Forums / Discussion / General

232,594 total conversations in 7,776 threads

+ New Thread


Anita Sarkeesian was named the 100 Most Influential People by Time recently.

Last posted May 04, 2015 at 11:40PM EDT. Added Apr 17, 2015 at 10:22PM EDT
53 posts from 30 users

Feminism and gender politics have become the hot button issues in the last couple of years, especially online, so it was reasonable that they included Sarkeesian. After all, who else springs to mind as readily (especially with the shake-up that GamerGate caused) when online feminist activism is mentioned as she does?

Keep in mind that the TIME 100 judges decide purely on the basis of influence; the people "honored" could have influenced the world either positively or negatively, or both. Regardless of how much Sarkeesian's views align with your own, it is undeniable that she is extremely well-known and influential. Thanks in part (or in majority, I suppose) to her opponents churning out countless videos criticizing her and posting low-quality "evidence montage" images meticulously detailing everything she says or does in order to reap sweet karma points. I'm looking at you, GamerGate. You have nobody but yourselves to blame.

Particle Mare wrote:

Feminism and gender politics have become the hot button issues in the last couple of years, especially online, so it was reasonable that they included Sarkeesian. After all, who else springs to mind as readily (especially with the shake-up that GamerGate caused) when online feminist activism is mentioned as she does?

Keep in mind that the TIME 100 judges decide purely on the basis of influence; the people "honored" could have influenced the world either positively or negatively, or both. Regardless of how much Sarkeesian's views align with your own, it is undeniable that she is extremely well-known and influential. Thanks in part (or in majority, I suppose) to her opponents churning out countless videos criticizing her and posting low-quality "evidence montage" images meticulously detailing everything she says or does in order to reap sweet karma points. I'm looking at you, GamerGate. You have nobody but yourselves to blame.

Why do so many people believe GG is targeting Sarkeesian? People have been against her views for years on this industry. You really think people will allow a person to control developers of an industry she has openly says she was never a fan of?

But tell me again, how "Low Quality" the evidence is against her in facts and analysis.

unusedusername wrote:

Why do so many people believe GG is targeting Sarkeesian? People have been against her views for years on this industry. You really think people will allow a person to control developers of an industry she has openly says she was never a fan of?

But tell me again, how "Low Quality" the evidence is against her in facts and analysis.

You're mistaken if you believe that my post was referring to GamerGate solely; I was pointing it out as a prime example. GG's fight with Sarkeesian over control of the dialogue on the GamerGate controversy is only one of many examples of her enjoying an elevated level of fame as a result of the opposition to her, and little more.

The very fact that someone took the effort to dig up a clip from 2010 (alongside the fact that it caused a considerable shitstorm on the internet, if Google is any indication) is a single of countless examples of her opponents insisting that she is made the topic of conversation. And yet it's puzzling when she is called influential?

Also, as a gamer, I want the views of developers to be formed based on their own assessment of critique of the industry, because I know that they are intelligent adults capable of forming their own conclusions and not brainless puppets vulnerable to being coerced by Muh Cultural Marxism. But that's a different discussion.

Last edited Apr 18, 2015 at 12:40AM EDT

Particle Mare wrote:

And yet it’s puzzling when she is called influential?

Yes. It is puzzling when a "critic" beats a Syrian's Children doctor, Academy Awarded Actors and Actresses, and Numerous Politicians and Humanitarians.

unusedusername wrote:

Particle Mare wrote:

And yet it’s puzzling when she is called influential?

Yes. It is puzzling when a "critic" beats a Syrian's Children doctor, Academy Awarded Actors and Actresses, and Numerous Politicians and Humanitarians.

>Syrian’s Children doctor

Care to name who you're talking about specifically? Or do you mean the role in general? Because once again, "influence" and hence entry into the TIME 100 is judged simply by how prominent a person is in current culture, and not necessarily by the positive impact they've had. There's a reason why they used the word "influential" and not "best" or "greatest"; it's meant to be a gauge of popular culture and is therefore unsurprisingly filled with a generous share of Hollywood celebrities. Case in point: Kim Kardashian is on the list.

Once again, it's not Sarkeesian's fault that she's talked about as much as she is (Logic 101: if people stopped talking about her, she wouldn't be talked about). I would choose a humanitarian aid worker in a warzone as a better candidate for being named a good person than she is, but I won't deny the reality that there's a reason why I know her name and not the worker's; Sarkeesian is more influential.


@Natsuru Springfield

Remember moot and mARBLECAKE? Remember that time Kim Jong Un was voted Time's Person of the Year?

It's been announced time and time again that the poll has little if any impact on the final cut, which is decided by the editors of Time. As elitist as it may seem, they trust their professional analysts more than random netizens, Youtube commentators, or anons from 8chan.

There was this one video talking about Sarkeesian. i can't find it anymore, but it basically summed up my opinion on her and the whole situation. She would have NEVER gtten so famous if nerds hadn't lost their shit over her. If you pay attention before her kick-starter for her Damsel in Distress shit she was relatively unknown.

