If Feminist Frequency Were 100% Honest With Us – Gaming Wildlife


About The_Director

Home of the 100% honest series. A comedy show that focuses on the the culture of gaming and those who are apart of it. A social experiment on learning about different types of gamers as well as CEOs and their various companies.


  1. Oddworld Inhabitant

    I’m scared to look at the YouTube comments…

    Personally, though, I find FemFreq interesting if only because, as “Critical Miss” pointed out (), few people are actually hardened supporters of the show, but many support just so they won’t be associated with it’s more… shall we say “unfiltered” critics. It was pretty much inevitable that somebody figured out a way to get money off of the internet darker depths without pandering to it, I guess. Anyway, great episode.

  2. Hey Anita, you might want start eating better. That diet’s making you way too thin.

    • Also, is Anita really living off Kickstarter money?

      • Well she’s certainly not providing the content to her backers in a timely manner, that’s for sure.

        • If someone is getting paid six figures to say Samus Aran’s boobs are objectifying women, then I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

          • Not just Samus’s boobs…. EVERY fictional woman’s boobs are apparently objectifying women as long as the game is popular enough to milk outrage from! Unless they’re somehow covering their boobs up with a thick outfit or something, that is. Then, people claim that they’re misogynist because the character isn’t feminine enough and they’re just a way to shame women from their sexuality or something. Right off the bat, you just can’t win against people with a hypercritical mindset like that because they’ll be offended no matter what you do on appearance alone.

            And that’s not even getting into the contradictory BS that comes with how characters are actually portrayed and how that’s also somehow bad no matter what you do because anything less than 100% perfection is depowering, but being a character who never fails at anything is also depowering to them because it makes the character a Mary Sue or something. Even if you can balance all this crap out, they’ll still claim the character just exists for diversity or sex appeal or something which they’re going to complain about as well.

            I mean, there’s just no way to win unless your game features 0 female representation… And even then, that only lasts until they find out you have no female characters and make a fuss over THAT as well!

          • Samus Aran would be a perfectly timely and modern reference for FemFreq to complain about. I think her latest video has her ranting about Joanna Dark in the N64 game Perfect Dark. It’s like she is somehow unstuck in time and space and has no concept of things like years, decades, generations, other continents or cultures, or how anything fits together in actual context.

            I think her Lego video is what made me write her off as a fraud. She spent almost an hour ranting about Lego’s marketing practices… circa 1978, all while implying to the audience that they were what the company currently does. She bounces around cherry picking examples to rant about like a deranged Time Lord with a broken Tardis. Gee Anita, you mean the 80’s did things differently? Or not to your approval? Or Europe and Japan have different cultural mores and standards then your own? Why imagine that!

  3. DeTroutSpinners

    Again, the best thing the games industry and community can do is to just ignore this single-noted sexist idiot and her uneducated, unresearched bullshit. Not likely as long as she has the intelligentsia dipshits of the media blindly pandering to her, but still possible. Those who refuse to challenge her should just be shamed and excluded from the discussion, just as she blocks anyone who disagrees with her (which includes many, many more female gamers than those who support her).

  4. Shots fired!

  5. *grabs a giant bucket of popcorn and waits for the glorious shitstorm to come*

  6. MonsieurMoustache

    …How are you on Channel Awesome? This is so against the morals of the people I’ve come to love on this site. It’s demeaning, cruel, and without substance or real evidence of argument. You add nothing to this conversation that Men Right’s bros on Youtube haven’t done already in similar whiny tones. It’s insulting and yeah, kinda sexist, but more importantly, dumb. Really really dumb. I expect better from these creators and this website.

    • Yesssss, here we go. *munch munch*

    • You know, I remember seeing her first games video, I liked it, then when I saw there were two others I even subscribed, then I saw the second one and couldn’t even give it a like(or was YouTube still using stars them?) and then after seeing the third I unsubscribed.

      You have to know literally nothing about video games to watch that series and believe anything that comes out of her mouth.

