1
198
199

Thunderf00t denounces Video Games' effects on people, and feminist Anita Sarkeesian's arguments (youtube.com)

submitted by Sambo333

top 200 commentsshow all 222
sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]RodneyKingoftheHill[🍰] 72 ポイント73 ポイント

This is what happens when you give a person with zero experience conducting quantitative research a fuck ton of money. The product is a methodless, wannabe qualitative mound of sensationalist bullshit.
Edit: Looked up her bio on wikipedia. She recieved her BA in Communications and MA in Social and Political Thought. I'm assuming she took a stats course in one of her COMM classes. Does anyone know about an MA in Social and Political Thought? Sound's pretty qualitative oriented. In any case, if she actually does have a background in quant courses, then she either paid zero attention to what was going on or is just blindly ignoring it to push her agenda...not sure which is worse.

[–]Ocho8 46 ポイント47 ポイント

She's appealing to her audience. Its not meant for "us" its meant for the people who shelled out their money to have their beliefs confirmed. Confirmation bias is a serious problem in this day and age.

[–]RodneyKingoftheHill[🍰] 15 ポイント16 ポイント

It's kind of pathetic. If you're throwing money at someone to conduct quantitative research they better damn well know what constitutes as a threat to external validity. All research is going to be subject to some sort of bias, but this is ridiculous. You don't hire a feminist to root out sexism in video games, that'd be like hiring a catholic priest to seek out the existence of god. Whatever their research is they cherry pick quotes from articles and ignore p-values, sample sizes, HOV,etc. BLEHHHHH.

[–]Ocho8 4 ポイント5 ポイント

From an academic standpoint it is quite frustrating. However, i'd argue that the people throwing money at her are not academics and dont care about methods or accountability. Instead they wanted to white knight/support a "cause" that they believed would confirm what they already thought. The facts be damned seems to be a common consensus when it comes to genes studies on both sides.

[–]StorytalesDan 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Confirmation bias is a serious problem in this day and age.

It's kind of pathetic.

As a redditor, I can confirm.

[–]molluskus 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Ironic how you say that while on reddit.

[–]Sir_Fancy_Pants 28 ポイント29 ポイント

don't forget she started out with the conclusion and asked for funding to then "do a ton of research" that in itself should tell you how fucking retarded she is.

anyone with even a basic grasp of highschool education knows research should come before the conclusion.

[–]dermballs 5 ポイント6 ポイント

All she did was discuss what is pretty much a week long course in feminism. It's pretty basic stuff. She is not writing a thesis, she is just discussing what has already been discussed at length but in video games.

[–]Jabronez 2 ポイント3 ポイント

A hypotheses comes before research which comes before conclusions. The problem is that she either didn't do any research, or found the research to be contradictory to her hypotheses so she didn't include it in her presentation.

[–]rambonz 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Indutive research, such as that utilising grounded theory does not start with a hypotheses

[–]rambonz 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Bleh post from phone can't edit inductive typo, but you get the point

[–]Talamor 4 ポイント5 ポイント

The problem really comes from wanting to show you are right more than you want to discover what is true. It's an issue with motivations which then poisons what they do regardless of method.

[–]rogersmith25 8 ポイント9 ポイント

$160,000 would have bought a lot of real research... the problem is that you don't know what you're going to get if you give it to someone objective.

The money here was given for a project to show that women are treated unfairly by games, not investigate if women are treated unfairly by games.

I think the reason she doesn't show any data or stats is because it isn't nearly as devastating as her audience and she want it to be.

Yeah, there aren't as many female game heroes in genres with a larger male audience... but you can't make $160,000 worth of videos with that one observation.

[–]asgardcop 5 ポイント6 ポイント

Or she just is in it for the money...

[–]gildencrantz -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Okay. We've got Anita's credentials.

...what are Tundraf33t's?

[–]Zosimasie 1 ポイント2 ポイント

He's an actual, real, publishing scientist, with a Ph.D in chemistry.

[–]Atheist101 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

blindly ignoring it to push her agenda...not sure which is worse.

She is ignoring it for money, plain and simple. Her fake kickstarter campaign raked in hundreds of thousands of dollars so shes set for a least a few years.

[–]moriquendi37 60 ポイント61 ポイント

I find it pretty hard to take a video with a title like: "Feminism Vs FACTS (Anita Sarkeesian DESTROYED!)" at all seriously. Looks like it will be a balanced, mature and respectful refutation of her video.

