Talk:Anita Sarkeesian

	This Gender related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>

, (new)

A look at the whole controversy

Facts behind the women vs tropes in video games Controversy pt 1, Facts Behind the Women v.s Tropes Controversy pt 2 (a): the indictment, and Facts behind the women v.s Tropes controversy pt 2 (b): The Indictment didn't have much regards for either side of the debate.--BruceGrubb (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I also should point out Anita's whole argument falls apart when you realize how many video games in Japan were aimed at girls and women but never got much promotion outside the country. Sailor Moon (1993-1998) had 20 (yes, TWENTY) video games, Slayers series ala Lina Inverse had 6 video games 1994-1998; Cardcaptor Sakura had 10 video games 1999-2004 and that was shōjo (female audience) focused, and so on and that was in a country not know of his equal view of women.

Regarding the 20 Sailor Moon games only only one was marketed outside of Japan and it was in France. And these were games AIMED at a female audience. Flawed sample = flawed data. Statistics 101 and yet this key flaw in Anita's methods is ignored by her supporters (and sadly most of her critics)--BruceGrubb (talk) 09:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Fuck this shit. I do not want to hear whining about Sarkeesian anymore. You won't cite the original videos when asked, you keep citing shit sources, and you won't fucking let it go. Fucking get a life. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 12:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Are these the kind of "alternative facts" I keep hearing so much about? InsertNameHere (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Comment is so vague that it comes off as non sequitur. Is the "alternative facts" regarding Sarkeesian or the comments regarding the flawed data sample?--BruceGrubb (talk) 00:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I deleted the page, and no, I don't regret doing so.

I'm fucking tired of this fucking undead GamerGate bullshit. The article is dead, shut up about a minor fucking commentator whose only "crime" was the mildest of critiques, you fucking overgrown infants. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 17:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Understanding Sexism

I was in the middle of posting this when I found out about GrammarCommie's hissyfit but I am adding it anyhow because it is relevant.

This point was tangentially brought up before but bringing it up again so people understand the finer points is needed. Genuine sexism like genuine racism is an activity of the conscious mind. The horrible portrayal of Samus Aran in Metroid Other M was not sexism but something far worse. Moviebob's GAME OVERTHINKER V23 goes into this aspect in regard to racism but the argument can be applied to sexism as well. As Metroid: Other M- The Ultimate Elephant in the Room we have a culture where abusive relationships are romanticized and if Twilight is any indication popular with female consumers. THE TWILIGHT SAGA; ECLIPSE (Escape to the Movies) Moviebob goes into the actual message in the novels and movies are giving its female fans - marry as early as you can, stalking equals love, and the most important thing about you is virginity. Sounds sexist as all get out doesn't it? But the Twilight series is written by a woman - and she doesn't seem to realize the this message is practically a blueprint for future shy demure abuse victims.--BruceGrubb (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You're continuing a 6-9 year long drama because a lady on the internet said videogame sexism might, maybe, be bad. You could literally be doing anything else with your finite existence, and you accuse me of throwing a hissyfit? Have some sense of bloody fucking proportion man!! Jesus Motherfucking Christ... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 18:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb Ok Bruce, I've stepped back and taken a deep breath, and I've come to an important decision. Either you cite the original Sarkeesian videos, with timestamps for the parts you dislike, and we then discuss them, or I will block you from this site forever. I cannot keep doing this culture war drama shit. I can barely bring my depressed ass to care about shit that actually matters, much less dealing with you spamming the talkpage of a C-list wiki with links concerning 6 year old YouTube drama. You have three days, after which I will strip your privileges and ban you, because that's apparently the only way I'll get through to your thick skull. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 18:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

GC: if you don't want to oversee this guy's edits because you are tired of the article, then you should let someone else oversee it. I'm sure Bongolian could do it, for example. It's not gold yet. UncleKrampus (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You don’t have that power, you’re making a fool of yourself. Christopher (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

