Feminism Thread

[Charismatic]

You moron, you can't allow the other side any points when you are playing the victim card.

[Callisto]

She looks she she was hot in her 20's

I would seriously go after her if she was local

[Quicklet]

you should probably think for a moment about what you just said there

Not sure what you're getting at. If you're laughing at the idea of legitimate criticism being contained in youtube comments, yeah I understand. But it still reinforces the argument that she manipulates the avenues of communication to suit her narrative that the only people who are criticizing her are doing so because they have some vendetta and not because her arguments are shallow and flawed.

[Callisto]

I am not a feminist, but I agree those earrings are retarded.

yeah but you're not hispanic

[Ksandra]

yeah but you're not hispanic

That just proves my point.

[Kohan]

Before diving into some other issues, I wanted to respond to the conversation about her not allowing comments, since I did originally bring it up. As mentioned, you can moderate YouTube comments. If she doesn't want her YouTube posting to be filled with immature dialogue, she could moderate it. That would require even-handed judgment and effort, though—I don't believe she can expend either of those things.

Don't really care for her videos. It's something worth discussing, but I don't agree with everything she says, or the examples she picks. That said, I don't see the big deal about her videos existing, and she wouldn't be a big deal at all if rampantly stupid gamerdudes hadn't flipped their shit in the first place.

The reason they're a "big deal" is because she crowd-sourced money for this, misleading her contributors by stating that her videos would be well-researched, fair, and so on, so forth. Those familiar with her history as a blowhard may have known better, but her successful accumulation of an amount of money far too great for a series of "sit in front of a web cam and spout out rehashed and uninformed things I've said a million times before" is, in fact, offensive.

Just a few posts prior, Ksandra said she's "not a feminist," despite being a female who wants equality in society. In those videos posted by someone else on the previous page, the headline is "Feminism VS Facts." Both of these things are indicative of how feminism has a seemingly inextricable negative connotation now, as if it were nothing more than a collection of man-hating, radicalized women who are not interested in equality, but are instead ravenous for superiority. This misconception has been perpetuated by the misunderstanding that a lot of women have, believing that they should distance themselves from the word as much as possible, and the popular depiction of it, which goes in line with that.

I had mentioned this in a previous discussion, and archi had responded that it's essentially only idiots who would believe such a thing, but being that condescending and failing to understand the consequences of a widespread, negative social understanding is something that also perpetuates it.

This may seem to be getting too general and going off-topic, but it comes back to this woman and her videos because they're representative of that overblown, embarrassing, and consequently self-defeating neo-feminism. She raised money to create something that successfully fuels the fire of anti-feminists, as it's unsubstantiated garbage, and it's recited as dispassionately and unsympathetically as they expect it to be. (Not that anti-feminists are usually all that competent; she may use misconstrued facts, but they tend to cherry-pick and argue emotionally, which is borderline valueless.) Meanwhile, actual feminists who are familiar with the term and who wish to do something positive—and to the benefit of all, not only them—must deal with yet another popularized "plea" from someone who they do not stand with, who makes things harder for them than it should be, yet who wears their banner proudly and in misrepresentation.

All of these things indicate why they're a problem. Their crowd-funding fleeced the people involved, they're constructed to be deliberately negative and controversial (rather than informative and exploratory), they humiliate anyone who wants to do good under the banner of "feminism," and they provide undeniably excellent fodder for those who consider feminism an undesirable thing. Really, I can't blame them for picking on it. Why wouldn't they? It's an easy target, and she's a great hand at setting equality endeavors back several decades.

[GoggleHead]

So where are all the level headed feminists hiding? I only ever see the crazy ones, so my assumption is that they've all just migrated to the banner of gender equality.

[Koul]

Are romance novels sexist for their portrayal of men? If so, we need to start a movement to get REALISTIC men in the romance genre.

[Charismatic]

So where are all the level headed feminists hiding?

Good fucking question. This is some unicorn level shit.

[Callisto]

I still don't get why she deleted my comment when I said she was pretty

[Shade]

Before diving into some other issues, I wanted to respond to the conversation about her not allowing comments, since I did originally bring it up. As mentioned, you can moderate YouTube comments. If she doesn't want her YouTube posting to be filled with immature dialogue, she could moderate it. That would require even-handed judgment and effort, though—I don't believe she can expend either of those things.


The reason they're a "big deal" is because she crowd-sourced money for this, misleading her contributors by stating that her videos would be well-researched, fair, and so on, so forth. Those familiar with her history as a blowhard may have known better, but her successful accumulation of an amount of money far too great for a series of "sit in front of a web cam and spout out rehashed and uninformed things I've said a million times before" is, in fact, offensive.

Just a few posts prior, Ksandra said she's "not a feminist," despite being a female who wants equality in society. In those videos posted by someone else on the previous page, the headline is "Feminism VS Facts." Both of these things are indicative of how feminism has a seemingly inextricable negative connotation now, as if it were nothing more than a collection of man-hating, radicalized women who are not interested in equality, but are instead ravenous for superiority. This misconception has been perpetuated by the misunderstanding that a lot of women have, believing that they should distance themselves from the word as much as possible, and the popular depiction of it, which goes in line with that.