[–]Sergnb 34 ポイント35 ポイント

It's always hard to take thunderfoot seriously because of his mightier-than-thou condescending attitude and how he makes his videos, but everytime, after rolling my eyes, I end up watching the video, and end up thinking "well he makes good points".

I guess when you are right you have some room for cockiness.

[–]u_got_a_better_idea 20 ポイント21 ポイント

I felt the exact same way, but after watching the video I have to admit I was quite simply wrong.

[–]holditsteady 6 ポイント7 ポイント

This guy sure does know how to pander

[–]Mighty__Helios 8 ポイント9 ポイント

Someone so colossally ignorant deserves such a response. To refute her claims in a respectful way would legitimize her points.

If someone had a kickstarter funded in which they make videos detailing how everyone with the name Bill was actually an alien disguised as a human, would you expect a respectful and mature response to it? Of course not.

Now that I think about it, the example I just gave probably has more of a chance of being accurate than how this women claims video games affects people who play them.

But then again, I guess I am just a man, whos "hatred of women is a source of sexual pleasure..." and not a man who thinks this "bitch be crazy."

[–]HogtownHoedown -1 ポイント0 ポイント

What arguments do you disagree with? Be specific.

[–]Draakon0 3 ポイント4 ポイント

Well, why does Peach get kidnapped by Browser? Is it because Peach is a she (argument made by Anita) or because Peach is an political figure to the Mushroom kingdom, whom without the kingdom could collapse into anarchy (not sure if this is the real intention by Browser). That is one example of many why I disagree with Anita.

[–]HogtownHoedown 2 ポイント3 ポイント

It's princess peach, not beach.

The game never goes into the political stuff. It's simply you looking for your princess.

[–]Draakon0 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

It's simply you looking for your princess

As in terms of love or as in trying to save an political figure from evil because Mario also lives in Mushroom kingdom?

[–]HogtownHoedown 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You're digging quite a story out of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYbs1Nuke4o

[–]Draakon0 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Well, for one, this is just 1 game of the Mario series (which each game introducing more lore/story elements as they come out). And 2nd of all, how can you judge a game if you ignore/skip over many things about it. Granted, that game is about speedrunning, but like I said its just one of many that go into more details about the life in Mushroom kingdom.

Besides, "your princess is in another castle" could mean many things. Mario was looking for his love or he was looking for his master or he was looking for the political figure that was ruling the kingdom Mario lives in.

[–]Sproutzz 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Just watch the video about a person that literally stole 130 thousand dollars to make videos with no actual research, then ask yourself if she really deserves respect and recognition for her work.

[–]holditsteady 3 ポイント4 ポイント

literally stole

[–]FlackRacket 2 ポイント3 ポイント

literally stole

I'm not sure what you mean here, she created the videos that she promised, on the topic that she promised.

[–]jokul 0 ポイント1 ポイント

the title is terrible, but the content is at least on par with the video being responded to. he does have graphs of crime rates / incidences but like the video he responded to he does not cite the sources in his comment section (they are somewhat available in the video however).

[–]popdown -1 ポイント0 ポイント

The attitude and general presentation of the video is a bit jarring but he does make some good points.

Half way through, I started to get a little confused on if he was trying to refute her arguments on video games or if he was trying to refute feminism as a whole.

I thought he did a good job at pointing out how most of her arguments are based on a general lack of knowledge of the game's scenario, how game characters are designed, and/or how the game is played. His role reversal scenarios and examination of the prostitute in Watch Dogs were really well done too.

[–]fgdsdfgfdgsdfgsdfg 46 ポイント47 ポイント

This guy has a terrible and obnoxious way of speaking.

Not that I disagree with anything he says, most of it is very obvious.

[–]twiggyace 23 ポイント24 ポイント

I don't like his mannerism either, he comes across as condescending. But I was taught years ago that just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you disagree with them. You may think it's obvious but his material is good for teenagers with religious parents as he's producing a logical view.

[–]WingOfWar 11 ポイント12 ポイント

Then again, it's kinda hard to not sound condescending when you're talking about text-book Tumblr feminists.

[–]farbenwvnder 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Pretty sure the idea behind the series is to be condescending and give no respect

[–]jindog 1 ポイント2 ポイント

I think he may be speaking to close to the mic. If he would move away from the mic a bit I don't think it would be as bad. Wouldn't watch it either way, but just saying.