    • At least one of the creators here is part of #Gamergate and another made a video entirely about hating SJWs. Agree with their views or not, you have no idea what site you’re on.

    • OK, so you believe Anita is trying to be a legitimate critic of games that actually wants to do good for the industry, right? Since that’s the main part of the video and one of the big things you’re offended about, right?

      If that’s the case, I dare you to list what an actual empowering female character would be according to Anita. As far as I know, all she’s done is tear characters and games down and point out the “flaws” in their representation…. If she was someone trying to acheave a legitimate goal then it shouldn’t be hard to find out what she actually wants and list an example of some kind, right? I’ll be waiting for whatever response you come up with.

      • You know she does game reviews as well, right? And she’s praised plenty of representations in those. She generally doesn’t sing much praise in her Tropes videos because that’s not what they’re about.

        Though actually, in her most recent Tropes video, she praises a couple games that subvert the trope she’s discussing.

      • Then I would say that you are massively guilty of failing to pay attention. If you had, you might have noticed that two of the videos she produced were entitled “Positive Female Characters”. These referred to Jade from Beyond Good and Evil, and the Scythian from Superbrothers: Sword and Sworcery EP. You could also have searched for her easily findable Steam profile, where she has a “Recommendations List”. From there, considering the games that are on there, you could also infer that she considers Faith from Mirrors Edge, Chell from Portal, Max Caulfield from Life is Strange, and a good deal more female characters, as empowering.

        And I hate that I have to explain this AGAIN to someone who hates on Anita, but she has said COUNTLESS times that one can be critical of fictional works while still enjoying them. The classic example is how a good deal of Star Wars fans still have love for Return of the Jedi but nonetheless dislike the Ewoks. Similarly, plenty people like myself love the Dark Knight Trilogy but aren’t fans of the Rachel Dawes subplot and also find Christian Bale’s Bat-voice cringeworthy.

    • I see a lot of people crying harassment on her behalf, but none of those people are capable of rebutting any of the criticism against her. too busy being a knight in shining armor to take a good hard look at who you’re defending.

      • That is Anita’s goal To create a cult to defend her so she can promote hate and sexism in peace.

      • Dromedary Meat Cactus

        ” none of those people are capable of rebutting any of the criticism against her.”

        Bullshit. It’s been done dozens of times in essays and videos. Maybe we get sick of addressing the childish claims of Anita haters based on rumors spread among morons.


    • It’s worth to see the SJW’s cry. I really love the taste of feminist tears. Keep them coming.

    • I stand by your opinion! This video is just trying to take away credibility and reducing the arguments to a maniacally screaming sock puppet yelling “Misogyny!”

      I don’t want stuff like this here. This was a civilized place once

  7. I’m a bit suspicious of this video, not because of the content, but this is channel awesome we’re talking about, man. Home of Linkara, Nostalgia Chick and a bunch of others like that. I liked it though, so kudos there.

  8. The Crazed Spruce

    Not sure what’s gonna be more entertaining, Anita Sarkeesian’s response on The Young Turks, or the “If TYT Were Honest” video that’s bound to follow.

    Hey, StormWolf, could you pass the popcorn? 🙂

  9. Well, damn. That was much less ironic than I was expecting.

    I just really don’t get what’s so bad about her videos. I just watched her new one and it was pretty harmless.

    • As far as I’ve seen and heard, she just rails on everything. Everything is an offensive female character or an offensive portrayal or something and it gets to the point where it becomes clear that there are no positive examples because their complaints are often contradictory or impossible to do all-together. Have their been empowering female characters? Of course. Has the channel even mentioned them or explained what writers should do to make a good female character? Not to my knowledge. They’re just cashing in on either ‘easy targets’ or popular games specifically meant to invoke rage and they’ll never actually show any positive portrayals because they’re smart. They know their hardcore audience is the SJW crowd and people like them who will find flaws in anything even if those flaws don’t exist and they know that if they can keep appealing to them regardless of what it means for their actual content and message, that they’ll stay somewhat relevant.

