Anita Sarkeesian doesn’t represent me nor any female gamer!

You have all heard about the constant battle between Anita Sarkeesian and Gamergate. I have been following both of their tweets not to pick any side but to see if what she says has any truth in it. She is the kind of person that says to have been harassed, faced with death threats and constantly being belittled for what she does. Let’s start off from the begining and see where she started.

She first became popular on a site for donating called kickstarter where she practically made money with the promise of making videos about certain gaming characters. The goal was reached and actually overreached since she got „6,968 backers pledged $158,922 to help bring this project to life but the promises were not held.

  • $7,500 – Voodoo Priestess/Tribal Sorceress (Tropes Video #6)
  • $9,000 – Women as Reward (Tropes Video #7)
  • $10.500 – Mrs. Male Character (Tropes Video #8)
  • $12,000 – „Ugly” = Evil (Tropes Video #9)
  • $13,500 – Man with Boobs (Tropes Video #10)
  • $15,000 – Special Video To Be Announced If Goal Magically Reached!

So, there were supposed to be 10 videos but if you check her youtube channel, there are only 6 videos and this project was funded in 2012 so it has been a while but the videos didn’t appear. What does that say to us? That she basically scammed the persons who actually funded her project and did not respect the made promises.

Anita Sarkeesi now is a representative of feminist frequency. I actually checked her tweets and videos only to see a few patterns that currently reside everytime she is interviewed or questioned by the media:

  1. She never stops complaining about death threats and harassment.
  2. In her every video she needs to mention gamergate and the people that harass her from this group.
  3. Whenever asked by people about her goals, she always gives out the female in a flimsy armor or the female used as decoration.
  4. In all her videos she also says about the damsel in distress stereotype.

We can see that first of all, she strikes to draw pitty upon herself from the audience so they she will grow sympathy from them. Next, she pulls in the name card so that her opposition will be viewed as something negative and will be remembered as something unthrustfull and negative in case people doubt her. Her next two opinions are general and used everytime eventhough she gives proof of a lack of understanding the diversity in video games. Sure, there are videos like that but i clearly remember world of warcraft, mass effect, Diablo and many other games that do not fit her pattern yet she mentions nothing of them. Maybe she doesn’t have enough popularity to go against a big company like Blizzard or she might be afraid that the companies have the balls to actually press charges against her for slander.

Let’s all forget who Anita Sarkeesian is and focus on what she represents. She represents Feminist gamers yet i do wonder something. Why do the feminists agree to be represented by someone who basically scammed people on kickstarter? Why does the media never ask her questions about the kickstarter project? She clearly isn’t a positive image to behold or to be represented by so why does no feminist jump on her head about these things that she has done? Why do they let her grow in popularity when she clearly does it for popularity and more money not for the ethics of it? Those questions will probably be left unanswered as feminists do not engage in criticism and neither does she. For someone who believes in her freedom of speech and changes, she doesn’t accept any critic since her videos have disabled comments so that tells us only one thing: she’s either afraid of being called what she is or of people that could change her followers opinion.

Another thing that you should take notice about her character are the tweets that she sends and just today i found some that clearly states what kind of person she is:


You can see here that she indulges in brainwashing people because she says so not because people would have enough judgment to see what and who is right  ( see Tweet with gamergate hates women). Another one is her nature of judging people that would invite her to a show and her opinion when she clearly dislikes the person. Her personality is one of a person that provokes people and would not accept the consequences of her words but is that right? Is it right to provoke with words and then behave like a victim if people tell her off? I think not and i think feminists should find a more intelligent person to represent them not this vindictive little scammer.

One thing she also confuses and seem to confuse are people with trolls. Just because she has received harassment from someone who has ” gamergate” on following doesn’t mean that the whole group of gamergate is harassing her. NO, make the difference between internet trolls who will engage in these kind of discussion and the group gamergate. If you can’t make that difference then you’re just an attention whore with a problem towards the group itself seeking any chance to relate any troll to it.