[–]catcradle5 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Completely. I agree with almost everything he says, but not the way he says it.

Sarkeesian's videos, in contrast, are actually pretty emotionally neutral and not really bombastic, despite the fact that they're completely illogical and inaccurate.

[–]MrNagasaki 16 ポイント17 ポイント

I don't agree with the original video, but this guy repeats the same stupid "argument" over and over again and thinks he is the shit:

"In popular game X you kill Y, SO WHY DON'T PEOPLE KILL Y IN REAL LIFE?!"

He is so convinced of his own genius, he even titles his own video "Anita Sarkeesian DESTROYED!", what an idiot. People like him only give Sarkeesian credibility she doesn't deserve.

[–]dielectrician 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You can't blame him, he's euphoric

[–]sensorih 2 ポイント3 ポイント

You are pathetic. You have no argument so you use this tired old maymay.

LE TIPPING INTENSIFIES LELELELLELELELELLELELEL LOOK AT ME IM ORIGUNAL.

[–]Brumisator 32 ポイント33 ポイント

It's sad that the spokesperson for feminism in games is such a vile and frankly dumb person as Sarkeesian, as I believe there's real meat for debate in there.

On the other hand, this "debate" has quickly mostly devolved into unfunny jokes and accusations, with neither side having any evidence or proper arguments, this thunderf00t guy doens't seem interested in anything but a reverse-smear campaign. Childish minds playing with adult topics.

[–]Exponentiallyrandom 8 ポイント9 ポイント

I don't really see a debate for sexism in video games. It's a form of art which is pretty much 100% subjective. The major point in all of this is that we have a choice in whether we interact with certain media or not. Men are just as much "objectified" in video games as women. Granted, this doesn't go for everything, but if you want video games to be the way you want them, then make your own. Don't try to force others to do what you want them to do. If it's what people will want, then change will follow.

[–]hopked 4 ポイント5 ポイント

There is a debate for it but it seems to have more to do with simple economics then sexism.

Supply and demand. More men play videos game then women. Thus more appeal towards men.

[–]Exponentiallyrandom 2 ポイント3 ポイント

I find more and more women playing video games these days. Especially the younger generation. And economics doesn't have to play a part in it. Everyone seems to be thinking on a grand scale. Games don't have to be produced by billion-dollar development studios anymore. Anyone can make a game now with enough time and dedication. People would rather complain about non-issues than solve them themselves.

[–]hopked 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You just made the point of economics for me. As the consumer base grows in deversity so will the product. I am in no way only talking about AAA games but just games in general. IE taking the gaming industry as a whole and looking at the amount of games that could be perceived as to appeal more to men as apposed to women.

My assumption is that this gap will close as the consumer base changes. Not because someone did a crowd funded "study" on sexism in gaming, but because more people are gaming.

[–]GaryOak37 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

ffs there doesn't NEED to be a spokesman for feminism in video games

[–]jj123321 20 ポイント21 ポイント

So according to Thunderf00t, the only evidence admittable in the video game behavioral influence debate is murder rates? If I don't kill somebody tomorrow then video games don't have an effect on me at all? Glad we can boil it down so easily!

Anyways, is this Anita lady an idiot? Looks like it. Is Thunderf00t an idiot. Yep.

Is it possible that there is an answer between the two extremes of "video games change you fundamentally" and "video games have no effect on anybody". Fuck yes there is. I play a lot of video games and I don't assume for a second that I am immune subtle influence. It's probably good for us all to step away from the xbox (or pc or ps) and go outside / be social / play a board game every once in a while.

(and don't get me started on violence in board games!)

[–]GaryOak37 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Do you have any proof of this 'subtle influence?' remember, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[–]JukesOfHazrd 0 ポイント1 ポイント

How about here?

[–]cliath 1 ポイント2 ポイント

How about here? ("Bad" video game behavior increases players' moral sensitivity)

[–]JukesOfHazrd 0 ポイント1 ポイント

That's an interesting article, thanks for sharing it. Someone else was mentioning the additional effects of competition in games and how it influences us. Surely there are lots of ways that games exert "subtle influence" on us. It would be really interesting to see some kind of city-wide-ish natural experiment to see how these (and other) effects interacted to affect overall violence/social norms. More aggression plus more guilt=?