While Twilight has been criticized for promoting abusive power dynamics in relationships, I think you are pushing the boundaries of what is a fluffy teenage fantasy aimed at teenage girls and speaking (in simplistic terms, but I digress) to elements of their ride through puberty. I've stayed away from a lot of Gamergate personally largely because it seems like a circle of shit pushing various over-reactionary narratives, and then it got to the point of doxxing and other bullshit, which means a lot of dumb reactionary people clearly have too much time on their hands. Tropes exist. They are interesting to talk about from a social perspective if one is honest and rational in how the tropes come to be. The male equivalent of the fluffy romance aimed at girls is the Call of Duty type of nonsense where a male can enact trope male fantasies by pretending to play Military Hero. Aside from the constant n-word edgelording in CoD chats, it doesn't say all *that* much. Neither does Twilight. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

#2 Women in Refrigerators (Tropes vs. Women) time stamp 1:40 (Apr 6, 2011). The issue she is referring to is Batman Vol 1 633 (2004)

Here is what the DCwiki said about the New Earth Stephanie Brown (who gave way to the Prime Earth version October of 2011)

"Batman later found evidence that vital medical treatment that could have saved Spoiler's life had been denied by his longtime trusted ally, Leslie Thompkins, who had fled to Africa in shame. When confronted by Batman, Thompkins, in tears, claimed that she willfully withheld treatment to Spoiler in the hopes that Batman would see the violence he caused and give up his mantle." (first added 10 April 2008).

"As recently revealed (Robin-Spoiler Special) Stephanie Brown did not die in the above mentioned adventure, but was severely wounded to the point of death." (first added 28 February 2010) The Robin-Spoiler Special) has a cover date of August, 2008.

So we have a female character supposedly allowed to die by a female doctor only to find out by October 2008 it was all one big misdirection.

I should mentioned that in Circle of Fire #1 (October, 2000) we were introduced to what appeared to be an Alex DeWitt where is was Kyle who was killed and stuffed in the refrigerator. Sure it all turned out that she as well as Oblivion were unintentional creations of Kyle but was an interesting reversal.--BruceGrubb (talk) 20:09, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't give a fuck what a multinational company's fucking PR statement was, since it's irrelevant to what is and is not true. What specific part of this article do you take issue with? Let's start with the Hitman shit you spent all of last year's comment bitching about. What is the problem there? In your own words. Not some YouTuber, not a company, What specific part of the video do you take issue with and why. If wanted all of these people's opinions I'd fucking ask them. If all you are is an empty vessel for their opinions, then there's nothing further to talk about since you basically wouldn't have an opinion, you'd just be vomiting up someone else's. Am I getting that point through your thick ass skull yet? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 20:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

What PR statement?! I'm citing actual comic book issues via DCwiki (as in DC wikipedia) here. I have no freaking idea what DC's PR department was even doing then. You asked me to "cite the original Sarkeesian videos, with timestamps for the parts you dislike" which I have done with one. You also said "we then discuss them". Blowing off what you yourself requested is not discussing them. Oh and here is more.

At the 2:21 we are told about Big Barda's death but not that it was part of the whole Death of the New Gods saga (which was a modest character killfest) and somewhere along the line it seems it was revealed that she was actually killed by Infinity Man. Then at the end of Final Crisis #7 (March, 2009). This was added to the DCwiki 3 September 2009.

Are you starting to understand why I am so annoyed with her? I don't even follow these characters and am entirely pulling from the DCwiki making sure that the relevant material appeared before she made the video in question. She omits reverent facts tat disprove the statements she made and it goes back to the point the supposed "C-list" (basically a No True Scotsman argument) videos were making - poor if any actual research.--BruceGrubb (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb "What PR statement?!" I misread "DCwiki" as "DC", a mistake for which I apologize. I'll address the issue again, give me a bit to re-review the sources. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 21:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

One claim at a time though. I'll address the first before I move on to the second. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 21:39, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I was in the middle of revising it when you came out with that PR statement thing so they are actually part of the same post. I hit the 2:41 mark on #3 The Smurfette Principle (Tropes vs. Women) and we get another untrue claim. If she has said Miss Piggy was the only regular Muppet Show or that female muppets were a minority tan she would have had a point but Miss Piggy being the only female Muppet is untrue. The Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem had a female drummer who would appear from time to time.--BruceGrubb (talk) 21:52, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb One claim at a time. You want me to be civil? Then treat me with some respect and don't bombard me with new stuff that I have to then double check background information on. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 21:58, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Side note, I said the wiki was C-list, not the YouTuber. Which we are, honestly. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

All right, I've watched and rewatched the video several times, checked a blog that the video cites, checked the Wikipedia article on said blog, and checked the DCwiki articles on the characters.