I have to say one thing: this person doesn’t represent female gamers and will never represent real women. Real women would not accept to be represented by someone who clearly cares more about her vendettas with a group, who can’t take criticism, who complains about harassment and yet provokes it within her tweets, who scams people with the promise of a project yet fails to respect it. I refuse to be represented by a person with clearly a lack of morals and respect for anyone who might challenge her to a real debate.

Facebook or the new social police

Remember all those social platforms where you could make accounts with the name you actually desired? Not necessarily because you didn’t like your own name but you liked the idea of being someone else or of not being known by everyone who just stumbles upon your profile. Nobody likes that since there are so many fucked up people that can actually see your picture and your name and get a lot more info from your facebook page than they get from yellow pages.

So i probably would have understood if facebook was a FBI database to keep track of people on social media presenting personality traits of your next criminal offenders but it’s not and it has given a lot of power to the users. First of all if facebook was actually serios with it’s line of reports than i would totally understand why all these precautions but unfortunately, it’s not.

Lately, the only reports or majority of reports that people will complain of are the name reports. Yes, it’s silly and it gives a lot of power to the users who don’t have a real enough reason to report others. See if you’re a person with 2 names and your real name is composed of 3 than you’re elligible for reports and getting your page deleted. It doesn’t matter that your facebook page contains 2 real names because  you don’t have the third. Yes, facebook users and report managers are that desperate. You cannot hide your name because it requires the picture of an ID.

So what is Facebook doing with this? does it want to seem transparent and forces it’s users to be transparent too? Does it collect names and information for the all conspiracy theories that we can all think of? Well it sure does seem like it since all of the other reports aren’t taken seriously.

So what about all the other reports? You know, when you see a page that shouldn’t be there because it[‘s promoting violence against humans/animals and you simply report it but you get the message from facebook that the page is fine and the reports don’t meet the requirements? Because even if that’s clearly a page that violates the facebook policy of hate speech/ violence/ propaganda/ harassment it will not be taken down by facebook who seems to have a high up in the sky requirement for these kind of pages to be deleted. So, basically an innocent person who just didn’t want to give her full name can have its account deleted but these pages, no.

When that happens, let’s say you actually give your picture with the id to solve this thing but it puts you in a waiting time. Seriously, how much do you have to wait for this problem to be solved? If you search the internet, you will find people that have been waiting even for 6 months so that they can get back their account or are still waiting. What is up with this dear facebook?

Why does facebook put such an importance on such a minor issue like the name and put such a low importance on other problems that are clearly more of importance than the name? What is wrong with you, facebook? Why do you give the users such a great power regarding a name and you’re unable to solve more important issues like violence, harassment, hate speech and offensive pages/ posts and people?

Today’s activists and the herd logic

There is a type of thinking that has been spreading through most of the activist groups especially on social media and that is called the herd thinking. This herd thinking is mostly given by a few characteristics which you will always find present in any discussion with a proclaimed activist. Also, i do differentiate between activists that do not use harmful means to reach their pourpose and the ones that do. Here, we talk about the ones that use harmful or unethical means to reach their pourpose.

1.Quick to judge without any basis than the point of disagreeing with their opinions. So, if you don’t agree with their opinion and you actually speak out than you will be judged or clasified by them under no basis and they will ignore everything you said even if you actually make a good point. Let’s see an example on that:

For the record, it only took me less than 10 minutes to provoke a quick to judge reaction from one of them only by disagreeing with their opinion. Because i said that people defended on their free speech right when that was taken, she easily judged me as being an internal mysoginist based on no action or basis. Just so you know, internal mysoginy is one of their favorite comeback arguments because it’s so general and cannot be prooven/ unprooven. So regarding that, you can see that my first response was entirely unrelated to what she actually said.


2. Their counter arguments are their personal projections.  So the example up shows you exactly how this person projects their personal beliefs that were simply unrelated to the topic at hand. What is projecting? Projecting is when you bring in and project your own beliefs, personal opinions and issues onto other people. Projecting has no place in a common discussion and debate because it has been proven that personal issues, judgementals with no basis will ruin any discussion from the start. So why do people like this have so much credibility? From what i’ve seen it’s easier to influence people who are not educated on that part because all the logic seems simpler and true for that matter. When people do start to get more information on it, they actually start to question that logic.