      I mean, I don’t think there’s really any other way to see this way of doing things other than saying that Anita is an uninformed person who was thrust into the spotlight and keeps herself afloat from just raw backlash, SJWs, and people who don’t really know any better…. Do sexist character decisions and traits exist? I believe so. Is Anita the person to turn to to learn about those things? Heck no.

      • “Have their been empowering female characters? Of course. Has the channel even mentioned them or explained what writers should do to make a good female character? Not to my knowledge.”

        Serious question: what is your knowledge of her videos? I’m not saying you have to watch them (if you think you’re not likely to like a media review, don’t bother with it), but if you’re not watching them all the way through then you can’t say what is or isn’t included. I haven’t seen all of her videos, but most of her videos that I’ve seen include positive examples.

      • I mean…have you actually *watched* her videos? I ask because a lot of people I see “criticizing” her tend to think she said these totally extreme and wacky things that she doesn’t actually say in her videos.

        Or the “cashing in” part. She made a small kickstarter 4 years ago and a new one for a more ambitious project recently. She doesn’t put ads on her videos, she doesn’t have a patreon, and her company is a nonprofit. Seriously, I don’t understand why people talk like she’s scamming people out of their life savings.

    • The major problem with her videos is that she makes a lot of assertions and claims that are demonstrably false, distorted or exaggerated. The videos are hugely sensationalistic. She blows things completely out of proportions and, in some cases, she’s outright lying. And she is painting the gaming community and the gaming industry as completely depraved and highly toxic, based on the actions of a small minority (and sometimes not even that). She is, essentially, a highly successful Jack Thompson.

      “Well, what’s the deal? Thousands of youtubers do exactly that!” Right, but the problem is that she is extremely influential, and people in power actually listen and believe what she’s saying, and she has this amazing power to affect politics, even on an international scale. That makes her a million times worse than a random youtuber spouting BS.

      That’s what the problem with her videos is.

  10. I don’t agree with everything Sarkeesian says, but there is one important error you made:

    “I say something uninformed, people complain, I cry misogyny, and people fund my Kickstarter!”

    The misogyny and kickstarter-funding happened long before she had said anything uninformed about video games. She said she wanted to analyze media from a particular perspective: If you’re on Channel Awesome, you clearly have no objection to that. But the series hadn’t started yet, and arguing against someone’s speech BEFORE THEY’VE EVEN SAID ANYTHING makes it pretty clear that your objection isn’t actually with the content of their speech.

    Did the backlash cause people to fund her Kickstarter? Yes, obviously. For every person harassing someone with no good reason, there’s someone who’ll see that and say “this is bullshit, and throwing money at this cause is the most obvious way I can help counteract that”. Lots of people who contributed (myself included) only knew the kickstarter existed because of the ludicrously overblown criticism of a series that didn’t even exist yet, by those who equate media criticism with censorship (which I like to think doesn’t include anyone on Channel Awesome, for obvious reasons).

    I’ll be honest, while I’m not really happy with FemFreq, the fact that she’s only so successful because her haters are so overzealous does make me laugh.

    • “misogyny and kickstarter-funding happened long before she had said anything uninformed about video games”

      In her kickstarter pitch for tropes vs. women, Anita outlined the subject of 12 videos she promised to make, saying they would be “heavily researched”. Basically, she hadn’t done any “research” but already knew she was going to complain about 12 specific things. You could say she was “arguing against someone’s speech (video games) BEFORE [SHE’D] EVEN [PLAYED] ANYTHING [making] it pretty clear that [her] objection isn’t actually with the content of [the games].”

      Of course, she ultimately didn’t actually do any research, unless you count the game footage she ripped and a few unsubstantial quotes from whatever she opinion piece she’d read that week, but if we are talking statistics, quantifiable evidence, scientific papers, peer reviewed studies… yea, there is nothing linking video games to misogyny just like there is nothing linking games to violence. Not in the world, not in her videos.