I had mentioned this in a previous discussion, and archi had responded that it's essentially only idiots who would believe such a thing, but being that condescending and failing to understand the consequences of a widespread, negative social understanding is something that also perpetuates it.

This may seem to be getting too general and going off-topic, but it comes back to this woman and her videos because they're representative of that overblown, embarrassing, and consequently self-defeating neo-feminism. She raised money to create something that successfully fuels the fire of anti-feminists, as it's unsubstantiated garbage, and it's recited as dispassionately and unsympathetically as they expect it to be. (Not that anti-feminists are usually all that competent; she may use misconstrued facts, but they tend to cherry-pick and argue emotionally, which is borderline valueless.) Meanwhile, actual feminists who are familiar with the term and who wish to do something positive—and to the benefit of all, not only them—must deal with yet another popularized "plea" from someone who they do not stand with, who makes things harder for them than it should be, yet who wears their banner proudly and in misrepresentation.

All of these things indicate why they're a problem. Their crowd-funding fleeced the people involved, they're constructed to be deliberately negative and controversial (rather than informative and exploratory), they humiliate anyone who wants to do good under the banner of "feminism," and they provide undeniably excellent fodder for those who consider feminism an undesirable thing. Really, I can't blame them for picking on it. Why wouldn't they? It's an easy target, and she's a great hand at setting equality endeavors back several decades.

I guess that's fair. She took everyone's money to start a dialogue about women and games, but it's nothing but a misinformed lecture. Or at least, that's what people thought they were paying for. I think Kickstarter is great and all, but I've definitely been waiting for the bubble to burst and somebody's project to implode due to under-budgeting or unforeseen incompetence. Maybe here we are. Though I bet it'll be more spectacular when a 500k game fails to materialize.

The gist of the Jimquisition video that I linked to was that if it weren't for the people who hated Anita so much propelling her into the spotlight in the first place, no one would even know who she was or that she was making videos at all. And if they hadn't turned it into a debate about their misogynistic idiocy vs. Anita's "feminism" then we could be talking about the actual content of her videos instead and possibly (possibly) have had a rational discussion about it. They set out to shut her up and instead have made sure that everyone knows her name, AND made her out to look like the hero.

Now we're all stuck with her.

So where are all the level headed feminists hiding? I only ever see the crazy ones, so my assumption is that they've all just migrated to the banner of gender equality.

Good fucking question. This is some unicorn level shit.

Well as this is the closest they'd get to a warm reception, I don't imagine they're always going to be eager to stand up. I suspect it's much like the normal girl gamers that many dudes on the internet claim do not exist. They're just quietly and reasonably doing their own thing so you don't notice them as much.

Anyway, I don't know. Are these things reasonable?

http://katastrophicallynerdy.tumblr....-truly-did-not

http://pretendparades.tumblr.com/post/51239709824

Alternatively, I already mentioned George RR Martin further up in the thread.

‘To me being a feminist is about treating men and women the same,’ he said. ‘I regard men and women as all human - yes there are differences, but many of those differences are created by the culture that we live in, whether it's the medieval culture of Westeros, or 21st century western culture.’

[Kohan]

So where are all the level headed feminists hiding? I only ever see the crazy ones, so my assumption is that they've all just migrated to the banner of gender equality.

Naturally, the more radical are the more recognizable; it's precisely like Christians being labeled as wholesale intolerant individuals due to organizations like the American Family Association, not to mention any other group's suffering under a lazily generalized image.

Do you want those still living, or would you accept historical figures as well? In the latter regard, perhaps the most well-known is Susan B. Anthony, who is also particularly noteworthy in this discussion due to her disliking radical figures as well. To cover that, and to touch in brief her desire for equality both of the sexes and races, here are some quoted bits from the linked Wikipedia article:

Anthony's pursuit of alliances with moderate suffragists created long-lasting tension between herself and more radical suffragists like Stanton. Stanton openly criticized Anthony's stance, writing that Anthony and AWSA leader Lucy Stone "see suffrage only. They do not see woman's religious and social bondage." Anthony responded to Stanton: "We number over ten thousand women and each one has opinions ... and we can only hold them together to work for the ballot by letting alone their whims and prejudices on other subjects!"

The creation of the NAWSA effectively marginalized the more radical elements within the women's movement, including Stanton. Anthony pushed for Stanton to be voted in as the first NAWSA president, and stood by her as Stanton was belittled by the large factions of less-radical members within the new organization.

[...]

Before retiring, Anthony was asked if all women in the United States would ever be given the right to vote. She replied by stating, "it will come, but I shall not see it...It is inevitable. We can no more deny forever the right of self-government to one-half our people than we could keep the Negro forever in bondage. It will not be wrought by the same disrupting forces that freed the slave, but come it will, and I believe within a generation." "Failure is impossible" were the words she left with her "girls" to encourage them on in the long discouraging struggle ahead. Fourteen years after Anthony's death, following assiduous campaigning, women's right to vote was affirmed on August 26, 1920, by passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which Anthony and Stanton wrote.

