Anita Sarkeesian called someone "a garbage human", but before we talk about that....

[Jolly_Penguin]

That just maybe she's being hyperbolic in order to joke about how she was, for a moment, the overly strident college student who figured out how to communicate her concerns, and maybe she wasn't considering the reaction an overly-literal, wildly hostile

Sure. Her smile while she says it signifies that as well. It is her admitting that she is prone to seeing sexism and racism "everywhere", ie, seeing it even where it isn't. That's why people were showing that clip. It was her admitting to holding a hammer called "systems" and seeing everything as a nail and hammering everything. Now, she no longer hammers everything. That doesn't mean she no longer sees everything as a nail.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Oh, so it's a rant now?

No. Where did you get that from? I wrote of her "speech" not "rant".

Anita Sarkeesian talked about how, when she first stated studying sexism in our society she saw patterns and connections she hadn't noticed before, and for a while she felt the urge to talk about them at every opportunity. She joked about how hard it was on her friends until she learned how to choose the right time and place to have those discussions.

You missed the part about her seeing it everywhere and you missed the part about her never saying she no longer does. She declared she has a tremendous bias "hyperbolically using the word 'everything'", and that is why people point to that clip.Nobody thinks Anita thinks plastics are sexist and racist as Mumbles noted.

She presented a 25 minute video on the subject of 'new' female characters in established games that are nothing but the original male characters with bows and eye makeup. She noted example after example. And she talked about the Smurfette Principle, aka the token chick, apparent in numerous video games. But all that critic got out of it is that she said there was only one female mushroom character in the Mario series when there's like, 5 of them. And that's supposed to prove that the entire Tropes vs. Women in Video Games installment was bogus?

Now you are the one being unfair, to the critic. He did not make that one point and claim that it invalidates her entire series. He merely corrected her on one of her points and didn't much touch another. He also made a myriad of other points of her over reaching.

Critic points out women are actually pretty common, and specifically that there are more females in the game she is specifically referring to, while saying she doesn't know video games and then pointing to her saying so herself, her disabling comments, and her changing her mind on if she knows and likes videogames right when it profited her to do so.

This is what you should be attacking if you think the critic was being unfair, as this is what he actually said.

Stalkers don't usually pull fire alarms. Harassers don't always shout. Abusers like to torment their victim, and what better way to do that than to show up at their work, or outside their home, or at events where they know the victim will be so that their victim will be forced to interact with them?

She wasn't forced to interact with him. She could have ignored him. And as far as I am ware, he has not been convicted or even charged with stalking or harassment. And no, making critical videos of somebody's public works is not harassment. Or were Siskel and Ebert career harassers?

In my OP I asked "was Anita Sarkeesian wrong to call out one of her harassers like that? Was it acceptable, unacceptable, understandable, unforgivable, or what?" I believe it was both understandable and laudable. If an apology is owed, it would be owed by Sarkeesian to the organizers of the event for breaking a rule, and by the event organizers to Sarkeesian for allowing Benjamin and his fellows to use the conference as a means to harass her.

Yes, she was wrong to do that, calling him out when he wasn't being disruptive, singling him out and calling him a "garbage human" while she was in a position of power and privilege over him. The only other public speakers I have seen do such a thing to quiet audience members are Milo, Donald Trump, and professional wrestlers playing bad guy characters, and they were wrong to do it too.

That's a lot of material to go through.

I provided it through a simple youtube search just to provide you with some more context for your thread here. I don't expect you to watch all of it. I haven't and won't myself. I posted it for anybody who is interested, may recognize any of those people (ie, Rogan), may want to hear Sargon's own take on it, may want to see the actual event happenings, etc.

you watch the first 6 installments of Tropes vs. Women in Video Games and do the same thing. Summarize the points she makes, quote her, etc., and then comment on what you just saw.

That could take a while, and I don't really have time for it right now. I may do a little of that later on but I may not get through her entire series.

 

[Arctish]

No. Where did you get that from? I wrote of her "speech" not "rant".