At 5:26 Sarkeesian summarizes her point, which is that, in her view, the trend of offing predominantly female characters as a plot point for the character advancement of male characters is a reflection of the overall attitudes toward women in our society.

To address your point @BruceGrubb that the examples you gave have thermian explanations (a video explaining the thermian argument for those who are unfamiliar with it) and therefore invalidate her argument, I do not see how that would be so. She is not arguing merely that each individual plot example is sexist on its own, rather that they follow an overall trend in writing priorities.

Based on a reading of the primary basis for her premise, a referenced response article for criticism of that source, and Wikipedia's coverage of both I'd conclude that her video is A), rather mild, and B) ignores more nuanced motivations for killing off these female characters. For example, if a comic line was selling below expectations there would be good reason to kill off a character in a lurid and shocking manner, thus potentially boosting attention and sales. So while the potential sexist attitudes might inform which character gets killed off, the primary motivator for the killing might be financial, rather than bigotry or artistic vision. In such a scenario, the motivation for the creative decision might not belong the artist, but to the executives and marketing teams who work the business end of things. In any event, Sarkeesian's only focusing on one problem with media, rather than addressing multiple interconnected problems. Bruce, your response? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:48, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Wasn't aware of the thermian argument but IMHO is does really apply here as we have an external view. So many characters have been altered in comics that I literately don't know when particular parts of woman in refrigerator was inaccurate in 2011. Gwen Stacy's supposed resurrections and the whole is she a clone or not tap dance case in point. Side note Phoenix I should be mind controlled/mind raped (not sure which better describes what Mastermind did to her), went nuts, died, revealed that wasn't her but a deranged Phoenix Force which shoved part of the real Jean's memories into the Madelyne Pryor clone (I won't into how she got jerked around as my heads hurt enough tying to sort through this mess) and I started reading only Excalibur Vol 1 (1988) because it made more sense with all the reality hopping than the mess the X-men were by that point. And the cherry on this whole mess? Her death was an editorial mandate as the original plan was to have her depowered.--BruceGrubb (talk) 00:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb this explanation seems to drift in and out of the thermian argument. I understand it's partly because you're sourcing from DcDatabase, which writes in a thermian manner, but still. Also, you aren't really addressing my points regarding Sarkeesian's video being focused on the overall trend and how that's informed by social norms. Please do address it, I spent a lot of time writing, checking, rewriting, and rechecking that post. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 00:37, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

As I said back in 14 April 2020 "Sarkeesian is right (as opposed to Jack Thompson and Patricia Pulling who IMNSHO are/were off on the dwarf planet Pluto) in there is a problem but she undermines her argument with easily disproved examples" For me it has never been about the message itself but the poor way that message is presented - bad or grossly inaccurate examples.

Cast in point is #6 The Straw Feminist (Tropes vs. Women) at the 3m30s mark. Lack of female faces on American money? Sacagawea dollar (2000 and supposedly still being minted) replaced the earlier Susan B. Anthony dollar. Ironically 19th century early 20th century US coins generally had a female either in profile or full figured with the penny being the main exception from 1857 on.

Bubbles can only think of Supergirl and Batgirl? Has she never heard of Wonder Woman (October 21, 1941 to present day), Shadowcat (Kitty Pryde), Storm, or Jubilee who are reasonably powerful and strong females in their own right and aren't exactly unknown in popular culture? It is as if Bubbles is being taken out of context and used to present a strawman argument. The Power Puff Girls wiki entry on Equal Fights shows that Femme Fatale didn't even know who Susan B. Anthony even was and has to be told by the Power Puff Girls.--BruceGrubb (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb "shows that Femme Fatale didn't even know who Susan B. Anthony even was and has to be told by the Power Puff Girls." This is what I mean by your apparent reliance on the thermian argument. These characters were written this way. The way you phrase this implies that they're real people that exist in empirical reality, not fictional characters in a TV show. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 15:08, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

