful looking person, but this isn't the case. literally nobody is going OH SHE'S SO PRETTY I WANT TO donate a certain amount of money so she can research on the subject of females in videogames WHAT A FUCKING BABE find me a group of posters or thread anywhere talking about how attractive she is and how we should donate based on that. you're keep talking absolute fucking nonsense. oh so most of the money comes from people that secretly want to fuck her. their fetish is giving money to attractive people. a huge number of men, yet you can't find a small group that actually says it out loud. your argument is complete horseshit and you should drop it for your own sakeRobotMonkeyHead said, Yesterday, 06:42 PM Yes, the average fetish (cross culture and gender) is to "give attractive people money".which is absolutely not the case here for reasons i've already stated. her being attractive is a very small factor, i've already detailed why and your rebuttals have been essentially meaningless. i consider what you're saying. i consider it inane. she's a feminist. the type of man that gives money to women just because they're hot is a sexist and therefore has zero interest in feminist issues. that type of man would not support this cause. you'll probably reply to this with a wiki link that has jack shit to do with what i said or you'll point out a typo. barf i've decided to do the research myself (since rmh could not) and find out how many people believe anita sarkeesian is hothttp://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22anita+sarkeesian+is+hot%22lol my search for "anita sarkeesian is hot" got one result in a reddit thread~what the fuck does that tell you~ Ok, your entire point here is that her money came from 90% feminists and that her looks had very very little to do with anything, right? Your support is that feminists are not concerned with whether or not someone is attractive. Here's why your point is 'horseshit' (in your own terms):1) Feminists and gamers overlap, not all feminists are women, not all women are straight, and neither feminists nor gamers are excluded from the list of people who form character assessments based on physical appeal. Saying that feminists are immune to favoring attractive people is just inane. Supporting equal rights for women and men is a completely separate issue from whether or not they are attractive. Feminists are anti-sexist, not anti-sexyist. They do overlap where feminists assert that woman are treated as sex objects, but their attractiveness is not the perceived problem, peoples reaction to it is. Whether morally reprehensible or not, often enough that reaction is very predictable (being that they favor the sexy with undue credibility), which is my point, and is well supported with plenty of research. Not that a bunch of drooling horny straw men want to pay her to let them give her the stick. That's a humorous exaggeration of what I'm saying, that on some base level may be poetically true, but I think it misses a lot of the key details in that people who find her attractive also amount to support and audience (which is kept by her points) as well as funding. 2) Read it, for your own sake.3) The comment I made about her being funded by gamers was just a jab at the people on this thread for giving her attention (which again, if she were a fat balding man, I don't think you/they would have nearly to the same extent), and all of that was admittedly before I'd done any actual reading on this bees nest of hormonal dysfunction. 4) Run on sentence alert: Her looks serve her in the feminist camp because as an attractive woman, she's perceived as being more likely to have experienced being treated with the biases she's opposing, one of which is sexually objectivizing women, making her point somewhat accurate, but at the same time hypocritical, in that being objectivized has worked to her benefit, both in building an audience and playing the damsel over at 4 chan, which is another separate instance of a similar hypocrisy. 5) Clone her, but mess with the clones looks. You have 2 Anitas (oh christ) one looks how she looks, and the other is just road pizza ugly, but with the exact same mind and coarse of action (up to and including dress, hair style makeup and personal 'presentation). Now imagine how the entire thing would play out for both of them, beginning years ago with building an audience. Little to no difference in the 2 scenarios is what you're telling me? I fart in your general direction. As far as I can tell, barring any new info, my point remains completely sound despite you ignoring the well researched realistic evidence for it. (See #2.) All that in light of the point at hand, I don't mean you any personal disrespect.
RobotMonkeyHead said, March 26, 2013, 05:53:20 pmOr maybe that for the second time, even with me pointing right to it, you've failed to read the part where I said "not out loud" meaning I don't think this is a key talking point for most people (and I can see why) but I do think it's a very heavy factor none the less. That will still be false until you can prove it. That's just your own speculation that you're forcing onto everyone else, claiming "that's what they really think". Anyone can claim "they're doing this because X, and they'll never admit it, but I know the truth !"Back it up or back up already. Until you can do that, your claim will still be ridiculous.Quote1) Feminists and gamers overlap, not all feminists are women, not all women are straight, and neither feminists nor gamers are excluded from the list of people who form character assessments based on physical appeal. Saying that feminists are immune to favoring attractive people is just inane. Supporting equal rights for women and men is a completely separate issue from whether or not they are attractive. Feminists are anti-sexist, not anti-sexyist. They do overlap where feminists assert that woman are treated as sex objects, but their attractiveness is not the perceived problem, peoples reaction to it is. Whether morally reprehensible or not, often enough that reaction is very predictable (being that they favor the sexy with undue credibility), which is my point, and is well supported with plenty of research. Not that a bunch of drooling horny straw men want to pay her to let them give her the stick. That's a humorous exaggeration of what I'm saying, that on some base level may be poetically true, but I think it misses a lot of the key details in that people who find her attractive also amount to support and audience (which is kept by her points) as well as funding. There's still no relation of causality between one and the other, so don't claim they're funding her because of that, even with all your researches.Quote2) Read it, for your own sake.Still no causality.Quotemy point remains completely sound despite you ignoring the well researched realistic evidence for it.There have been researches on a certain subject. You have repeatedly failed to prove that these researches had any sort of application in this case. So your researches are completely useless and not proof of anything.