Sorry, I misread that. You were talking about Benjamin ranting.

You missed the part about her seeing it everywhere and you missed the part about her never saying she no longer does. She declared she has a tremendous bias "hyperbolically using the word 'everything'", and that is why people point to that clip.Nobody thinks Anita thinks plastics are sexist and racist as Mumbles noted.

I did not miss the part about seeing it everywhere. I don't find that part of her statement remarkable at all. You know why? Because North American society is rife with sexism. Sometimes that sexism is expressed in blatantly obvious ways. Sometimes it's expressed in subtle ways. Sometimes sexism has gone unchallenged for so long that most people don't even notice it. As a student of social systems with a particular interest in gender studies, it's is utterly unsurprising Anita Sarkeesian noticed it.

And why would she say she no longer sees it everywhere? Why would anyone? Once you notice that people often receive different treatment based on their apparent gender, or that segregating people by gender is so important to some folks they put the force of law behind it, or that the expectations placed on children vary according to gender, or that some children are valued over others because of their gender, you can't just un-notice it. I suppose you could decide that you don't care, but apparently Sarkeesian didn't stop caring. Is that a problem?

She presented a 25 minute video on the subject of 'new' female characters in established games that are nothing but the original male characters with bows and eye makeup. She noted example after example. And she talked about the Smurfette Principle, aka the token chick, apparent in numerous video games. But all that critic got out of it is that she said there was only one female mushroom character in the Mario series when there's like, 5 of them. And that's supposed to prove that the entire Tropes vs. Women in Video Games installment was bogus?

Now you are the one being unfair, to the critic. He did not make that one point and claim that it invalidates her entire series. He merely corrected her on one of her points and didn't much touch another. He also made a myriad of other points of her over reaching.

Did you watch that video all the way through? Did you check his claims against the Tropes vs. Women in Video Games installments he's criticizing? He pulls a small portion out of different installments, builds a counter-argument based on those little sound bites, and at the end of his video says

"In conclusion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with criticizing video games, or any kind of media for that matter. However, any critiques that you have should be factually accurate and as we've seen, much of what Anita is saying simply isn't".

Much of what she's saying isn't accurate? He critiques a line or two, maybe a minute out of a 25 minute video, and calls that much of what Sarkeesian said? And some of his quibbles are clearly opinion based, not fact based, like his argument in Point 7 that the fact the game was coded to allow players to kill strippers and drag their dead bodies around without penalty doesn't mean the game developers were inviting players to do it.

He doesn't bother with any of her citations of published studies or social theory. He doesn't discuss her overarching themes or challenge her observations in general. He just picks at a few nits and acts like it refutes much of what she says.

I'd be happy to discuss each and every point he raises and the Sarkeesian videos he's criticizing, but only if you agree to watch all of them too.

Critic points out women are actually pretty common, and specifically that there are more females in the game she is specifically referring to, while saying she doesn't know video games and then pointing to her saying so herself, her disabling comments, and her changing her mind on if she knows and likes videogames right when it profited her to do so.

This is what you should be attacking if you think the critic was being unfair, as this is what he actually said.

Stalkers don't usually pull fire alarms. Harassers don't always shout. Abusers like to torment their victim, and what better way to do that than to show up at their work, or outside their home, or at events where they know the victim will be so that their victim will be forced to interact with them?

She wasn't forced to interact with him. She could have ignored him. And as far as I am ware, he has not been convicted or even charged with stalking or harassment. And no, making critical videos of somebody's public works is not harassment. Or were Siskel and Ebert career harassers?

She was part of a panel discussion in which members of the audience could pose questions for the panel to discuss. So yes, she was going to have to interact with him and his buddies or abandon her place at the table - a choice I'm sure Benjamin took great pleasure in forcing her to make.

Siskel and Ebert were not the most well known and outspoken members of a group that hacked, doxxed, made death threats against, made rape threats against, slandered, stalked, pursued, and harassed the subjects of their commentaries. If they bore any ill-will or malice against the directors and actors they criticized, they never let it show. They made videos in which they criticized others' public works but were not harassers because that's not harassment. This is harassment, and Carl Benjamin was engaged in it when the and his friends coordinated their efforts to take up the front rows at the panel where Anita Sarkeesian was scheduled to appear.