3.When you do get to debate with one of them, you need to expect a few things that will happen. First of all, that person will chase it’s tail to prove otherwise but will also ignore some of your arguments. Yesterday i was telling someone that books based on true stories have that written in their description otherwise they are fiction. That person ignored my argument and continued to show examples from that book even after i told him that. So what does that make of this person? a herd mentality person who can’t actually counter argument.

4.The herd mentality will extrapolate. You will be judged for assumed things and imaginary arguments that they find as being real even if they are not. So expect to be the pro rapist, sexist, misoginist, criminal offender even if you’re not actually picking any team. (because in arguments people expect you to pick a team;…why should you actually be in the grey area and calculate this on your own judgement )

5. Even if they do consider that they do not manipulate opinions, they actually do. It is a difference when you say ” sign this petition if you think x has harmful opinions, whatever to society” and another thing to say ” Sign this because x is a Rapist and he admited in his book that he raped someone”. Well that’s a clear sign of manipulation since that is a false accusation on a proof that would not stand in any court because the book did not say the examples were  real so basically they could be a figment of his imagination.

These are 5 reasons why activists have a herd mentality and why they should not be encouraged nor engaged upon. Oh by the way, if you do engage, always be ready for the incoming insults. They have no limit.

Feminists and their quest to ban freedom of speech

Nowadays, there has been a lot of controversy from people regarding a famous blogger named „Roosh” which actually has gotten me very intrigued about this problem. I actually spent time looking on his blog posts from these days but also on his older blog posts to see if there is a difference. What i can say since this is a personal blog, is that the difference from his 2-3 year older posts is that the content was softer and you could actually see less posts about women than you see now on the first 30 pages of his blog. People actually don’t see that their controversy about certain posts will actually make a writer seek more content related to it so it’s only natural that he has started to write more posts regarding females.

Recently i read one of his posts about the model Tess Munster who is an obese model. The article was written not necessarily in an aggresive or misoginistic way but in a fact based reality way. Any good doctor will tell you that this women who are obese are not healthy and any rational person would know based on that fact that obesity is not something you should promote to kids these days. Regarding this article, Roosh is harsh but he’s also right and the fact that it actually caused controversy within the feminist side, it is as he says that they live in a world of delusions. It is funny though how they act upon his harsh writings and yet you see articles on daily dot with ” 10 problems a person with stick legs wont encounter”. Is this not body shaming too? or does it only apply to fat people because people actually call them fat. Wow, double standards much? or maybe we don’t know it yet but only feminists are allowed to have freedom of speech.

On another side he released some books that stirred up more controversy on the fact that he is actually promoting rape because he doesn’t express what the world would do but his thoughts and desires on certain situations. Yes, they might include rape and yes his thoughts can lead to that but yet his actions have not lead to that so there is a big difference between actions and thoughts. If he actually were a rapists as feminists called him than he would be in jail but yet he did no such thing and yet he did nothing to be seen as a „criminal charge” so really, what is the problem? Yes, he writes down on his blog offensive things and thoughts but in the end, it’s his blog and the only naive creatures are the feminists who bring more and more advertising to his blog. Now, they are trying to actually ban his books or probably take down his blog because genius feminists only believe in their own freedom of speech. Roosh mate, if you read this you should probably thank those feminists for their part in advertising you and making you a more succesfull blogger. Good job.

Now, let’s go to the feminist actions that you could probably recognize as comunist type of actions that were being done in comunist countries. I live in one that has actually been through a period of comunism so i do quite recognise this type of mentality. The only difference between the feminists and the comunists is that feminists can’t shoot you without facing criminal charges but all the facts and actions lead to this type of mentality that has never been good for any country that actually celebrates freedom of speech. Regarding the so called offensive books, well i can give you more than 10 authors that write really mindblowing offensive books regarding rape and yet nobody has spoken about it. Here is a small list about it: I just want to see campaigns to make the stores ban those books like they are actually trying to do with Roosh’s books. Hell i wanna see these campaigns of „let’s ban books we don’t like” trying to ban „the story of O ” or all the horror erotica that actually include rape, zoofilia and other weird shit but they won’t be banned because they were not writen by a famous blogger. Instead these brainiac feminists focus on a famous blogger who is clearly using their negative opinions to make himself more popular. How is this relevant? Well … it’s relevant when you think they are trying to get a book banned ( a pickup line book) when there are other books who include pedophilia, zoofilia, rape and other banable things still on the market and being left alone.