[–]Vaultbro 3 ポイント4 ポイント

I don't feel like looking, but if you actually care, I remember reading a study about 6 months ago that got to front page that was about this same thing, but they looked at the effects of losing - its the competition of video games that tends to make children/people in general more aggressive, not the violence itself.

[–]AlphaWookie 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Yup your right. There is no violence in the game of Monopoly, but boards sure do get flipped if you land on Boardwalk and it has a hotel.

[–]JukesOfHazrd -1 ポイント0 ポイント

I don't care to look too much into it either, but the meta-analysis I linked to distinguished between best practice and weaker studies. The best practice experiments included a control for non violent video games. The best practice group still found positive correlations between violence and aggression variables even with the control. A possible explanation could be that violent videos are more competitive, but that seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

[–]notable_bro 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I firmly believe it has to do with the stress. For example, rage games, like Super Meat Boy, will probably increase aggression far more than some violent video games because players will easily get frustrated. More storyline and puzzle oriented games however, will probably decrease stress. The problem is that there really isn't a nice, easy way to distinguish or quantify these variables - save for making an entirely new game that can be triggered to be either violent or not, and difficult or not. It's likely that games that are less stressful tend to be less violent.

[–]CreepyPetey 2 ポイント3 ポイント

My sentiments exactly. I actually wanted to agree with this guy, but when he started talking about Hitman and wire stranglings I couldn't take him seriously.

[–]jamesparker9 1 ポイント2 ポイント

lol its like when you see 9gag-esque posts such as "If GTA mAEKZ M3 a Bad murderer DEN MAriO Will MAEk Me A PLumbERRR HAhAHA@@#

[–]CarCrashPregnancy 1 ポイント2 ポイント

So wait, this guy says one opinion you don't like, and that negates the validity of his entire argument?

[–]jj123321 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I think he's using that as an example, there are multiple issues just in the first 10 minutes:

1) murder by car

2) invalidation of a source by looking at the first blog comment while ignoring the source.

3) guilt by association (multiple counts).

4) more murder rate bullshit.

5) hitman bullshit.

man... don't make me continue, this is like 4 minutes. Go watch the video with a critical eye and think to yourself "Maybe I agree with him, but how valid are each of his arguments. Why is he saying what he's saying right now"

[–]TimberAdi 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I raged so hard when playing this

[–]hopked 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Thunderfoot puts out some great info. He does approach all of his videos with a gloves off very confrontational and direct logic. That shouldn't take away from his argument.

Video games probably does have some kind of effect on us. It isn't direct into social understandings. It probably has a more direct effect on the person partaking rather then what that person will do to others.

Thunderf00ts point is pretty valid. Violent video games are way up in terms of popularity, detail, and sheer production. While violent crimes are continually going down. Case and point no direct correlation.

Now this vacuous "feminist" wants to try and claim that there is a direct correlation between video game women and sexism. Which is the same argument with a different subject. Which I believe is what Thunderfoot is pointing out.

[–]Crunkbutter 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Exactly. He's simply debating the validity of her unscientific conclusion.

[–]Tammt 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Case and point no direct correlation.

But that's the problem.

I'm not claiming to have evidence that supports a correlation, but you can not disprove it like this. There are so many other factors that contribute to violent crime rates sinking - it could absolutely be possible that video games lead to more violence and they would still be sinking.

Thunderf00ts argument here was that because video games are played on a massive scale we'd either see a massive change in society or none. And that's wrong.

I like his other videos where he disproves things in a scientific manner but this time his arguments were very weak.

[–]esseo 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Yeah, I stopped within the first minute. Literally nobody, literally, is saying that if you play video games, you'll go out and kill people. The argument is that violent imagery in our media in general affects our mood and behavior and I think the answer is yes, it does.

[–]Bahamuts_Bike 8 ポイント9 ポイント

There may very well be responses to some of Sarkeesian's claims. These aren't them.

[–]redwar 4 ポイント5 ポイント

I stopped at the Elvis & Harry Krishna comparison, a weak and awful rebuttal.

[–]Crunkbutter 3 ポイント4 ポイント

He was using an analogy. Sarkeesian is saying that sexism in video games leads to sexism in real life. Thunderf00t is saying that she doesn't have any studies to back up the correlation that she's come up with and uses an analogy as a rebuttal.
If video games really had such a direct effect on us as that, we would see it elsewhere and not just in her unfounded claims.