She was about as big as any other YouTube feminist. Then the nerds found her video. And lost their shit. I mean it. Death threats, just about every big name youtube ranter making videos "refuting" her claims, people searching for proof of her supposedly evil deeds. And this put her into the spot light. Notice how all the articles about her hardly mention the work she does and talk about the harassment she got. The people constantly wanting to fight and debate her. They were the ones who made her big.

tl;dr, if people had just learned to ignore sarkeesian from the start none of this would have happened.

TripleA9000 wrote:

There was this one video talking about Sarkeesian. i can't find it anymore, but it basically summed up my opinion on her and the whole situation. She would have NEVER gtten so famous if nerds hadn't lost their shit over her. If you pay attention before her kick-starter for her Damsel in Distress shit she was relatively unknown.

She was about as big as any other YouTube feminist. Then the nerds found her video. And lost their shit. I mean it. Death threats, just about every big name youtube ranter making videos "refuting" her claims, people searching for proof of her supposedly evil deeds. And this put her into the spot light. Notice how all the articles about her hardly mention the work she does and talk about the harassment she got. The people constantly wanting to fight and debate her. They were the ones who made her big.

tl;dr, if people had just learned to ignore sarkeesian from the start none of this would have happened.

But does "ignore it and it'll go away" really always work out? It's undeniable that she used all the attention from those that strongly disagreed and took a disliking to her ("the nerds"? Really dude? Is this fucking junior high?) to her advantage in our reality, but there are many other ways to get well known.

0.9999...=1 wrote:

But does "ignore it and it'll go away" really always work out? It's undeniable that she used all the attention from those that strongly disagreed and took a disliking to her ("the nerds"? Really dude? Is this fucking junior high?) to her advantage in our reality, but there are many other ways to get well known.

i say nerds because the grand majority of people who hate her were nerds. Do you see nerd as being a derogatory statement?

0.9999...=1 wrote:

But does "ignore it and it'll go away" really always work out? It's undeniable that she used all the attention from those that strongly disagreed and took a disliking to her ("the nerds"? Really dude? Is this fucking junior high?) to her advantage in our reality, but there are many other ways to get well known.

No publicity is bad publicity, the motto goes. She's primarily a Youtube commentator; people in her industry depend on views to their videos or they'll sink. I guarantee you that if you subtracted all of the people who trawled through her content searching carefully for things to discredit her with, her content wouldn't seem nearly as popular (view-wise) as they are.

TripleA9000 wrote:

i say nerds because the grand majority of people who hate her were nerds. Do you see nerd as being a derogatory statement?

There are dozens of different ways to define that word. Which one are you using? And I'd imagine that the person who says something like "the nerds found her video… and lost their shit" would be the one who sees it as a derogatory term.

0.9999...=1 wrote:

There are dozens of different ways to define that word. Which one are you using? And I'd imagine that the person who says something like "the nerds found her video… and lost their shit" would be the one who sees it as a derogatory term.

I see nerd in a neutral light. The people who hated Anita fell under the title of nerd. Because they had the characteristics of nerds. And i say lost their shit, because that's exactly what happened. But thats a discussion for a different day. The fact is is that people got mad at anita. Its like that phrase says "Haters make me famous" thats exactly what happened.

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

Well, whether it was good influence or bad. I certainly do think she has caused a massive influence of some kind.

Just look at all the dried lakebeds of salt she left behind!

I expected butthurt and I got exactly what I came for.
Also, whether or not people will want to admit it, Anita has been kinda influential, if counting making people mad as influential.

Particle Mare wrote:

No publicity is bad publicity, the motto goes. She's primarily a Youtube commentator; people in her industry depend on views to their videos or they'll sink. I guarantee you that if you subtracted all of the people who trawled through her content searching carefully for things to discredit her with, her content wouldn't seem nearly as popular (view-wise) as they are.

Yeah, I know. Let me put it a different way, if not her, then the ideas and attitude she represents were eventually going to find their way into the Zeitgeist for public debate somehow. That's just the fact of the current trend- the individual themself doesn't matter as much.

0.9999...=1 wrote:

Yeah, I know. Let me put it a different way, if not her, then the ideas and attitude she represents were eventually going to find their way into the Zeitgeist for public debate somehow. That's just the fact of the current trend- the individual themself doesn't matter as much.

I suppose you have a point in terms of broader society, but the topic here is the TIME 100, where the individual is everything.

unusedusername wrote:

When nearly 80% of people have voted for her not to be on this list, she doesn't deserve it, AT ALL.
But then again, the list contains random J-pop singers, something is indeed rigged.

When nearly 80% of people are so salty that they vote for her not to be on the list, she definitely deserved it.

….
In the words of AlphaOmegaSin, she may be a crooked wannabe, but she is a damn good advertiser and con artist.
Also, why so much salt on both sides? Sheesh, she's nothing special.

Last edited Apr 18, 2015 at 12:04PM EDT

why are people even surprised she is there

this list is made to show the popularity of a person, good or bad, and anita has been the center of the feminist argument for years even if she did jackshit compared to most ppl in it

remember Moot? he has done for humanity about as much as anita yet he was named the most influential person by the same magazine, because back then 4chan pretty much shocked the entire world.