      Classic bait and switch; people paid for well researched videos but the only thought that went into them was one litmus test: Can I be offended somehow? So basically she got over a hundred thousand dollars to get on her soap box for 12 videos of sound and fury signifying nothing… and ended up only making 4 or so videos… in 4 or so years… and mostly capitalizing off the backlash even going to the UN to give a speech on mean youtube comments.

      Channel awesome is for opinions and critiques, Anita promised way more than that. She promised something scholarly and factual. The results… well, you remember when hard core nerds went to Ironman 3 expecting to see the Mandarin but instead they got Trevor? Yea, Anita gave us Trevor, and we gave her something like $150,000

      • “Anita outlined the subject of 12 videos she promised to make,” No she didn’t, the original pitch was only for 5 videos, each covering one stereotypical representation of women. She didn’t argue against a single specific game in the pitch, and she also pointed out that each video would include positive examples. To reasonably make these claims, you have to know 1. That these 5 cliches exist in some video games and 2. That you have at least 1 positive and 1 negative example for each cliche. The first is fairly obvious, and the latter is a safe assumption. She wasn’t complaining about anyone’s video game in the pitch, she was complaining about cliches, like countless other media critics.

        “Actual research” doesn’t always mean scientific studies. Research scientists are not media critics, and vice versa. The only “scholarly” thing she mentioned is that her videos have been used in high school and university classes, which was true of her old videos and is especially true of her newer work.

        And it’s just plain factually untrue to say that there aren’t peer-reviewed scientific papers linking video games to misogyny and violence. It’s fair to say the scientific community hasn’t come to a consensus, and many researchers believe video games to be harmless or beneficial, but there are DOZENS of studies on the impact of video games, and many do find unflattering correlations. Here’s the first longitudinal study that turned up on google, if you’re actually interested in the science: http://goo.gl/Kvkyrl

        “We gave her something like $150,000” YOU did? Really? I pitched in $5, but if you actually gave her money, then congratulations you’re the first person I’ve talked to who contributed to the kickstarter and is vehemently opposed to what she used the money for. Again, I’m not a huge fan of her videos, but the mistakes she makes are not nearly as ridiculous as the backlash.

        And if you honestly expected Marvel and Disney to make a major blockbuster with one of the most racist villains in comic book history… Well, I suppose that explains a lot. I’ll be honest, I prefer the 2013 Mandarin to the 1964 Mandarin.

      • You’re still pissed that Shane Black took out a villain so steeped in Cold War racism and wrote him off as a byproduct of an overeager villain and his actor friend? To tell you the truth, I know the Mandarin is supposed to be Iron Man’s Lex Luthor. The problem is that while Lex can be removed from whatever bubble he was supposed to be created under, the Mandarin is proving one tough cookie to get removed from the bubble.

        Anita promised a lot of things, yes, and she didn’t deliver. Which makes the second Kickstarter kind of, well, stupid. Part of it I chalk up to how close the release dates got to Gamergate – the release schedule was, I think, a video every 3 months starting in mid-2013, so I can see the schedule slip starting when it got closer to the explosion of Twitter harassment. However, why is she starting a new Kickstarter? Like, why? I don’t get it. It only makes her look more like the corrupt harpy that everybody in Gamergate tends to paint her as. Maybe to defy the norm? I dunno, people aren’t always like that.

      • Dromedary Meat Cactus

        “we gave her something like $150,000”

        I seriously doubt you’re part of the “we,” so stop pretending to care about the well-being of people who actually contributed to her campaign.

    • As I recall, she made some blatantly uninformed comments in the video for her kickstarter campaign. And don’t forget that she apparently now has a second kickstarter campaign, so they’re 100% right with their timeline.

