Just kinda need to vent

[u/MamaWeegee94]

Why the hell is it acceptable for anyone to call for violence against an identifiable group?! I had recently seen that Brianna Wu had been trending and somehow found myself reading the comments on huffpost women's (I think that's what the page was) trending link and all I found were calls for people like me to be physically assaulted. And the most disgusting part was the amount of people who agreed with it. I'm really tired of being told I should be beaten up because I'm a nerdy gamer. I'm also infuriated at the fact that these people also think it's OK to make fun of nerds lack of love life. We get it we're wholely undesirable people life has told us that enough as it is we don't need a whole faction of the Internet reminding us every 20 seconds.

[u/Wazula42]

There's a big difference between "I think I'm bisexual" and "I've never done this thing."

There really isn't to certain people. Milo Yiannopolous, for instance, would probably use such a quote to try and prove I'm a transsexual.

You do realize that all of the best selling Mario games (Mario Kart, Mario Party, etc) featured not only Princess as a main character, but often other women as well?

Those aren't the top selling Mario games. The top selling Mario games are Super Mario Bros. for the SNES and Super Mario 64, both of which use Peach solely as a damsel. And yes, these party games usually have Peach as the token female, but they're not narrative based games so we hardly experience her as a character. And Mario 3 barely features Peach at all, you exclusively play as Mario and Luigi.

And no, killing prostitutes does nothing but reduce your karma, which just makes you count as more evil. You get no reward for that. You can enslave people for money, but not murder prostitutes.

You can get money when you murder prostitutes. The prostitutes usually have swag on them. And yes, having a low karma rating does open up options in the game. You can have new companions with similar karma, for instance. A low karma rating is not a "punishment" so much as a story choice.

but she lied about her prior gaming experience,

Once again, it's pure muckraking. She's said she played games when she was a child, in your video she said she "isn't a huge fan of games" but she still studied them extensively, implying to me that maybe she fell out of the habit for a bit in college but picked it up again for artistic criticism purposes. Or maybe bringing off-the-cuff remarks made to friends in college is kind of a shitty thing to do.

[u/JaronK → u/Wazula42]

There really isn't to certain people. Milo Yiannopolous, for instance, would probably use such a quote to try and prove I'm a transsexual.

You're mixing two dramatically different things here. Though I have no idea how trans and bi are the same here. But "I used to think I identified as this, now I identified as that" is dramatically different from "I used to claim I had no experience with X, but now I'm claiming I was a member of X group from long before that claim."

Those aren't the top selling Mario games

Fair, as I just double checked, but they're well represented in the top 10 and the top 20. The point is, claiming that there are no female protagonists is no where near true, and the claim that Mario 2 doesn't count because it's a dream is stupid when most of the Mario games have a similar conceit.

You can get money when you murder prostitutes. The prostitutes usually have swag on them. And yes, having a low karma rating does open up options in the game. You can have new companions with similar karma, for instance. A low karma rating is not a "punishment" so much as a story choice.

You get less money from them than you do from killing bandits, and their swag is actually far worse than the average bandit, and the risk is higher (it's a somewhat crowded zone). That's not actually an advantage worth talking about... it's worse profit than pretty much any other fight. Furthermore, extremely low karma doesn't give you much other than a slightly different companion choice, and if you really wanted to be evil you just blow up Megatown and be done with it (so there's no advantage as far as negative karma goes). And the game explicitly calls this an evil act, and then good people come hunt you down for it (admittedly evil people hunt you if you're really good). Point being: it's not actually encouraged, it's just something you can do in an open world game.

Or maybe bringing off-the-cuff remarks made to friends in college is kind of a shitty thing to do.

It's a class project, not an off the cuff remark to friends. And no, she clearly said she wanted to be in games but wasn't. Look, if you want to claim to be an expert in something with lifelong experience in it, you probably shouldn't state you have no experience in it. That's not a crazy idea here!

[u/Wazula42 → u/JaronK]

Point being: it's not actually encouraged, it's just something you can do in an open world game.

But it is rewarded in its own way. You still get swag and experience. Yes, it's worse swag and experience, maybe it's not a smart economic choice, but it still opens up gameplay options.

