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.


Fifty shades of Grey or 50 shades of stupidity!

I was wondering if to write or not to write this article but since i’ve read many stupid people, i will at least for their sake so they can actually realize that their actions don’t have the logical outcome.

So, the story begins like this:

This author, E. L. James had decided to write fanfiction which contained a highly sexual part if not more than 50 % of it but she decided she wouldn’t do it the normal way. She decided to make this book about an abusive relationship because it was probably one of her fantasies. Nothing wrong there since i’ve read my share of erotica which contained abuse just for the kicks of it.

So she went to her editor and presented her book which he took it, read it and decided it could have a great succes but not because it was highly sexual. It’s succes was going to come because it actually exploited something that it is still a tabu and that is the graphic sex scenes that included BDSM. While the author considered her book still a fantasy, the publishing decided to review this book as revolutionary in sex. All good to the fact that in time, the media wasn’t satisfied and after people read it, they decided to focus on the tabu part. All of this while the author was giving interviews where she did specify that this book wasn’t a model for sex or bdsm but nothing more than a developed fanfic.

So the book was released and a lot of feminists jumped out of their asses that the book is about domestic violence then about abuse and claimed that the author admit that. Are you crazy? why would she ruin her fantasy to complete the ego of survivors of domestic abuse whom frankly she should not even care. Do you know why? Because people need to differentiate between a book which is pure fantasy and a real life situation. Smart people wont start to take the main characters as models and the most will be that they will fantasize about one of them.  Stupid people will take the book seriously and condemn it for not applying into the normal type of erotic romance.

Moving on, the book had a tremendous succes and they decided to do a movie about it. Sure thing but the pages kept filling with 50 shades of abuse and that usually means you give google more keywords to relate it too. So, the book is about an unhealthy relationship which we actually knew directly from the author which never claims that the book should be a model.

The tricky thing is that their marketing contained welcoming messages to explore the unknown and many people took it as a sign that this is a model book which is not but the interpretations of the book had changed from fantasy to sexual model.

Is it the authors fault? NO

It’s the media and the public fault entirely for the made up brand and perverted view about the book and it’s more funny how they actually complain about it.

The movie came out and i heard it was horse shit but i did find out that many people went to this movie because they wanted to see if the abuse was for real or simply to make fun of it. My point is that all this negative attention only brought more people to view in the movie and all this fuss about a Woman’s fantasy is pointless and childish and most of all, it did the opposite of what those anti-abusers wanted.

When you bring so much negative fuss about a book or about a movie, the media would be foolish to not use it so in other words you get manipulated. You made the site 50 shades of abuse, they made an article and used it to stir up the curiosity of their viewers and bring in new viewers. In other words most of the people that say that the book is about abuse, have read that book in order to  help with the cause of showing how it glorifies abuse. How did they help the cause? By reading that damn book and bringing more money to the author.

What you people need to understand that whatever kind of attention you guys brought or hope to bring in the future, you’re only being manipulated and media will use that attention and your cause will be lost.

To get rid of something, you make it that it’s going to be forgotten or ignored so in other words you stop giving it attention and maybe in one year or two, people wont even care to remember. If you continue to give it attention, then it will become more and more famous.

Remember readers, this book is a fantasy and nobody is allowed to judge someone’s fantasy unless it’s that awfull as in murder, rape and it’s actually becoming reality. Get that head our of your asses and put some smart glasses on to realize that this is only a book and not even that.