      • I re-watched it yesterday to make sure I wasn’t misremembering, and didn’t notice anything inaccurate. She didn’t talk about any specific games, and the only statements she made about games as a whole are that they can accomplish a lot of good but many include harmful stereotypes. Those are obviously extremely broad, but not remotely false as far as I know. I love video games and don’t agree with much of what she says, but no one can say that games with harmful stereotypes don’t exist. You can say they’re protected by free speech and have every right to exist (and I’d agree with you), but no one in their right mind would say that, for example, the Duke Nukem games don’t imply some shitty things about women.

        She did start a second kickstarter, which imo was a stupid choice, but let’s be honest, people were making this argument LONG before she’d done that, and when people complain about how much funding she got, for the most part they’re still complaining about the first one.

  11. Chicken Puppet

    Am I the only one who thinks gaming in general these days is much less misogynistic in content than ever, and that the real issue is a few adult dumbasses and mostly pre-adolescent boys on the internet who get way too much attention for the actual amount of validity or influence they wield?

    Real mysogyny exists in the real world, and (not to get too real, but…) things like female genital mutilation, white slavery, and domestic violence are where the focus should be instead of whether it’s sexist that Bayonetta shows off her butt in a video game cutscene?

    • You’re on a website where people angrily complain about movies nobody forced them to watch, so yes. “There are worse things so don’t complain” is one of the dumbest arguments you could bring to anything, especially entertainment. If that’s how it worked, we wouldn’t even be allowed to complain about Sarkeesian’s scams because worse crimes exist

      • Chicken Puppet

        I think you’re really just trying to poke and provoke here, so I’ll just quickly point something out:

        – This website and a lot of the content creators are doing this all in fun. It’s entertainment. While there is some editorial content, it’s mostly just goofing on nerd culture and old movies and games.

        – What Feminist Frequency does is *activism*. They are trying to sway public opinion on social issues and point fingers. That’s very different.

        So not only have you mis-characterized my argument, you also failed to make a valid comparison. When Channel Awesome starts declaring movies and movie audiences need to change or bend to a political or social agenda, then you’ll have a point.

        • I just said the argument was dumb regardless of context, so I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with moving those particular goal posts. But since you turned it into a jumble of even dumber arguments, I’ll play along. Channel Awesome trying to sway public opinion or bring change, you say?

          “Let’s get the comments into the thousands. Tell the Copyright Office your issues with the DMCA! It’s time to take a small step forward and try and begin to start real change. This is really only the first step, and while this whole battle won’t be easy we must try and fix these problems at the source.”
          -Doug Walker in “Save Fair use NOW”

          “Everyone from the casual fan to the die hard cosplayers, and everyone in between: demand better. Demand better from the creators and the studios, but most of all, we must demand from ourselves. Change cannot occur without our help.”
          -Sage in his Macross Plus review saying anime has declined since the ’90s, pointing out things like overuse of fanservice.

          “Needs more gay.”

          You’re on a review website, which is a thing that involves views and opinions. From many passionate producers all about sharing their thoughts. Including dropping all jokes and giving angry tirades about creators for offensive depictions and even boycotting their work, as if it might not be “all in fun.” Entertainment and political leanings in reviews, even the kind that goes into activism territory, have never been mutually exclusive to each other.

          And even if they were, that has nothing to do with making your original, blatant logical fallacy valid. Anita being a sleazy, preachy reviewer doesn’t warp the laws of the universe into letting you make sense. All you did was mis-characterize your argument as Chewbacca.

          • Chicken Puppet

            I’ll bite and just quickly make a few points because you really have no argument here.

            1) I agree with Sage on the point you brought up , even though I don’t particularly like him as a reviewer or agree with him often. However this does not mean I demand we change anything with political activism. I don’t think he does either. It’s just an opinion about a harmless topic.

            2) So we’re just going to ignore 98% of the content on this site which is harmless reviews and satire and focus on the few instances where some content creators engage in activism?

