Hilariously Endorsing One’s Enemies (A response to Anita Sarkeesian)

It’s funny when you watch people who think that they are so smart be made to look so dumb.  Like, really funny.  The kind of funny where I am unable to process it because of the levels of funny that I am seeing.  Following the latest release of the latest video in her series of videos about positive series protagonists, Anita Sarkeesian was clearly trying to pander to a crowd of people who already agree with her.  She lives in the echo chamber, so why change things now?  But, due to the diligence of people on the Internet, it seems that her work kind of slapped her in the face.  This is more than a little funny.  Especially since the SJW, aGGro crowd was all over any negative reception of the video.  Which they got little of, it seems.  But the Internet had a comeback for her.  I hope you enjoy.

The video is about Jade, from Beyond Good and Evil.  Like most gamers, I have no problem with this character.  That was, apparently, thing #1 the aGGros were trying to go after my side of the fence about.  “Why wouldn’t you like Jade?!  You GGers just disagree with Anita to do it!”  But then, I and many others were like, “we don’t really have a problem with her video.  It’s a good game and she’s a good character.  Why would we take umbrage with that?”  For some context, here’s Anita’s video.

Well, now that you watched her go through the basic key points that she has already brought up 100X, let’s look at this another way.  Because, it’s ind of interesting that Anita chose Jade as a positive female character to emulate.  Why?  Well, let’s look at Jade’s reason for going on her quest.

She is trying to document a conspiracy that is being covered up, partly by a corrupt mainstream press.  This is done through collecting evidence of collusion, and saving the evidence so that the whole thing can be exposed to a wider audience.  In other words, Jade is doing the same thing that GamerGate is doing.  The irony here is that Anita is making a video praising this character, when she herself is part of a corrupt press, involved in covering up the truth and adamantly defending lies.  Oh, wait, scratch that last part.  Adamant defense would require her to interact outside of her echo chamber.  She basically yells deeper into the cave, for her audience to hear.

Unreal.  This just keeps going with my belief that she’s not a gamer.  I have no doubt that Anita has NEVER played Beyond Good and Evil.  Either that, or, since it’s been proven that she’s a con artist, she simply doesn’t care.  Cognitive dissonance it ain’t.  It’s outright lies, to make her look better.

Modern feminism has this unique dichotomy when it addresses its own shortcomings – lie.  Or, if the lies are exposed – double down on those lies.  The wage gap that has been introduced – women earning 77 cents to every dollar that a man earns – has been disproven, time and time again.  When you correct for things like education, hours worked, experience, specialty fields within careers (family doctors and surgeons get paid differently), time off due to maternity and countless other factors, then the wage gap almost vanishes.  The parts that remain could be real discrimination, or it could be women being less ambitious when negotiating wages.  Either option is possible.  When faced with these facts, what do feminists do?  They just shout louder.  That’s their answer to any and all criticism of their ideas.

How about that 1 in 5 statistic that even President Obama has pandered, saying that roughly 20% of girls in college get raped.  For comparison, that number is the same as the number of women who are raped in the Congo, where warlords have used rape as a weapon of war.  When the stats for that have been shown to be grossly-inaccurate, what do feminists do?  They shout louder.

Third-wave, Puritan Feminists are incapable of addressing inaccuracy.  Jackie’s story in Rolling Stone gets shown to be a complete fraud, they shout louder that she is telling the truth.  Because the notion that Jackie lied means that women can lie.  And we all know that that’s crazy, right?  Women are being on a plane far above men.  They are so perfect and wonderful that they NEVER lie.  Ever.  Got it!

All of this in mind, how did Anita react when the comparison between Jade and GamerGate was made?  Here’s the link.  See for yourself.  Rather than admit that she might be wrong.  Rather than keeping an open mind and maybe expanding her point of view, Anita decides that she is going to just “close her computer” and choose to not think about it.  Because thinking about it, or asking her audience to think about anything outside of the echo chamber, is too hard.  That might actually affect her in some way.  Can’t have that!

The viewpoint that Sarkeesian represents is on par with Catholicism in the levels of faith that it holds to.  Their slogan at XOXO Fest was “Listen and Believe.”  You are supposed to “Listen and Believe” what they say, regardless of the lack of evidence.  If evidence comes up that doesn’t agree, then you must ignore it.  Because, obviously, it’s the patriarchy or whatever’s fault that they are wrong.  That’s how they do.  On one level, it’s kind of funny how these young people, almost all of whom are not connected to any official religion, buy into this sort of thinking.  They are skeptical, but only to a point.  To the point where they go to universities and are fed canard after canard, with the mentality if you agree, you are an evil misogynist who obviously hates his mother.  Oh, and if women disagree, they are sock puppets or sluts or whores.  Because slut-shaming is totally cool, so long as the person doing it calls themseves – feminist.

Right, Arthur Chu?  Or how about you, Ryan Wiley?  Get back to me.

Until next time, a quote,

“We’ve had vicious kings, and we’ve had idiot kings, but I don’t know if we’ve ever been cursed with a vicious idiot king!”  -Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones

Peace out,

Maverick

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Hilariously Endorsing One’s Enemies (A response to Anita Sarkeesian)

  1. It’s an interesting change of tack for her, though. She’s completely abandoned her series she was massively overpaid for in which she was going to crap on video games and female characters in them for 12 to 20 youtube videos in favor of actually finding examples of female game characters she thinks are doing things right. As big of a dope as she is, I think if she’d done this sort of thing from the start, or at least balanced out her first videos with stuff like this, she would’ve gotten substantially less shit from people. Sure, most of her complaints would still be rooted in crit theory nonsense, but at least she wouldn’t come across as nothing but a complaining complainer who only complains.

    • Perhaps. From where I’m sitting, she wouldn’t be taking nearly as much shit if she hadn’t built up her career feeding the trolls and using the attention they gave her as a marketing tool. When her channel first started, nobody cared what she had to say. It was the same as it is now, but without all the endless “I’m a victim! Feel bad for me!” baggage that has become the staple of her entire career. But, because she’s a con artist, she knows what she’s doing with that. Look at how she succeeded, but her imitators, like Brianna Wu, have failed. It is almost awe-inspiring…

      • Very valid point! I wouldn’t quite go so far as to say that Wu is a failure; she’s cashed in pretty good. The difference is she’s actually crazy and doesn’t have handlers to manage PR for her. Considering that, she did pretty well for herself.

      • Also a good point. Though, while she is crazy, Wu also isn’t a con artist. Anita is. She has genuine skill with that. Wu just wants attention. Motives affect the outcome. *shrugs*

  2. At this point, a “gender studies” “graduate”, without ever having worked a honest days in their lives, and someone with a past in telemarketting and pyramid scams at that, conjoined by a rebel without a cause/clue trust-fund grown-baby-boy with a truckload of self-hatred for being an incompetent worthless vermin leech upon the face of society, is not to be expected to raise any sort of academic-degree or otherwise valuable scholarly work or in any way produce that is a contribution to society.
    They can only yield the most entertaining logical fallacies and mind-numbing narcissism.

    As an intellectual, I find them vapid and vacant of substance.
    Though the humour of the self-contradictions is not lost upon my bemusement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s