Spider-Byte wrote:


Ignoring her wont work neither can criticizing her. She will still get money and publicity from being an expert of misinforming people. We should just leave her and hope she goes away.

well yeah, now its far far too late. What i was saying is that if people had ignored her from the start we wouldn't have reached this point. But no one likes a captain hindsight

You understand this is an influential list, right, and not a most liked list?

Of course she deserves it, she influenced many people to follow her, and is basicly the leader of gaming feminism, or w/e it is.

The question is, was she influencial, not, do you like her.

I don't see why Gamergaters/Anti-Anitas would be salty about this. I don't know about you but I would never want to be on the same list as Kanye West. I honestly think that makes it a win win for both sides. Anita's fans get to go "Haw haw, suck it nerds! Your death threats got our lord and savior even more famous!" while the GGers get to go "Haw haw, she's as influential as Kanye West!"

Well played TIME.

UnKewln00b wrote:

I don't see why Gamergaters/Anti-Anitas would be salty about this. I don't know about you but I would never want to be on the same list as Kanye West. I honestly think that makes it a win win for both sides. Anita's fans get to go "Haw haw, suck it nerds! Your death threats got our lord and savior even more famous!" while the GGers get to go "Haw haw, she's as influential as Kanye West!"

Well played TIME.

"Ha Ha, you are as influential as a 128 award winning artist, how does it feel loser?"

Last edited Apr 18, 2015 at 01:07PM EDT

UnKewln00b wrote:

I don't see why Gamergaters/Anti-Anitas would be salty about this. I don't know about you but I would never want to be on the same list as Kanye West. I honestly think that makes it a win win for both sides. Anita's fans get to go "Haw haw, suck it nerds! Your death threats got our lord and savior even more famous!" while the GGers get to go "Haw haw, she's as influential as Kanye West!"

Well played TIME.

See, its optimism like this that brightens my day.
Thanks man.

James Blunt wrote:

"Ha Ha, you are as influential as a 128 award winning artist, how does it feel loser?"

128 awards doesn't cover up universal douchebaggery and massive ego-stroking.

Trollanort wrote:

128 awards doesn't cover up universal douchebaggery and massive ego-stroking.

at the risk of derailing this thread

how does that make him less of an artist/less influential.

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

Well, whether it was good influence or bad. I certainly do think she has caused a massive influence of some kind.

Just look at all the dried lakebeds of salt she left behind!

that was one of the images used to prove that this was anita alt/fake account.

I noticed majority of the guys hate her… I really wish she wouldn't block her comments on YouTube, it makes her kind of immature. I've noticed she can be a bit hypocritical, and a lot of people even says she's faking everything. Then again, I don't really know a lot about her other then her videos.

Ryumaru Borike wrote:

Didn't Anita already have a following by the time her critics showed up? I mean, why did so many people speak up against her unless she already had a substantial following?

the following she had was about as big as any other youtube blogger, think Amazing atheist, thunderfoot level. She was somewhere around their. But people's hatred of her pushed her past their level of fame.

Devil's Advocate here, but it would be absolutely a lie to say she wasn't influential.

She's widely hated and despised, and she's so much a farce that it's painful to watch through her videos, but honestly? Thanks to her bullshit, I think a lot more casual video game players have become a lot more alert to how the press has been pushing down an agenda in vidya, and how the media does try to control what content is produced and what is not by trying to sell the idea that it somehow hurts women or other minorities.

I don't think she belongs on that list, there are far more influential people who are deserving of a spot, but she is most certainly an influential person. A huge influence on internet communities, stirring the lives of hundreds of thousands; support, disgust or otherwise.

Last edited Apr 22, 2015 at 02:26PM EDT

Calling somebody influential doesn't mean that they're praiseworthy. Kanye West is doubtlessly influential because of his immense fortune and fame. Prior to the advent of new information technologies, fame was won through renown, which was earned with worthy or otherwise monumental deeds. The over abundance of information that the digital age has produced means that fame can no longer be associated with either renown or worth; instead, it is the product of chance.

What I mean by "chance" is that it is circumstance that makes people famous nowadays: you could be doing the same thing as a hundred other people and those hundred could be doing it better, but if you have some angle that makes your story marketable, you will be the one catapulted into public knowledge. Personally, I think the way in which media culture works nowadays means that fame is earned unjustly and needlessly, shoving people into the limelight who are unequipped to handle it. Time was, leaders were the ones with fame; now, it's anybody marketable.

How does this idea correlate to the topic of the thread? Well, the thread's subject had a marketable story, and so they were catapulted into the public sphere,despite their inability to handle what it means to be famous in this day and age (and also they are probably camouflaging their opportunism behind the banner of gender politics). The poisonous stranglehold that progressivism has on contemporary intellectual discourse definitely helps them, too…

Also, as Particle Mare and Triple A have said, a knee jerk reaction from a certain type of people has contributed to the marketability of this story; they need to take some of the responsibility on themselves, as difficult as that may be.

Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Howdy! You must login or signup first!