            If you have to use the exceptions, then you aren’t really proving the rule. That’s like saying a comedian who tells one joke about politics is a political satirist when the rest of his act is about dating and fast food…and then claiming he is exactly like a guy who does primarily political humor.

            Sorry, you can stretch things to fit your agenda but my point stands. Channel awesome is primarily a humor and nerd/pop culture review site, not a site primarily about activism like Feminist Frequency.

            That doesn’t mean you can’t be critical of Channel Awesome when they do engage in the occasional bout of activism, but please don’t try and claim there is some kind of equavelnce here.

            Sounds like you have some bones to pick, but you made a mistake in using me to make your little example out of. Why? Because even if your absurd stretch of definitions were true and we abandon all logic to concede that Channel Awesome’s purpose is equal to that of Feminist Frequency…Sarkeesian and Feminist Frequency are still a solution in search of a problem.

          • Despite your dubbed anime villain confidence, I’m not sure you know what an argument is. You literally started with a logical fallacy. Liebermintz even broke it down and explained it to you while you thought sensationalism and accusation were valid counterarguments. That’s operating on the same level as trying to shut down discussion by screaming sexism where it doesn’t exist. Which is why people who aren’t even defending Anita are explaining your words are brain poison while you resort to drama.

            1) “It’s just an opinion about a harmless topic.”
            It’s asking to change the standards of a foreign entertainment industry by bringing in Western preferences. Things like fanservice, which has gotten series legally shut down and people arrested, aren’t exactly harmless or a-political. Agreeing with the message doesn’t magically change the subject any more than explaining you’re dense decides people’s affiliations.

            2) Yes, because that was your argument. “When Channel Awesome starts declaring movies and movie audiences need to change or bend to a political or social agenda, then you’ll have a point.” You made up a stupid condition that doesn’t salvage your original argument and lost at it anyway. Which is spectacularly dumb.

            Not as dumb as making up a number like 98% and going on about how big it is in a third layer of unrelated idiocy, but still dumb. Also, nobody’s equating the two sites no matter how hard you try to make it about that; I’m just noting things that prove you’re cluelessly babbling.

            “Channel awesome is primarily a humor and nerd/pop culture review site, not a site primarily about activism like Feminist Frequency.”
            They’re both nerd/pop culture reviews unless you don’t know what a video game or a review is. Again, not equating the sites, just pointing out you’re kind of slow.

            “Sounds like you have some bones to pick, but you made a mistake in using me to make your little example out of. Why? Because…”
            That’s such a strong line, I’m trying my hardest not to respond entirely in “Ah! So powerful..!!! *dramatically wiping blood from mouth* I must focus my forbidden technique energy… But if people die when they are killed, will it protect sempai’s smile…!?” I’m sorry. That was rude of me. I’ll try to stick to my usual condescending rudeness. Where were we…

            My only bone to pick was how stupid you sounded so you were already an example on your own. Honestly, given your insane hero and persecution complex while making everything about problems that don’t exist, the only person on this site I’d equate to Anita is you.

            This isn’t related to anything, but are you from South Korea by any chance?

    • Fallacy of relative privation, duderino, with some “no true Scotsman” zest thrown in. Makes for a good soup. Not the good Blind Melon soup. Internet drama soup.

      Invoking that “real misogyny” has to refer to outright negative action – and then naming white slavery like “hey guys, Irish slavery was TOTES worse than black slavery! Them blackies got it gud!” or invoking some form of missing white women syndrome (their cases get more press and notoriety than missing women of color); alongside female genital mutilation – does limit things.

      Okay, then. Ableism. Real ableism is when somebody shoots me in the head for being autistic, according to you. Real ableism isn’t when Hollywood producers rely on the same old Sheldon Cooper/The Ringer/Rain Man/Adam tropes – autistic kids are really smart, but they’re so inept socially! – to make superpowered beings that relate to the mental disorder/disease of the month. That can’t impact me. That can’t impact the people that I have to deal with on a daily basis – I’m either a total 100% creep who needs to be killed like he were McMurphy with a lobotomy or I’m the 100% most perfect angel who can do no harm, who can do no harm. Am I even granted a middle ground or am I denied it because “well, he’s disabled – his mind only works black and white?”