I don't think you actually believe his presence there was entirely innocent. I think you understand why he was there and what the 'cell phones at the ready' thing was all about. To be perfectly frank, I think you're kind of a Sargon fan. I think you got your opinion of Anita Sarkeesian from Benjamin when he was posting as Sargon of Akkad during the Gamergate controversy. You don't seem to have viewed her videos or read her stuff yourself.

In my OP I asked "was Anita Sarkeesian wrong to call out one of her harassers like that? Was it acceptable, unacceptable, understandable, unforgivable, or what?" I believe it was both understandable and laudable. If an apology is owed, it would be owed by Sarkeesian to the organizers of the event for breaking a rule, and by the event organizers to Sarkeesian for allowing Benjamin and his fellows to use the conference as a means to harass her.

Yes, she was wrong to do that, calling him out when he wasn't being disruptive, singling him out and calling him a "garbage human" while she was in a position of power and privilege over him. The only other public speakers I have seen do such a thing to quiet audience members are Milo, Donald Trump, and professional wrestlers playing bad guy characters, and they were wrong to do it too.

That's a lot of material to go through.

I provided it through a simple youtube search just to provide you with some more context for your thread here. I don't expect you to watch all of it. I haven't and won't myself. I posted it for anybody who is interested, may recognize any of those people (ie, Rogan), may want to hear Sargon's own take on it, may want to see the actual event happenings, etc.

you watch the first 6 installments of Tropes vs. Women in Video Games and do the same thing. Summarize the points she makes, quote her, etc., and then comment on what you just saw.

That could take a while, and I don't really have time for it right now. I may do a little of that later on but I may not get through her entire series.

You posted links to videos you haven't watched, and you don't expect participants in this thread to watch them either?

Welp, from now on I won't watch videos you link unless you can provide some kind of summary that indicates 1) you watched them first and 2) they're relevant to the discussion.

 

[barbos]

By the way, why is she wearing makeup in all these videos?

 

[Juma]

By the way, why is she wearing makeup in all these videos?

Why do you ask?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

By the way, why is she wearing makeup in all these videos?

Why do you ask?

Do you really need to ask that question?

 

[Trausti]

By the way, why is she wearing makeup in all these videos?

Gotta cover up that schnoz.

 

[Mumbles]

By the way, why is she wearing makeup in all these videos?

Same reason many other people (regardless of gender) do when on camera, I'd imagine.

ETA: here's a short video describing the basics of the discussion around Sarkeesian, and works well for Sargon...

[youtube]wmVkJvieaOA[/youtube]

 

[Arctish]

What in particular do you want me to dis Sargon for? What did he say that you think I should find offensive? The only mention of him on this board has been Arctish's evidence-free claim that he was harassing Anita Sarkeesian.

Evidence was posted in this thread by me and others, starting with the OP. There's more but I didn't think you needed it, seeing as how you immediately recognized Sargon of Akkad and knew all about his attacks on Anita Sarkeesian. I've also heard you parroting Gamergate talking points. And you seemed to already know about the Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian game and how other women like Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu were targeted by the same haters.

I have tried to be careful in how I word my posts to distinguish between the harassment Benjamin is known to have engaged in and that which is anonymously committed by online trolls. The death threats, rape threats, harassment, stalking, doxxing, etc. committed by trolls outweighs what Benjamin himself has done by a huge margin, but Benjamin made a living going after Sarkeesian (his money came from his YouTube attack videos and for a while that's all he did; he had no other source of income), and has egged on other abusers by laughing at their antics and validating their hate. His attacks are part of the harassment Sarkeesian has faced ever since she started feminist frequency.

I see no reason to believe that without actual evidence of it. Its slander as it is.

