welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Feminism because why not make a thread for it?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 292, 293, 294 ... 319, 320, 321  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10662
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You'll be waiting a while since it would require me re-watching one of her videos, and no, I'm not going to do that, but I do recall, in the Hunger Games video I mentioned earlier, she talks about Katniss 'not grieving enough about deaths after the first' or something to that affect.

Also, I forget which videos it was in, but there's been a couple of times Sarkeesian has made points about violent acts being committed against women as being "depictions of violence against women", when in fact they are just "depictions of violence" which just happened to be against a woman.

Also, aside from this, there's the fact that she conned her way to popularity on kickstarter by trolling 4chan, something I actually applaud, but it also is still kinda underhanded and sneaky.

In the end, more than activist, more than a feminist, more than even a woman, we should think of Sarkeesian as a businessperson who's out to make a profit via a cause (even if it is good and she's doing good deeds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGdixGdxyiM
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://about.me/omardrake
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I should watch the Hunger Games thing now that I've actually read the books and seen the movies.
_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9677

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have criticisms of some of the general applicability of Sarkeesian's demonstrations of trope in media, but that dude's general point is so spurious it hurts. Actually, spurious isn't even the right word; it's shit.

He literally victim blames Anita for the death threats by saying that his sympathy for her ends because she happened to advertise her videos in specific locations that 'brought the response on herself.' She must have been asking for it, hm?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WheelsOfConfusion



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 12385
Location: Unknown Kaddath

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
He literally victim blames Anita for the death threats by saying that his sympathy for her ends because she happened to advertise her videos in specific locations that 'brought the response on herself.' She must have been asking for it, hm?

On the other hand, when Aaron Barr tried to unmask Anonymous and told them he was doing it and then the predictable happened, everybody was like "Barr saw the hornet's nest and decided to stick his penis into it!" That was a huge wave of schadenfreude which nobody felt particularly guilty about.

That said, I'm not familiar with what Sarkeesian was supposedly doing all up in 4chan so I can't say it's the same kind of situation. Also, a human being is not a hot stove because it has agency so even a provoked backlash is still the responsibility of the provoked, and all that. But if what she was doing was about the same level of "should have seen this coming" as Aaron Barr revealing himself to Anonymous members he was trying to identify publicly, should we react differently?

*edit* Just to be clear, nobody should be harassed and threatened out of their own home by internet psychos. For any reason, ever. I'm just bringing this up because when there were accusations (again, assuming that this is the case) that Sarkeesian trolled 4chan to work them up, that's seen as victim blaming. When Barr trolled 4chan to publicly dox them most people reacted with a Nelson laugh.
*double edit* To clarify even further, I'm looking at this question from both angles. Maybe we should feel guilty for victim-blaming Barr?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10662
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
I have criticisms of some of the general applicability of Sarkeesian's demonstrations of trope in media, but that dude's general point is so spurious it hurts. Actually, spurious isn't even the right word; it's shit.

He literally victim blames Anita for the death threats by saying that his sympathy for her ends because she happened to advertise her videos in specific locations that 'brought the response on herself.' She must have been asking for it, hm?


I didn't come away with the same take. I took it as Sarkeesian is both a victim and not a victim at the same time. She took purposeful steps and actions to draw her attackers to her.

To me, this doesn't make her less of a victim, but makes her seem disingenuous. As someone who positions herself as a moral activist (which isn't a bad thing), her actions of purposefully drawing more attackers to herself seems to undermine the foundations of what she's trying to establish.
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://about.me/omardrake
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Samsally



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 6638

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darqcyde wrote:
She took purposeful steps and actions to draw her attackers to her.

This is the very definition of victim blaming.
_________________
Samsally the GrayAce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10662
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Samsally wrote:
Darqcyde wrote:
She took purposeful steps and actions to draw her attackers to her.

This is the very definition of victim blaming.

Nope. Victim blaming would have be saying "She should have known better than to go to 4chan."

I'm saying that she went with the express purpose to artificially exacerbate the negative responses in order to make her point seem stronger. Her actions indicate that she intentionally, willfully, and purposefully, for the sake of monetary gain (getting more kick starter supporters), drew the attackers to her. It's called victim playing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_playing

Quote:
Victim playing (also known as playing the victim or self-victimization) is the fabrication of victimhood for a variety of reasons such as to justify abuse of others, to manipulate others, a coping strategy or attention seeking.


BUT

This doesn't mean that she was a real deal legitimate victim as well.

My take away from the video I linked is that while she was a victim (and didn't deserve to be so) she went and made herself MORE OF a victim for her own personal gain. That is why I said she is both a victim and not a victim at the same time.