      • Chicken Puppet

        I don’t think you understand what white slavery means or perhaps I used it incorrectly, I guess I should have said sex trafficking or forced consent.

        Anyway, none of that matters because Sarkeesian is a solution looking for a problem, and I have never heard such a melodramatic pity party as your post…and this is the internet where such mentality thrives!

        Please save us from the threat that isn’t there in digital interactive entertainment. Maybe we can go back to saying comic books and rock and roll are perverting our youth again!

  12. I find the people trying to defend Anita to be questionable. She doesn’t get the work she says she’ll do done, she steals video game footage from other youtubers, she started another kickstarter before finishing the project funded by the previous one, she says obviously wrong things that a fuelled by buzz words and despite all this she still gets funded because… ‘misogyny.’

    She’s a fraud. Why anyone defends her I don’t know. Most real feminists disagree with most of what she says.

    • “Most real feminists disagree with most of what she says.”

      Then quote them. Quote the most real feminists who disagree with her.

      The fact is, she is what she is because the #GamerGaters aimed their bullshit campaign against her. You have the right to disagree with her. Where the issue comes in is the 4Chan idiots who fueled and manipulated #GamerGate started a harassment campaign against her and the vast majority of gamers who supported #GamerGate are too naive to see they were manipulated hook, line, and sinker. If not for those who took up #GamerGate, she’d be just another YouTuber presenting her own views on cultural criticism.

      That being said, I fail to see what people have against her actual content. She’s not saying stop playing video games, even the ones that have already been made with sexist content. She’s saying we should be more aware of said content and use said knowledge to make games better.

      • The problem is that I don’t think she ever says HOW to make games better. She just goes out, finds whatever problems she can (even if her requirements are contradictory), and rails on the game for having said “problems” without providing any real solutions or even attempting to suggest actual examples or solutions to work from.

        For example, if you have a female character without a feminine shape due to some outfit or armor or something, you’re just seen as a male character trying to pass for a female or something along those lines which is apparently depowering because it’s teaching young girls to have a negative body image. If you have a female character who doesn’t do that and shows off the shape of their body or shows any skin at all, it’s also depowering because it’s written off as just something to get men off or as too sexualized or whatever excuse of the week they feel like throwing at it for whatever reason. So there’s really just no winning against people like that as far as I know…. And since gaming companies can’t win, then they learn to drown out the noise regardless of whether or not what’s being said actually matters because why would they even try to please people like that who won’t buy your product no matter what?

        • A film critic mostly points out the flaws in things. Roger Ebert never offered suggestions – he gave you what was wrong and said, “Figure it out yourself.” I think Anita’s trying to do that.

          Not successfully – she’s known for being more of a pundit, like a liberal version of Christina Hoff Sommers, who gets interviewed because she’s the Really Popular Feminist. Sommers is popular, but only amongst Fox News viewers and libertarian types. The mainstream won’t give two shits about her.

      • THIS. All of this. Yes.

        In fairness I should add, I’m a feminist, and there are things she says that I vehemently disagree with. But framing that as a problem, or a way of discrediting her, is unfair: like-minded people can disagree, that’s one of the hallmarks of a necessary discussion. Using that as a reason to harass her is absolutely ridiculous.

        There is something hilarious about the fact that, had no one decided to harass her, she’d just be another mostly-unknown media reviewer on youtube.

      • Anita Sarkesian started her uninformed campaign against video games YEARS before GamerGate got started.

  13. I’d have gotten a woman actress, to avoid people yelling misogyny at the actor, but, This was amusing as hell.

    I don’t hate the woman. If she’d address these, and a few other issues, I’d listen to her defense and explanation, at the very least. ONE of my biggest issues with her is the refusal to even note the calm, rational questioning and detraction, and only point fingers at the psycho doushebag idiot insult threat brigade.