Also, if you stopped watching it there, you missed the rest of his points. Congratulations on having an opinion of something you didn't really watch!

[–]redwar 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Then he should have said something like that rather than "SEE THERE HASN'T BEEN AN INCREASE IN ELVIS/KRISHAN MURDERS. Look how dumber her video is! Hurr Durr!"

Also, yes I did form an opinion: that after wasting 4 minutes of my time on a poorly constructed argument and border-line obnoxious video, I wasn't going to spend another THIRTY-THREE minutes to see if he got any better. Thanks for the congratulations on my time management skills. I'll take it.

[–]TossisOP -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Right?! The argument is that these video games are causing subtle behavioural changes. Thunderf00t totally strawmanned his rebuttal of "BUT YOU DIDN'T SEE PEOPLE FULLY REPLICATE THE ACTIONS THAT WERE TAKEN IN THE VIDEO GAME!!!! HA!"

[–]Smatsy 11 ポイント12 ポイント

Okay, first of all, media does effect people. It makes up a huge portion of our entertainment and information. I'm pretty sure Sarkeesian isn't trying to insult or censor video games. She's not making an argument that video games are toxic or that we should only play video games she deems appropriate. She's just pointing out the common TROPES. People act like she's making these ground-breaking comments that threatens video games as an art form, but honestly she's just pointing out that video game design and writing isn't always that...artistic. Just remember, she's not attacking your beloved video games or game culture -- just the bad writing. More on tropes (because they exist in most media entertainment) http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Tropes

[–]Crunkbutter 3 ポイント4 ポイント

She isn't just saying, "This is a boring narrative" she's saying that the way she feels women are portrayed in these games is objectively dangerous in real life.

Did you even watch the video?

[–]Smatsy 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Do you even know what a trope is?

[–]KiwiPiranha -1 ポイント0 ポイント

The fact this guy's post got 13 upvotes baffles me. He probably didn't even watch more than 5 minutes of the video. Also, where were these buffoons when Jack Thompson had his crusade about how violent video games effect people? It just boggles the mind how we all laughed at him for that, but when some con artist comes along and says the same exact thing, just in the context of sexism instead of violence, people actually take her seriously. Get a fucking clue, people.

[–]CollumMcJingleballs 0 ポイント1 ポイント

If media doesn't effect people then why are people so drawn to Fox News for their conservative views and never give MSNBC a chance and vice versa? Media does affect people, but in terms of video games it's a divisive subject since most people on the internet are also very familiar with video games themselves.

[–]JukesOfHazrd 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Is anyone here actually familiar with the video game violence literature? I'm not, but found this, and wondered what people think of it. A quick search suggests that the literature points toward a positive correlation between violent video games and aggression. However, it seems most people here are rejecting that association. Why?

[–]AlphaWookie 5 ポイント6 ポイント

It's competition that raises aggresivness and how one deals with winning or losing, not the content of the game. There is no violence in the game of Monopoly, but boards sure do get flipped if you land on Boardwalk and it has a hotel. I hope that helps.

Be Well

[–]JukesOfHazrd 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Its a good point, I get mad when I lose at chess. However, the meta-analysis I linked to only includes studies that include a control for non-violent games and still finds a positive correlation. A possible explanation could be that violent games are more competitive but I'm not sure I believe that as I can think of plenty of competitive non violent games and non competitive violent games. In fact it seems plausible that the opposite might be true, if violence substitutes for competiton. Are you aware of any experiments that control for violence and competition? If not, I see no reason not to believe that both competition and violence raise aggression.

[–]Terence_Hill 0 ポイント1 ポイント

If he would've made the video in a professional way, it would be useful as a base for reasoning/discussion. But the way he made this video, it's a bro-"did-you-watch-this"-thing.

[–]AnOriginalConcept 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Thunderfoot's analysis is also flawed.

Here are some thoughts: One would not necessarily expect to see an immediate, noticeable effect on murder rates due to violent video games. Here's a metastudy regarding the effect of violence in videogames.

(http://www.soc.iastate.edu/sapp/VideoGames1.pdf)

Secondly, he dismisses her for using studies with less than 100 people. There can be statistically significant results with less than 100 people.

Thunderfoot's argument against violence induced is that the lack of a strong result implies no result.