(indent getting too far and we already have a "od" loop back) TL;DR The 'Thermian Argument' is Absolute Sophistry (mirror) and The 'Thermian Argument' is Absolute Sophistry - TL;DR article go over the flaws with the 'Thermian Argument'. It is kind of funny that the title has "TL;DR" because the response video is longer than the original video. Dan Olsen’s Claim that the ‘Thermian Argument’ is a Fallacy is Fallacious also tears the thing to pieces especially with this comment:

"The other flaw to the nomenclature is that the Thermians are a fictional race. The Thermian people and their mannerisms do not exist in real life. Humans, on the other hand, can spot the difference between fiction and non-fiction. They are aware that the events that happen in a work of fiction is not real. And if a person is not able to differentiate between reality and fiction, the problems lie more with that person than the work of fiction.

One person's comment of "The Thermian Argument is a logical fallacy that occurs when a question or criticism concerning the political statements that can be gleaned from a game or other work of art are countered instead with an in-universe explanation for why the thing being criticized is actually valid. If someone asks “Why are the women depicted as being able to fight in melee as effectively as the men?” and you counter with the girls in this universe are actually just as powerful as men and thus it's okay, then you've committed the Thermian Argument, so to speak." illustrates how the Thermian Argument itself is a logical fallacy as does"Creepy Garbage; or, Dan Olsen and the Importance of Believable Hypotheticals" (Divine Divisions)

The Thermian Argument is the same mind set that says every depiction of a swastika is a reference to Nazis regardless of what it actually represents and has resulted in some really stupid things. It is Paula Pulling claiming that D&D caused people to get magic and devil worship. Simply put it is an an ad hoc non sequitor argument.

Anthropologically the terms for this are effectively etic (external) and emic (internal). Horace Miner's 1956 "Body Ritual among the Nacirema" used the then popular etic that '"primitive" peoples believe in magic but we are so much enlighten' and turned it on the then current 1950s United States totally ignoring the emic reasoning. The result was was that this culture is just as much a bunch of magic believing savages as whoever was being studied in Africa this month. By ignoring the emic (internal) one comes to a false conclusion. The Thermian Argument effectively says 'forget this emic point and go full speed ahead with an etic argument'.

"Explaining why a story's use of a controversial element is valid via in-universe citations is not shutting down the discussion." And excellent example of how emic and etic can go hand in glove is 1984. Based on the real world that reality cannot exist as portrayed but the novel itself provides an answer - the government lies about everything and even made Goldstein's work that Winston Smith uses to learn about how the world came to be. The squaring of the circle here is that Airstrip One is in reality a North Korea like state not that the world of 1984 is totally impossible. The Thermian Argument effectively say 'I can't be bothered to square the circle because the circle isn't valid in the first place' or as Carl Sagan would put a heady mixture of special pleading, begging the question, observational selection, inconsistency, non sequitor, and false dichotomy. It is an effort to go Doylist with a Watsonian concept.

Dan's whole 'How do you kill a vampire' misses the whole point of vampire stories. Theresa Bane's 2010 Encyclopedia of Vampire Mythology McFarland & Company (who specializes in academic and reference works) goes into the vampire belief around the world and "No matter when or where, how it hunts or what it hunts, the vampire attacks that which man considers most precious. The reason that there is no single definition of a vampire is because each culture of people, from their various time periods and from their various locations, has feared different things. The vampire has become man’s fear manifest; as man has evolved, so too has the vampire. What is culturally important to one people is not necessarily so to another." A vampire story has a message, an emic and etic narrative, a fear made manifest.--BruceGrubb (talk) 02:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb Why do you use brainrot reactionaries as sources? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Since when are Horace Miner and Theresa Bane "brainrot reactionaries"? Or are you referring to the idiots removing a Native American symbol because a bunch of 1930-1940 racist nutjobs used it?--BruceGrubb (talk) 02:59, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb I stopped reading your gish gallop after you cited TL;DR. You're trying to argue that there's no difference between fantasy and reality. I need someone who understands metaphysics better than me to explain this. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 03:05, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

It was not gish gallop. It's the way I write when I have a lot of information to provide. Heck, I write fanfictions and believe me trying to alter what they are and have reasonable in-universe reasons for changes in character behavior can be a project. In the real world where was no solar system spanning kingdom but if you write a Sailor Moon fanfic that is kind of the price of entry unless you have an alternative method for her to get her powers and a reason for a Beryl to be around.