Anita Sarkeesian shares the graphic, violent threats that fill her Twitter feed

One Week of Harassment on Twitter

And of what I've seen of his videos (I haven't watched them all, as there are many) I haven't seen anything from him that is outrageous.

Is that because there's nothing outrageous there, or because you hand wave it away as 'calling attention to an issue' just like you excuse Elam's excesses?

Show me a clip of him saying something like "Nothing is sexist. Nothing is racist. And you've got to point it all out"

No one here thinks he's a compete idiot. No one has suggested he's utterly unaware of sexism in our society, or that he's a sexism denier. Quite the opposite in fact.

or pulling fire alarms to shut down Feminist meetings

I don't think Carl Benjamin himself shut down Anita Sarkeesian's scheduled talk at Utah State University by threatening violence "worse than the deadliest school shooting in American history" if she were allowed to speak. But someone did, most likely a Gamergate sympathizer if not an actual participant. Benjamin is prominent in that vicious little pack and has diligently stoked the Sarkeesian hate for years, and you know it.

or accosting people on the street to tell them to shut the fuck up.

Shenanigans.

You still haven't taken your own advice and listened to Chanty Binx read what was on that list, have you?



***ETA: Come to think of it, have you finished watching any of Sarkeesian's videos? If so, which one? I'd like to discuss it with you.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Did you ever play the Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian game that was making the rounds back then? You don't have answer, but I wonder sometimes if you did.

No. Did Sargon make it? That may change my view of him.

Anita Sarkeesian shares the graphic, violent threats that fill her Twitter feed

Did Sargon make these threats?

I don't think Carl Benjamin himself

Well ok then. Yet you blame him. Why?

Benjamin is prominent in that vicious little pack and has diligently stoked the Sarkeesian hate for years, and you know it.

Are you talking about his videos criticizing her? What was the very worst of them? What did he say that has you riled up against him? Give me a quote or a link so I can see what you do? As I said, I haven't watched everything he has ever done. What I have seen isn't what you are accusing him of.

You still haven't taken your own advice and listened to her reading what was on that list, have you?

I have. I don't believe a word of it. Are you still trying to claim that she's onside with MRA issues despite protesting and attempting to shut down the CAFE meeting and accosting MRAs on the street and telling them to shut the fuck up?

 

[Arctish]

No. Did Sargon make it? That may change my view of him.



Did Sargon make these threats?

I don't think Carl Benjamin himself

Well ok then. Yet you blame him. Why?

Benjamin is prominent in that vicious little pack and has diligently stoked the Sarkeesian hate for years, and you know it.

Are you talking about his videos criticizing her? What was the very worst of them? What did he say that has you riled up against him? Give me a quote or a link so I can see what you do? As I said, I haven't watched everything he has ever done. What I have seen isn't what you are accusing him of.

You still haven't taken your own advice and listened to her reading what was on that list, have you?

I have. I don't believe a word of it. Are you still trying to claim that she's onside with MRA issues despite protesting and attempting to shut down the CAFE meeting and accosting MRAs on the street and telling them to shut the fuck up?

I amended my post so some of the wording has changed.

If you really did watch Chanty Binx read her list, and you really do know now that she was pointing out issues where MRAs and Feminists can find common ground and work together, why do you keep characterizing it as her accosting people in order to tell them to shut the fuck up? Why don't you acknowledge her as one of the good kind of feminists albeit a loud and rather rude one?

 

[Arctish]

Jolly, I have a proposal for you.

You pick out a Sargon of Akkad video you believe is a valid critique of Anita Sarkeesian or her work. It doesn't have to be about one of her Tropes vs. Women in Video Games installments although that would be helpful. It could be in response to one of her talks or written articles.

I will find the Sarkeesian video Sargon is referencing. Or, if he isn't referencing anything specific I'll find one I think is representative.

We'll watch them both and do our own analysis.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

why do you keep characterizing it as her accosting people in order to tell them to shut the fuck up? Why don't you acknowledge her as one of the good kind of feminists albeit a loud and rather rude one?