[–]sensorih 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Hasn't violence decreased across the board the past few decades? If violent video games had any effect wouldn't that decline been halted or reversed already?

[–]WINZOW 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Two people that like the smell of their own farts.

[–]htownplaya69 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Who doesn't?

[–]UnionJames 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Who?....and who?

[–]electricmink 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Sarkeesian is a woman who has done a series of videos exploring in depth how women are portrayed in video games and how that portrayal reflects attitudes toward women in society. Thunderfoot is a self-styled skeptic who once upon a time produced some moderately good videos but has devolved into an anti-feminist wank. Frothing about Sarkeesian's is apparently now one of his favorite hobbies, when he's not snarking about the whole solar roads thing.

TF's whinging that Sarkeesian is suggesting video games cause misogyny is a pretty typical - turning what she's actually saying (that the portrayal of women in video games is a symptom of a larger societal problem, and - like many societal issues - promotes a feedback loop where the symptom helps reenforce the problem) on its head then flaying the resulting straw man mercilessly.

[–]mr-dogshit 0 ポイント1 ポイント

As much as I don't agree with Sarkeesian, I don't buy Thunderf00t's arguments either.

She's not arguing that if we're told to go out and do something we would do it, she's simply stating that our opinions on non-taboo subjects can be manipulated by the media - I mean, how do you think advertising works?

Thunderf00t is trying to argue that that is the same as not only persuading people that mass murder is okay, but also that we should go out and commit mass murder. I don't know about you but my position on mass murder isn't a transient concept which can be swayed by compelling arguments - it's based on morality and... oh I dunno, mass murder is just completely fucking wrong and only a psychopath would, or could be made to, think otherwise!

Does he deny that changing social attitudes to smoking have existed over the years, or drug use, or handegg vs soccer, or Justin Bieber, or "#YOLO". Does he think that Richard Dawkins invented memetics as a joke?

Fuck neo-feminism and fuck ignorance, in equal measure.

[–]bubbadoom 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Time for our weekly anti-feminism video.

[–]electricmink 0 ポイント1 ポイント

It's just "Lewis' Law" at work.

[–]DavidWongCracked 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Weekly? If you're talking about reddit, there's always at least one on the front page, at any given moment.

[–]AirCastles 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I don't get it. Doesn't it upset you all intelligent people that women, in our society today, get less pay for the same work, less respect for the same ideas, less recognition for the same achievements?

There was a time when women were not allowed to vote because they weren't seen as citizens but as property of their husbands. That is less then a hundred years ago, three generations. Do you think that the development from that to where we are now has just stopped at 2014 and now everything is fine and dandy and there are nothing wrong with how the image of women?

Guys, it isn't about whether men or women have skimpy clothes or strong jawlines or even specific games. It's about the overarching trends, and the roles that video games and media produce that we of course are affected by (why else would companies spend so much money on advertising?). The main issue is that media are reproducing the image of the woman as a passive object, valued for beauty, more often men are. And this influence of course contributes to the issues I mentioned in the beginning.

Inequality today isn't so much about men who hates women but about the hierarchical structure of society we subconsciously follow and reproduce.

Can't people stop throwing shit at each other and address the real issues?

[–]Terminal-Psychosis 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Women do not get paid less for the same work, at least, not anywhere near the ridiculous 25% people like to throw around.

The actual number is more like 1-4%, and there is no proof that this is because of sexism.

[–]Parelius 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Not to say she isn't talking bullshit in her videos, but isn't it possible that there is a non-literal effect? I don't think anyone suggests killing 1 video game character means you'll kill 1 person in real life, but it is possible that video game behaviours translate in subtler ways, like lesser antisocial behaviours or something like that. Let's not kid ourselves, it's not like we're entirely impervious to all kinds of impressions we receive.

[–]ProducedByScottBurns -5 ポイント-4 ポイント

This feminist/SJW bullshit has absolutely no place in gaming. Can't wait 'til these morons move on to the next 'cause'

[–]Sir_Fancy_Pants 9 ポイント10 ポイント

its people bringing bullshit victim complex in an area where people have been and should be free to explore and enjoy their fantasies and curiosities whatever they maybe, and not be lectured by some deluded sole moral arbiter deeming what is and isn't acceptable.

the only criteria for a game should be is it fun/ do you enjoy it, that is it.

[–]rogersmith25 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Exactly. Is it so bad that some pieces of art are targeted at a male audience?