This is why many Doctor Who/Star Trek/Star Wars fans are going off the rails - even in-universe large hunks of what is going on makes no freaking sense. That is not to say they are entirely right. The premise for the Doctor regenerating into a woman was established in "Hand of Fear", him having lives before the 1st Doctor was in "Brain of Morbius", and him coming from another universe was from the 'lost adventure' "Cold Fusion". It was already there if you knew where the blazes to look. It isn't some 'woke agenda' but a mixture of both the writers and the fans not knowing the canon as well as they think they do.--BruceGrubb (talk) 03:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb I want you to compare my carefully written response here with your scattershot response here. Almost none of your response is framed in a way that makes sense, quotes are just dropped on the reader with zero fucking context, and the whole thing reads as a stream of consciousness rough draft that was never polished. It's litterally throwing multiple disconnected points at me with no connecting tissue. It's a gish-gallop. I don't put up with this sort of stuff from Ken, or from "race realists" or from conspiracy theorists, and I won't put up with it from you. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 10:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Fair enough. But you did say if didn't put out this in three days you would try to get me kicked off here. Because I don't trust my memory I an rewatching these videos and searching the internet for counterarguments and making sure they existed before the video in question was made (lot of slugging through history with regard to any wiki's involved) so it isn't like I have these ready to go. I was posting them as fast as it took me to find and double check the stuff was around before the video so I don't point to later retcons like Batgirl's being paralyzed being temporary with the Prime Earth redo.--BruceGrubb (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I was frustrated and wanted you to actually stick with the topic rather than wandering off only to appears days later, a habit which by the way gives to impression of dishonesty. An impression I've revised in light of you mentioning your ADHD, but still an impression I had at the time, which thusly informed my opinion and statements. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:51, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

One thing that a course I took as part of my anthropology degree said was that if the evidence used to argue a point of view, even if that point of view is perfectly valid, is flawed or demonstrably inaccurate that undermines that point of view. Carl Sagan has something similar with his 'observational selection, also called the enumeration of favorable circumstances' and 'suppressed evidence, or half-truths' points in his Baloney Detection Kit. #6 The Straw Feminist video does this with the power puff girls episode Equal Fights omitting the fact the girls have to tell Femme Fatale what Susan B. Anthony did.

Another key point in research is to cross your sources to see if they have left anything out or are using out of date data.--BruceGrubb (talk) 05:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether sexism is the result of the subconscious or cultural bias or a product of one's upbringing nor if the agent is a man, woman or non-binary. The result is still something sexist. The origin of the text or work's sexism is irrelevant. Your text in this section is all over the place and mostly a distraction. Bruce, you are trying to water down the strength of her arguments by adding "claim" before statements that really should not be considered controversial. ShabiDOO 03:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The problem with invoking the Thermian Argument is that in doing so shuts down any debate. Pokemon is an animal abuse simulator, Animal Crossing is a bunch of lazy people getting you do their work for them that conveniently helps the local borderline loan shark, Hitman is about an amoral murderhobo, D&D is racist because the different races have advantages and disadvantages, and I think you get the idea. Take the D&D example. 'But they're difference biological races' - Thermian Argument as in the real world all human "races" belong to the same species. See how easy it is to shut down anything by invoking this thing?--BruceGrubb (talk) 01:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I think, here, you are using the term 'Thermian argument' to refer to something that is not the Thermian argument. The Thermian argument is the claim the the internal rules or consistency of the fictional space justify whatever happens within that space. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 01:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I said "invoking the Thermian Argument". Tell us just how does saying 'But they're difference biological races' with regards to the advantages and disadvantages of the D&D races to counter the claim that D&D is racist not a Thermian Argument.--BruceGrubb (talk) 21:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

How I feel as a result of this argument

I regret learning anything. Ignorant people have things so fucking easy... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 11:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

You know, I'm not always the type who is very plussed by those who over-emote on mere tropes (not sure about Sarkessian, I'm not going to spend an hour listening to a podcast which probably is already summarized at TV Tropes already). But man, the responses of Gamergate are in many ways unbelievable. She seems to be talking about shitty braindead tropes aimed at males. And so what? They are. She may be framing things in an overly feminist way for all I know (eg going off on male fanservice as "sexualization" is fine, because it is, but when there's a whole shelf of Harlequin romances at the book store with fanservice of a different kind, it's, er, a bit one sided of frame). But if she is, that's all you have to say. At least Gamergate asshats reacting as they did brought attention to some of these tropes. Media catering to specific demographics with dumb tropes will always exist, but if designing a game for a more generic audience, it's good to keep some of these tropes in mind, I reckon.