Because, fuck face, she... I'M TALKING HERE... STOP TALKING OVER WOMEN... she walked up to people on the street who had just come out of a meeting she protested and helped to shut down and cheered when the fire alarm was pulled... hey shut the fuck up fuck face I'm talking here... then she purported to express agreement with some of their issues, while womansplaining to them that women are the real victims and these issues are caused by patriarchy that these men prop up. So men cause men's problems! Cry me a river, if only these fucking men would stop trying to share their issues aside from Chanty controlling a one sided conversation she could set them straight... oh nevermind. Maybe I'll just hack the forum and shut it down so you can't respond. Or is there a fire alarm I can pull?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Jolly, I have a proposal for you.

I have a better one for you, and already posted it above. It is your claim that Sargon attacked, stalked and harassed Sarkeesian, with zero evidence that he did. You keep insisting that he did such bad things and deserved to be called out as an audience member before saying anything and called a garbage human.

I'm afraid the onus for that is on you, not me. I'm quite happy to agree with you as I stated above if you can actually show a pattern of him stalking and harassing her. And I'd think rather poorly of him if you show a video that you think is particularly vile. You haven't bothered to do that. What is this video that upset you so much? I posted the video of Chanty disrupting the CAFE meeting. Post yours showing Sargon doing something similar. And no sitting quietly in the audience isn't that.

All of this said, despite what you may think, I am not a big fan of Sargon or particularly interested in Anita. I usually write Anita off with the likes of Milo and Ann Coulter. Sargon rarely has anything original to say so I don't follow him either very closely. I am only speaking in his defence because you started a thread seemingly to slander him without showing any reason to do so, and justify him being called out in an audience while sitting there quietly and being called a garbage human.

Had I demeaned and ranted against Chanty Binx never showing her disrupting the event or screaming and swearing at people who exited that meeting, you'd rightly accuse me of slandering Binx. You defend her and attack him, yet we've seen video evidence of her poor behaviour on this forum and none of his.

 

[Arctish]

why do you keep characterizing it as her accosting people in order to tell them to shut the fuck up? Why don't you acknowledge her as one of the good kind of feminists albeit a loud and rather rude one?

Because, fuck face, she... I'M TALKING HERE... STOP TALKING OVER WOMEN... she walked up to people on the street who had just come out of a meeting she protested and helped to shut down and cheered when the fire alarm was pulled... hey shut the fuck up fuck face I'm talking here... then she purported to express agreement with some of their issues, while womansplaining to them that women are the real victims and these issues are caused by patriarchy that these men prop up. Cry me a river, if only these fucking men would stop trying to share their issues aside from Chanty controlling a one sided conversation.... oh nevermind.

I just listened to you. I didn't interrupt. I paid attention and did my best to grasp the points you raised. It wasn't hard.

Someone else on this board suggests we all try to do the same, especially when we're confronted with people who don't share our ideological viewpoints. It's one of the places where we agree.

Anyway, getting back to Sargon and Sarkeesian, I suggest we discuss her Tropes vs Women in Video Games: Women as Background Decoration Parts 1 and 2. The creator of the 8 FAILS video uses it extensively, so we can discuss his commentary too if you'd like.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Anyway, getting back to Sargon and Sarkeesian, I suggest we discuss her Tropes vs Women in Video Games: Women as Background Decoration Parts 1 and 2. The creator of the 8 FAILS video uses it extensively so we can discuss his commentary as well.

Are you going to defend your claim that he harassed her and stalked her? Or are you ready to let that go? Or are you saying that a poorly done review of her work (if that's what you think Sargon did) equates to harassment and stalking? I'm still waiting for you to show him telling people to dox, attack her or stalk her or something. I don't believe he did. Maybe I'm wrong. Show me your evidence.

Does a poorly done critique of somebody's work justify Anita's treatment of Sargon as seen on camera? Or can you show him doing something more? That was the question your OP and what I was responding to.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You pick out a Sargon of Akkad video you believe is a valid critique of Anita Sarkeesian or her work.