It's like playing a game, and knowing your going to win, but then going ahead and cheating to make sure you REALLY win.

***********
***********

"But Darqcyde," you may ask, "Why does this really bother you? Why are you seeming to be overly critical of her?"

Glad you asked (even though no one did ask).

It's because as I see it, it does more long term harm than good for feminism. Anita gamed everyone, both those on her side and those against her. To me, it wasn't necessary and is amoral. As horrible as the attacks were against her, the severity only lead to a direct increase of support: the more she was attacked, the more people supported her. I firmly believe that she made the conscious decision to take steps to increase the amount of attackers.

Lastly, if I'm not mistaken, thanks to belief revision bias, her supporters would rather call her critics 'victim blamers' than accept the fact that they may have been duped to some degree.
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://about.me/omardrake
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Since she is aiming to show that something exists where many people say it doesn't, she could also have gone there to show, "Look, this is what happens."
_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 6186
Location: California

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so, like, is it any surprise that darq looks at anita sarkeesian and sees some machiavellian plot to manipulate the rubes of the internet into driving her from her home with death threats

i guess you technically can't call it "victim blaming" if you don't think the person getting driven from her home with death threats is actually a victim, but, seriously, what the fuck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9677

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darqcyde wrote:
Sam wrote:
I have criticisms of some of the general applicability of Sarkeesian's demonstrations of trope in media, but that dude's general point is so spurious it hurts. Actually, spurious isn't even the right word; it's shit.

He literally victim blames Anita for the death threats by saying that his sympathy for her ends because she happened to advertise her videos in specific locations that 'brought the response on herself.' She must have been asking for it, hm?


I didn't come away with the same take. I took it as Sarkeesian is both a victim and not a victim at the same time. She took purposeful steps and actions to draw her attackers to her.

To me, this doesn't make her less of a victim, but makes her seem disingenuous. As someone who positions herself as a moral activist (which isn't a bad thing), her actions of purposefully drawing more attackers to herself seems to undermine the foundations of what she's trying to establish.


Where is it that she concedes anywhere that she is intentionally drawing attackers to herself? In the absence of that, this becomes an invented narrative supposed for her on her behalf.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ShadowCell wrote:
so, like, is it any surprise that darq looks at anita sarkeesian and sees some machiavellian plot to manipulate the rubes of the internet into driving her from her home with death threats

i guess you technically can't call it "victim blaming" if you don't think the person getting driven from her home with death threats is actually a victim, but, seriously, what the fuck


I think insisting the victim chose to do it for attention does count as victim blaming.
_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Darqcyde



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 10662
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you guys are saying she posted on 4chan expecting a rosy, happy reception?

That's implying that's she's dumb and not intelligent enough to expect a major negative response.

Does it make more sense that she posted on 4chan WHILE turning off comments on her Youtube videos and only leaving them open on her kick starter video (until the campaign ended) A) expecting positive support OR B) she was counting on being trolled and thereby being able to garner more sympathy (and more importantly, more money).

I say she was, at least in part, victim playing because she had MOTIVE to do so. The more she was a victim, the more support she got. I think she's far too smart and educated a person to do what she did without reason.

And she can not and will not ever concede to her tactics -- by doing so she's admitting to being manipulative. As someone trying to uphold a moral stance, admitting to underhanded tactics, even if they backfired somewhat (the over response of death threats), she will lose lots of supporters and her integrity. And it's not an invented narrative, it's a sequence of events, which is just a narrative. I have not seen anyone offer up reasonable counter points, just you all saying "Darq you're victim blaming" but then offering no other explanation or interpretations for her actions.

I don't think she planned on the level or severity of response she got (the death threats, getting stalked, the fucked up games, etc.), nor should she not be forgiven for making mistakes in judgement.

However, none of that invalidates my interpretation of the events. People will do lots of things for money. For $600, if you know the right people, you can get Yardies to take a person out. Without personally knowing her character, and even if you did know her, to say with 100% certainty (which you all seem to be doing) that she wouldn't manipulate people for $6,000 (the original goal) is naive foolishness, but that's part of how belief revision bias goes.
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://about.me/omardrake


Last edited by Darqcyde on Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:04 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see on here that it hasn't actually been proven that she posted anything to 4chan: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian

Is that true?
_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darqcyde wrote:
So you guys are saying she posted on 4chan expecting a rosy, happy reception?



_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3448
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also.


_________________
[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 292, 293, 294 ... 319, 320, 321  Next
Page 293 of 321

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group