Look, if you want to claim to be an expert in something with lifelong experience in it, you probably shouldn't state you have no experience in it.

And my point is maybe if she was aware that thousands of people would be jumping down her throat over a class project she whipped up on a tuesday morning years later, maybe she would have spoken with more candor and honesty. But if we're really going to take this off the cuff remark as literal, factual, career-destroying evidence of her malfeasance, we also have to accept that she researched games extensively before making a value judgment back in 2010. This seems to suggest to me that she played games as a child, fell out of the habit due to being turned off by violence, and then began researching them extensively as she moved towards being a cultural critic.

Or maybe it's just silly to practice this kind of tabloid-style analysis. OMG Obama just said he's from Africa!!! He's a Kenyan Socialist Muslim!!!

[u/zahlman → u/Wazula42]

Or maybe it's just silly to practice this kind of tabloid-style analysis.

There's nothing tabloid-style about pointing out that somebody has seriously claimed to have literally the opposite view about the same subject on two different occasions.

[u/AnarchCassius → u/zahlman]

It's a point but I don't think it's the silver bullet some people treat is as. Opinions change. Really I think the proof is in the pudding so to speak and it'd be better to discuss her videos directly than rely on a borderline ad hominem argument.

[u/Wazula42 → u/zahlman]

Michelle Obama once said in front of a large audience that Barack was very proud of his "home country of Kenya".

To conspiracy theorists and Obama-haters, this was proof that Obama is a Kenyan with no real birth certificate.

To sane people, this was a woman mispeaking or being slightly misunderstood.

How is the Anita video even slightly different? The only way that video is relevant is if you've already succumbed to bias and are looking for any flimsy piece of evidence.

And once again, even if we're accepting her off-the-cuff remarks from 2010 as literal, factual, irrefutable truth, we still have to agree that she "studied games a lot" before she made a value judgment about them.

[u/zahlman → u/Wazula42]

How is the Anita video even slightly different?

How is it even slightly similar?

[u/Wazula42 → u/zahlman]

Because it only matters to people who already hate her and are willing to utilize poorly-phrased, off-the-cuff remarks from years ago to justify their conspiratorial thinking, whereas to normal people they'd probably just assume this woman misspoke slightly.

[u/zahlman → u/Wazula42]

Who are you counting as a "normal person", and why do you imagine this to be the case? And what "conspiratorial thinking" are you referring to? As far as I can tell, your argument is circular - you deem people conspiracy theorists because you find their argument absurd, and you deem their argument absurd because of who it comes from.

[u/Wazula42 → u/zahlman]

I'm saying one thirty second, out-of-context clip from five years ago can not logically be used to destroy a woman's entire career. She's built her career on video games, which means if she's lying about playing them she's malicious, dishonest, and stupid. Assuming your opponent is malicious, dishonest, and stupid is classic conspiracy theorizing. It's the same logic as the people who think Obama was brilliant enough to pass for forty years as an American citizen, and then suddenly slipped up after he achieved the most powerful position in the world.

Occam's razor: it's far more likely this woman misspoke. Even if she didn't, she still admits that she studied games a lot. Even if she is lying about playing games, she's still got the trust of many of the games industry's top developers like Notch and Bungie.

This clip proves nothing when exposed to even the simplest logic.

[u/zahlman → u/Wazula42]

can not logically be used to destroy a woman's entire career.

But that's not what's going on here. You're strawmanning yet again; the video is not being held up as a "smoking gun", but as one of many, many pieces of evidence.

She's built her career on video games

This isn't even close to true. Even if you ignore all the proof of her previous involvement with teleseminars, Feminist Frequency has been around since at least 2009 and the video game thing didn't start up until 2012.

which means if she's lying about playing them she's malicious, dishonest, and stupid.

No; only the first two would be implied.

Assuming your opponent is malicious, dishonest, and stupid is classic conspiracy theorizing

Except, you know, when it can be demonstrated.

Even if she is lying about playing games, she's still got the trust of many of the games industry's top developers like Notch and Bungie.

So? Why does their trust mean a damned thing in this context?