So again, i will say good job to you Roosh for using all these feminist hysteria in your own detriment and for continuing to use it and debunk it in your blog posts. I may not agree with all your opinions but that is the reason why we are different human beings and why we both have freedom of speech. So don’t you dare be let down by these comunist feminists who are trying to ban your freedom of speech.

Internetul scoate ce-i mai rau din oameni.

O sa incep prin a face afirmatia: nu va exista niciodata o discutie normala cu argumente pe internet.

Acum, hai sa elaboram aceasta afirmatie. La un moment al vietii presupun ca fiecare dintre voi s-a bagat intr-o discutie contradictorie pe diferite platforme de social media fiindca ati avut alta parere cu si despre un subiect. Zis si facut, mesaj scris cu opinia elaborata de ce credeti ca actiunea x este gresita si apoi timpul de asteptare in care ceilalti oameni elaborau un raspuns la parerea voastra. In mod normal, cu argumente foarte viabile stai cu impresia ca oamenii o sa inteleaga logica pe care o folosesti si poate le dai o perspectiva noua. Urmarile:

1.Persoana noua nu-ti intelege parerea fiindca ea considera ca are dreptatea suprema si este incapabila de a vedea o alta perspectiva deci incepe sa-ti relateze extrapolari si situatii fantastice care au o probabilitate mica de a se intampla pentru a-si dovedi cazul.

2. Persoana crede ca tu incerci sa-i subminezi parerea si nu intelege ca desi chiar daca i-ai dat dreptate, tu ai listat efectele negative ce le poate avea fapta ei si urmarea este ca iti considera toata parerea negativa inclusiv pe tine. Ca urmarea a unei aprofundari ale acestei discutii fantastice, te jigneste si iti repeta aceleasi argumente la care tu deja dadusei contra argumente.

3. Persoana se crede cocos asa ca daca tu nu-i intelegi parerea, nu esti o persoana cu compasiune si atunci nu accepta o critica negativa si incepe sa te insulte si sa ia totul personal.

4.In cazul unui eveniment o sa te trezesti cu x persoane incapabile sa aiba alta perspectiva decat cea de a opiniei de masa asa ca fereasca cumva sa te bagi in discutie si sa le zici ca „mey, situatia nu e chiar asa”.

5.Persoana este mai in varsta si atunci crede ca are toate raspunsurile chiar si in domenii in care nu se pricepe asa ca orice ai spune, tot la parerea principala se ajunge.

Daca ar fi sa rezumam toate aceste discutii sau modalitati de a discuta realizezi ca nici o persoana de pe internet nu incearca sa-ti citeasca macar un fass din ce ai scris fiindca toate sunt preocupate pentru a-si apara parerea, gresita sau nu. Nimeni de pe internet nu incearca sa gandeasca din a treia perspectiva ca sa inteleaga ce a zis celalalt si totul se rezuma la atacuri personale. Cel mai rau, se vede la activistii de la noi fiindca deh, ei sunt cei mai inversunati si cu morcoveata in fundulet. Toata lumea a uitat cum este sa discute cu cineva in regulile bunului simt si au devenit incapabili de a avea o parere diferita fata de opinia publica. Este mult mai usor sa ataci o persoana sau sa te legi de persoana cu care vorbesti decat sa discuti. unde sunt frazele de genul ” inteleg la ca te referi dar ….” sau ” Pentru x am gasit statistici contradictorii cu ce ai zis tu „. Unde este bunul simt al oameniilor cand discuta? Bunul simt n-are loc pe internetul unde toti pot avea diaree verbala.

Asa ca oamenii buni, ce discutam aici? Discutam despre cum toti sunt Batman pe social media uitand de altfel propria educatie sau propriile maniere.