If you would like one still living, there is Jehan Sadat, a thoroughly well-educated woman who continues to campaign for quality in places where is is notably difficult to do so—specifically, the Middle East.

Jehan played a key role in reforming Egypt's civil rights laws during the late 1970s. Often called “Jehan’s Laws” new statutes advanced by her granted women a variety of new rights, including those to alimony and custody of children in the event of divorce.

After visiting wounded soldiers at the Suez front during the Six-Day War in 1967, she founded al Wafa’ Wa Amal (Faith and Hope) Rehabilitation Center, which offers disabled war veterans medical and rehabilitation services and vocational training. The center, is supported by donations from around the world and now serves visually impaired children and has a worldwide known music and choir band.

She has also played crucial roles in the formation of the Talla Society, a cooperative in the Nile Delta region that assists local women in becoming self-sufficient; the Egyptian Society for Cancer Patients and the Egyptian Blood Bank; and SOS Children's Villages in Egypt, an organization that provides orphans new homes in a family environment.

She headed the Egyptian delegation to the UN International Women’s Conferences in Mexico City and Copenhagen. She is founder of the Arab-African Women’s League. As an activist she has hosted and participated in numerous conferences throughout the world concerning women’s issues, children’s welfare, and peace in Africa, Asia, Europe, and North and South America.

Fortunately, the overall perception of feminism as a term and the understanding of what it represents has been improving, though it could stand to improve more, and that is why specifying the difference between neo-feminists and actual, equality-desiring feminists is important. Bolded below is a fine example of how much of a difference definition makes.

In 2001 a Gallup poll found that only 20% of American men considered themselves feminist, with 75% saying they were not. A CBS Poll in 2009 found 24% of men in the United States claim the term "feminist" is an insult. Four in five men refuse to identify themselves as feminist, but when its definition is given the number fell to two in five. An increasing amount of men said that feminism had improved their lives in comparison to polls taken in 1983 and 1999 with an unprecedented, but marginal majority of 47% agreeing. 60% believe that a strong women's movement is no longer needed, however. A YouGov Poll of Britain in 2010 found that only 16% of men described themselves as feminist with 54% stating they were not and 8% specifically claiming to be antifeminist.

Of course, the belief that strong women's movements are no longer necessary is indicative of the insulated viewpoint that people within these cultures have, as they would not understand problems like those that Jehan Sadat faces. Furthermore, it represents a complacency that engenders the misunderstanding I've referred to a number of times now; fortunately, anti-feminism is unpopular and shows no signs of significantly gaining strength, and most feminism ideals (when explained to the unknowing) are increasingly considered acceptable.

[Charismatic]

Anyway, I don't know. Are these things reasonable?

http://katastrophicallynerdy.tumblr....-truly-did-not

http://pretendparades.tumblr.com/post/51239709824

First one, yes. (aside from calling me a feminist, fuck off with that)
Second one, no.

[Outlaw]

One more thing about the video.

When she was previewing her next video and reversed gender roles it showed Mario in jail. It's almost like..
"All guys deserve to be behind bars for thinking their bad thoughts."

[archibaldcrane]

Wait, they made another Tenchu: Stealth Assassins game?

[Kohan]

First one, yes. (aside from calling me a feminist, fuck off with that)

If you agree with what's mentioned within, you would be. Do you believe that a popular negative connotation tied to a word is significant enough for you to deny association, even when you know better? If so, that is unfortunate; it would mean that you bend to whatever the popular uninformed opinion is.

Second one, no.

You believe that men should lose custody of their children, be represented as bumbling know-nothings, make alimony payments, and so on?

[archibaldcrane]

I want to make a video game that opens with a cast of 50 men and 50 women at gunpoint by the 'Satanic Rape Demons' who tell them that if they want to escape they need to complete a simple task: Do one pullup. Then the rest of the game is like 35 dudes and two chicks fighting to save the other 63 people.

[Rhinox]

Anyway, I don't know. Are these things reasonable?

http://katastrophicallynerdy.tumblr....-truly-did-not

http://pretendparades.tumblr.com/post/51239709824

Alternatively, I already mentioned George RR Martin further up in the thread.

http://tigerbeatdown.com/2011/08/26/...ge-r-r-martin/

Sady Doyle is a masterful troll.

[Charismatic]

If you agree with what's mentioned within, you would be.

I wouldn't be and am not. I'm pro-equality (of opportunity unlike 'feminists' and not outcomes) and that is precisely why I am actually anti-feminist.

You believe that men should lose custody of their children, be represented as bumbling know-nothings, make alimony payments, and so on?If you agree with what's mentioned within, you would be.

This is the stupidest question you have ever asked.
Sorry I don't believe in the patriarchy fairy, not agreeing with that means I fundamentally disagree with most of what is being said even though I don't think men should lose custody of their children and so on. Put on your dunce cap.

[Shade]

http://tigerbeatdown.com/2011/08/26/...ge-r-r-martin/

Sady Doyle is a masterful troll.

lol that's amazing.