DKDC said, March 26, 2013, 05:58:01 pmRobotMonkeyHead said, March 26, 2013, 05:53:20 pmOr maybe that for the second time, even with me pointing right to it, you've failed to read the part where I said "not out loud" meaning I don't think this is a key talking point for most people (and I can see why) but I do think it's a very heavy factor none the less. That will still be false until you can prove it. That's just your own speculation that you're forcing onto everyone else, claiming "that's what they really think". Anyone can claim "they're doing this because X, and they'll never admit it, but I know the truth !"Back it up or back up already. Until you can do that, your claim will still be ridiculous.Here's an excerpt from the article I posted. For a bibliography and links to the studies, check the article.Beauty Premium PhenomenonStudies show that physical appearance does affect people's concept in which beauty are likely good-better, smart-successful and important-valuable according these fourteen facts:-Physically attractive people' score is higher than less physically attractive people on measures of affect and mood.[15]-People tend to believe attractive people as smarter, more successful, more sociable, more dominant, sexually warmer, mentally healthier and higher in selfesteem than their physically unattractive people,[16] but studies show that there is no intelligent difference between attractive people and less attractive people.[17]-Physically attractive people are more sociable and less socially anxious and lonely than less physically attractive people.[18]-Physically attractive people are more popular than less attractive people and people are more likely to have a interaction with people who are physically attractive.[19]-We are more likely to give personal information to physically attractive people than we less physically attractive people.[20]-Physically attractive person is more likely to be reinforced than physically unattractive person.[21]-Physically unattractive people are more likely to be identified as psychopaths over physically attractive people.[22]-Physically attractive people with psychological disturbance are judged to be more maladjusted and to have a poorer prognosis than less physically attractive people with the same psychological disturbance.[23]-A physically attractive person is more likely to be found not less guilty than less attractive person while they are charged with the same crime.[24]-Physically unattractive defendants are considered to be more dangerous than better looking offender in sex-related crime.[25]-Physically attractive individuals found guilty of a particular crime are more likely to receive more nice sentences than less attractive defendants.[26]-We pay more attentions towards physically attractive strangers than to unattractive strangers of either sex. For example, people avoided sitting next to people with physical deformities.[27]-Physically attractive people have same reaction when they become addicted to cocaine and gambling.[28]-People with facial disfigurements and other flaws are more undesirable, even babies seem to prefer physically attractive faces than to physically unattractive ones.[29]
DKDC said, March 26, 2013, 05:58:01 pmThat will still be false until you can prove it. That's just your own speculation that you're forcing onto everyone else, claiming "that's what they really think". Anyone can claim "they're doing this because X, and they'll never admit it, but I know the truth !"Back it up or back up already. Until you can do that, your claim will still be ridiculous.DKDC said, March 24, 2013, 07:12:08 pmIt would have failed if she had been a man, but it's not the reason it worked either.You're still quoting random researches without proving that this is what actually happened in this case. Your researches are still irrelevant until proven otherwise.
You guys are some stubborn motherfuckers. You keep going in circles, on the horse of your repeating arguments over and over getting nowhere, and at this point only the less-than-a-handful of users are the only ones coming back to this thread ... to prove they're right, and ignoring each other's valid points (yeah, I'll give it to you, you both make reasonable points to some extent).It should stop, seriously. This fucking thread has been plagued and doomed since its begining by repeatedly delving in semantics and trivial nonsense about the PERSON making the study, and nobody is discussing the interesting TOPIC of the study.Small minds discuss people.Average minds discuss events.Great minds discuss ideas.
walt's right - i'm done repeating the same bullshit to someone that replies with irrelevant articles and is unbelievably dense in general
Well, I did ask everyone here respectfully if I should continue with my point or just stop, and no one told me to stop. But seeing as someone actually is now, I guess I will. I'll give one last response to the idea of 'the person giving the studies' vs 'the topics'. I don't think her topics are new, interesting, groundbreaking or anything that we haven't heard a million and a half times before. I found the instance of her getting all that cash and free games (on top of what looks like her doubtful ability to reciprocate) more interesting than her points, so that's what I've been commenting on. That's about it, really. I do think debate is relatively healthy especially in relevant opinion forming, in so far as it doesn't devolve to personal insult and remains on topic, which (with mild exception) I think has pretty much been the case here.Anyway, at walt's request I'm leaving this one alone from here out unless someone decides to call me back into the discussion...Peace, and I hope someone gained insight from this stuff. It's certainly made me think a bit.
Anita Sarkeesian is not even hot. She just looks like a person.Oh, wait! Does that mean that beauty is subjective and that just because I think someone is hot, doesn't mean thousands of other people also think that that same person is hot and are simultaneously dumb enough to give away money to that person just because they think that person is attractive, all while knowing that they will probably never even physically see that person in their lives and that that person will probably never even acknowledge their individual existences? Amazing!