Here is a Sargon Video about her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vyvv7P6Ldo

It is rather long. It is on topic. I've listened to most of it, and don't see much to call hateful or harrasing or even unfair. It seems like a fair rebuke to me. Do you see anything in it that's unfair, nevermind harassing towards Anita?

At the 29:30 mark he defends himself against your very claim here about him harassing her. He sounds convincing. Can you show where he's wrong and engaging in harasment?

 

[Arctish]

Anyway, getting back to Sargon and Sarkeesian, I suggest we discuss her Tropes vs Women in Video Games: Women as Background Decoration Parts 1 and 2. The creator of the 8 FAILS video uses it extensively so we can discuss his commentary as well.

Are you going to defend your claim that he harassed her and stalked her? Or are you ready to let that go? Or are you saying that a poorly done review of her work (if that's what you think Sargon did) equates to harassment and stalking? I'm still waiting for you to show him telling people to dox, attack her or stalk her or something. I don't believe he did. Maybe I'm wrong. Show me your evidence.

Well, since I never said he told people to dox, attack, or stalk her, you're going to be waiting a long time. Better pack a lunch.

As to my actual claim, I said he was a prominent member of the group that harassed, doxxed, slandered, made death threats, made rape threats, and more against her. I said his planning and executing a coordinated effort with like minded fellows to take up the front 3 rows at a forum discussion where she was scheduled to appear, all of them training cell phones on her to record her every sentence fragment, was in itself harassment, given the history of abuse she's suffered from Benjamin and Gamergaters like him and the extensive use of mined quotes to attack her. I stand by my assessment. Apparently so do the organizers of the forum at VidCon because they apologized to her for not heading it off.

Even if the event organizers didn't agree that the motive behind the coordinated effort was harassing Sarkeesian, I would still maintain that harassing her was his reason for traveling from England to Southern California and attending a VidCon panel discussion titled Women Online that just so happened to have invited her to participate. Harassing her is his stock in trade. I have no doubt he made a nice little bundle of cash from the resulting videos.

Does a poorly done critique of somebody's work justify Anita's treatment of Sargon as seen on camera? Or can you show him doing something more? That was the question your OP and what I was responding to.

You really think this is about a critique of her work? Really?

The question that was posed to Sarkeesian was "Why do we still have to talk about the harassment of women?"

Short answer: “Because I think one of my biggest harassers is sitting in the front row.”

She then elaborated: "If you Google my name on YouTube you get shitheads like this dude who are making these dumb-assed videos. They just say the same shit over and over again. I hate to give you attention because you're a garbage human. These dudes just making endless videos that go after every feminist over and over again is a part of the issue of why we have to have these conversations."

Oh and BTW, Gamergate wasn't about ethics in journalism.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I said his planning and executing a coordinated effort with like minded fellows to take up the front 3 rows at a forum discussion where she was scheduled to appear, all of them training cell phones on her to record her every sentence fragment, was in itself harassment, given the history of abuse she's suffered from Benjamin and Gamergaters like him and the extensive use of mined quotes to attack her. I stand by my assessment.

You have yet to show him abusing her.

Harassing her is his stock in trade.

Again, you have yet to show that. I've been patiently waiting for you to.

You really think this is about a critique of her work? Really?

I have no idea. I'm grasping at straws here because you haven't provided any foundation for your claim otherwise.

 

[Arctish]

I'm going to have to watch that Sargon video later when I have a better connection but I already lol'd at the opening image. I was going to post that very same picture as an example of the exaggerated bullshit that gets bandied about whenever Gamergaters talk about Sarkeesian.

Did you actually watch the video? Did you think she was screaming? Did you see anyone cringing? Did Sargon get his ass kicked? No?

Ah, but the truth isn't nearly so much fun as portraying her as a giant screaming head, pointy teeth bared and spittle flying, with the audience members frozen in shock as poor widdle Sargon is lofted into the air by the boot of Feminist Oppression, his sorry ass reddened by the force of Matriarchal Censure.

Figures he'd like it. Prolly has it taped to his office wall.