It's almost as if gamers feel some of these dumb tropes are worth defending. They really are not. There's no problem with enjoying a good mindless trope fest for the schlock it is, but come on, schlock is schlock. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

But it isn't just tropes now the 'invoke the Thermian Argument card' can be played. Invoking the Thermian Argument defense is nearly on par with taking a person or event out of the context of their time and place and judging them by our standards. It is akin to taking Lincoln's "If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it;..." out of the context it appeared and saying he was a racist because under one set of conditions he would have supported slavery.--BruceGrubb (talk) 01:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb When you argue a thermian position, you're arguing about fiction. Are you having a psychotic break? Do you not understand the difference between reality and fantasy? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 01:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

It's completely fucking ridiculous to use this stupid position to nitpick Sarkeesian's analysis and commentary. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 03:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding fiction has been pointed out elsewhere "history" is generally not what really happened but what people want us to think happened ie a fiction.

It is Birth of a Nation; it is Titanic (1943) where the Scottish Ship's First Officer William McMaster Murdoch was replaced by a German named Peterson. It is Lincoln being a beloved president when reading the actual works of the time show he was easily the most hated president North or South. It is Columbus sailing east to proved the Church's statement the Earth was flat untrue.

The whole mess with Jinx is a perfect example of why context matters. Everybody got on the "Jinx is racist" bandwagon without going over any possible non-racist cultural reasons for it being designed that way (Ganguro and that is the way Yama-uba is sometimes depicted - especially in Noh dramas) --BruceGrubb (talk) 04:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@BruceGrubb Ok so fuck off. Fuck off and never speak on this subject again, because you're twisting into pretzels just to defend your use of the thermian argument. First you weren't use it, then you were depending using it, and now apparently working theories and fiction are the same, apparently. Do you want to know why you can fuck off? Because you're diverting so far away from the original topic that said original topic is now in another fucking universe, one where fiction and non-fiction are different things. Seek psychological help, and farewell. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 11:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Inaccurate and biased portions in the first paragraph

The first paragraph implies that reddit hates her, and that the reason for their hatred is due to her being a woman, both of which are inaccurate. ^{— Unsigned, by: Alberto80 / talk / contribs}

If I had a dime for every time someone disliked an article for being "biased"... Also, tell me right to my face again that this one instance, among countless instances within the dire reality of gamer™ men on the Internet heaping hatred on a woman for being a woman, is "inaccurate". --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 02:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Well said, LGM. Well said.

And for you Alberto80, please read this again before saying it's inaccurate.

Exaskliri (talk) 06:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

“Does sexualization in video games cause harm in players? A meta-analytic examination“

This peer reviewed Computers in Human Behavior article concluded “sexualization in games was neither related to well-being/body dissatisfaction nor sexism/misogyny” (...) “Better designed studies, and those that showed less evidence for researcher expectancy effects (for sexism/misogyny outcomes), tended to find less evidence for effects,” (...) “As appears commonly in other realms of media effects, the evidence is weak that sexualized games influence player attitudes and behavior.”--BruceGrubb (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

“Perfect demon for REDDIT to hate”?

I would have thought the perfect demon for Reddit to hate would be someone like Ben Shapiro, Tatsuya Ishidua or even someone as reasonable as JK Rowling. Reddit’s a sewer of the far-left, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone as repugnant as Sarkeesian was a mod there. ^{— Unsigned, by: 2a00:23c4:aa1d:4a01:e47d:e6f2:7e45:d9c8 / talk}

Brushing aside "reasonable Rowling", that line was added about six and a half years ago. Chillpilled (talk) 06:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)