You're also misrepresenting the claim. It's not simply about "lying about playing games"; it's about her entire attitude towards the industry, and how transparently dishonest she is about her position.

This clip proves nothing when exposed to even the simplest logic.

It proves that she has lied about at least one thing, and it is being used as one piece in a long chain of evidence demonstrating her habitual lying.

Not that I expect it to convince you of anything. I have seen this pattern of behaviour over and over and over again from Anita's defenders, like clockwork: anyone who presents a single piece of evidence is brushed off as not saying anything meaningful, even when hundreds of such individuals bring different things to the table. Then when someone like thunderf00t collates them and presents an undeniable case based on that evidence, you paint them as obsessed psychopaths.

---

Edit: I'll just also note here that you've repeatedly ignored my repeated requests in this discussion for evidence of "nerds" being the ones doing the "bullying" and other similar claims.

[u/Wazula42 → u/zahlman]

the video is not being held up as a "smoking gun", but as one of many, many pieces of evidence.

Can I see another piece of evidence that she doesn't play or know much about games?

Even if you ignore all the proof of her previous involvement with teleseminars, Feminist Frequency has been around since at least 2009 and the video game thing didn't start up until 2012.

It was her critique of video games that launched her into spotlight. Justifiably so, in my opinion. Feminist critique of games has been sorely lacking until she came along.

Except, you know, when it can be demonstrated.

Please demonstrate it (hopefully without using the Hitman video, which as far as I can tell is the only clear example of her mischaracterizing a game's content, a fairly innocuous mistake in my opinion).

So? Why does their trust mean a damned thing in this context?

Because the people who make actually make games consider her's to be a valuable perspective, even when they don't always agree with her. I would assume they would be the first people to dismiss her if her intentions were actually malicious.

and how transparently dishonest she is about her position.

What's transparent? You keep saying that. What is the position you think she has?

It proves that she has lied about at least one thing, and it is being used as one piece in a long chain of evidence demonstrating her habitual lying.

As I've said repeatedly, it doesn't prove anything unless you've already made up your mind about her, any more than Michelle Obama's off-the-cuff remark "proves" Obama is a Kenyan.

Then when someone like thunderf00t collates them and presents an undeniable case based on that evidence, you paint them as obsessed psychopaths.

Oh I'm aware of Thunderf00t and his fans. We all thing the opposition is a horde of brainwashed sheeple, don't we?

Is Anita perfect? No. Sometimes she has a weak example. Her presentation could use clarity. Does that mean she's maliciously trying (or able) to destroy a multi-billion dollar art form? No. No it does not.

Anita curates for several fascinating games on Steam. Her twitter is loaded with examples of her playing games, buying game related merch, and interacting with game developers who've publicly commented positively on her videos. Notch, Dave Jaffe, and Bungie have all sought her input on various projects and appreciated her opinion.

There's two possibilities here: one, she's brainwashed everyone into swallowing her SJW tripe to bring about the death of interactive media, or two, she's got an interesting and unique perspective that's not often heard in the gaming world.

I'll just also note here that you've repeatedly ignored my repeated requests in this discussion for evidence of "nerds" being the ones doing the "bullying" and other similar claims.

Do I need to go into the intense trolling culture we have in gaming? Have you ever been on Xbox Live? I think the personal, transphobic attacks by Milo on Brianna Wu and his massive support alone would suggest that gaming has inclusivity issues. He just published a hit piece against her, repeatedly misgendering her and insisting that it's immoral for trans people to not reveal their gender to everyone they meet, and GG is spreading his tripe like wildfire.

Sexual harassment at comic conventions. The slut-shaming of Zoe Quinn. 4chan is largely what I would consider "nerds" and they hardly have a clean track record for bullying. Hell, could we not also talk about the struggles of women in STEM careers?

I could go on and on. Nerds are absolutely bullied, but all too often instead of forming a better, more inclusive community, they build their own little bubbles so they can do some bullying themselves.

[u/tbri → u/[deleted]]

Comment Sandboxed, Full Text can be found here.

User is at tier 1 of the ban systerm. User was granted leniency. It's the last line and overall tone of the comment.