If you go to Amazon, there is a section of books called "women's fiction", which are obviously books aimed at a female audience and about the female experience. This is a good thing.

Why can't there be a subset of any media (including gaming) with a male target audience? Games where you play a male character and explore the fantasies or realities of being a man? Or maybe just games that are full of things that your average guy is going to like?

People are acting like games that have a male audience in mind are a bad thing... then why isn't "women's fiction", and all forms of women-focused media, a bad thing too?

(Oh... in case you're wondering, I'll save you the time of checking: there is no "men's fiction" section of amazon. Why would there be? That would be sexist, right?)

[–]Inugami 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Well put.

[–]ProducedByScottBurns 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Summarized a lot better than I could.

[–]Breakyerself -1 ポイント0 ポイント

I'm getting sick of thunderfoot. I subbed him years ago because of his videos on creationism. I'm pretty well sick of hearing about feminism. Feminism is a political subject not a scientific one. He seems to be trying to keep some scientific themes as he talks about it, but I really feel his time would be better spent going after climate deniers, mystics, creationists, etc.

[–]lemurstep -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

Here's an idea, stop giving her attention and she has no foothold. Shave that neck-beard and do something constructive with your life.

[–]MGUK 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I seem to get downvoted for saying this, but does this opinion really exist? I live in the UK and have never seen any news article making any comment about video games. The only place I see it is people making comments on reddit about people saying video games cause violence. Maybe giving these people less attention could be beneficial.

[–]GIMR 0 ポイント1 ポイント

uuhhh...I don't like her videos or agree with them but just because there's an employee boss relationship doesn't mean the employee isn't objectified. You can willingly objectify yourself which is what prostitutes and strippers do. Also, just because someone is willing to objectify themselves doesn't mean it's necessarily okay, or good for them to do it. The question should be, when is it ok to objectify yourself and when is it not okay? There's a fine line though and it isn't necessarily a black and white issue.

[–]Masterbencher 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I don't get how people even acknowledge her anymore. She is clearly out to prove her agenda and she cares very little to actually debate/learn about the areas she is involved in. She has no place in a reasonable debate because her mind is set in stone and no amount of facts/debates/ideas will change her belief.

Anyone who donates to her is just as ignorant as she is. You aren't helping to change anything or help support a cause. Your are lining the pockets of someone who is close minded and cares very little about the gaming industry.

[–]Lazaek 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I've seen a few of Anita Sarkeesian's videos, and as many have pointed out there area a lot of ignored areas that blatantly ignore important information. For example, one of her earlier videos mentions Double Dragon.

In DD Anita criticizes how a woman is punched and kidnapped, with some versions of the game showing the woman's panties as the kidnappers carry her away. What she doesn't mention is that countless male NPCs are killed by the player(s), who are brothers (if playing 2 player). At the end of the game if you're playing 2 player you then fight your brother to the death to see who really gets the girl.

Think about that a minute and tell me if you really think woman are the ones exploited there.

[–]nutbread -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Thunderfoot is refuting arguments she didn't make. Saying, "media affects us" is not saying, "if you commit vehicular manslaughter in a video game you are more likely to do it in real life". I like her videos, although I really can't understand where all that money went. I certainly didn't donate any to her.

[–]asfdfasdafsd -5 ポイント-4 ポイント

Yea that lady is a fraud. Who cares? I wish thunderf00t would do more interesting and scientific videos. I don't care if he finds the "Psychic research institute" is bogus. This guy has been bit by the controversial video click-hole lure. He will click-hole down the drain at this rate.

[–]Debianasfuck -1 ポイント0 ポイント

What the fuck happened to thunderf00t

[–]Defender-1 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

here.. we... go.. again.

[–]wumplord -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

Thunderfoots a moron, what else is new.

[–]xWhackoJacko -3 ポイント-2 ポイント

Stop shining light on this agenda pushing twat. At this point, most know modern feminism and the things they cry about are nonsense - we honestly don't need reminders spilling into other subreddits that aren't r/TumblrInAction.

[–]Nameisbrokicker -5 ポイント-4 ポイント

INB4 shitstorm of debates.

[–]Tim_Teboner -4 ポイント-3 ポイント

This guy would get knocked silly if he spoke like that irl

[–]fatjesus -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Say "category 5 boollshit" again, it's really helping prove your point...