    • My thougts on this are 2 fold.
      1. Why is this group really focused on Feminist Frequency? This is there second video attacking this woman and her work. Threre really is alot of sexist bullshit that exists in the gaming world. Whether it be from save the princess trope to big breasted women fight the big bad guy all the while wearing the chain mail bikini. this is just not a real deception of warrior women of the time who were probably really tall thick women that could wield a weapon just like a man. NOT the big breasted waif that is depicted across so much media. Anita Sarkesian does make a decent point about sexist depictions of women in video games.
      2. Attacking all women in video games as being sexist is bullshit I agree. Look at some of the outstanding I dare say awesome depictions of women in games Bioshock Infinite, Remember me and mirrors edge all good examples of strong female characters I would like to see more diversity of people in games. How about a strong fat female character for example? Stop looking at Anita Sarkesian at being the devil and look at her as being more of a example of what is both right and wrong with the medium of vidieo games.

      PS you are right no one is makeing these people watch these moives and shows and then critiquing them, however no-one is making you pay attention to what Anita Sarkesian is saying,and then telling the world your opinion about her.
      The fact of the matter remains is that without critiasism there would be no need for people to improve there craft. people would just crank out the same crap and tell everyone else how wrong they were that they could not see their vision. Is that not right Michael Bey?

      • TerminalSanity

        1. Because her “work” is shoty spreads a great deal of misinformation and relies on a ironically on viewer ignorance and stereotypes about both video games and gamers at the expense and exploitation of a valid issue discussion about sexism in videogames and popular media.

        2. I will in no way “look at her as being more of a example of what is both right and wrong with the medium of video games.” and frankly neither should anyone else Because its painfully clear she hasn’t bothered to actually review the actual content of video games in any substantive fashion beyond reading a few Wikipedia articles and searching for enough footage to advance her precluded arguments. Her opinions bring nothing of value to the table because they’re entirely vapid. If you’ve actually played the video-games she’s highlighted you’d know this too. Its not that there’s no sexism in video games its that Anita is a piss poor advocate for that issue because she’s unapologetically and overtly ignorant of video-games.

        • Thank you so much for pointing out the problems with FemFreq while recognizing that a discussion needs to be had about sexism in video games. Seriously, if more of her detractors took this route, all of us would have less BS to deal with.

      • I was about to say: the first video about her was more an April Fool’s joke that fans demanded be made for real.

        This is the “for real” video.

  14. Written by: four dudes.

  15. Thank you for this video. Thank you so so much. Love how most of what Anita says are actual quotes, and you stuck to the facts about kick starter and production of Tropes Vs. Women. I only wish you would have mentioned how she went to the UN to give a speech about mean Youtube comments, cus you know, if theres anything the governments of the world need to address, its a lack of internet censorship.

    • Because when journalists can get away with outing trans women for utterly petty reasons ON THE INTERNET, there seems to be a little thing repelling people away from the Wild West of the tubes.

  16. It’s really mindboggling how something that is basically an accessible version of ‘gender studies’ manages to attract so much spite and agression from within the gaming community. Gaming Wildlife takes the easy stance here: that of the people who solely try to slander her, try to discredit her as a person, try to attack her on her intentions rather than on her claims/opinions. Whether you agree or not, that is your own free choice, but the topics she raises are very common for many people who took courses in the humanities. She’s rehashing stuff that is extensively talked about and analyzed in academic settings. And yet she gets so much hatred to her person for doing just that…

    I followed ‘Feminist Frequency’for a while. I didn’t even know about Gamergate or any of the controversies around her as a person. Well…there was no denying that mysogeny is real, because YouTube kept spamming me ‘satire’ on her person for months afterwards. On her looks. On her money grabbing intentions. On her background. And my God: the comment sections are atrocious dens of outright hate and agressions. Very seldom did anyone (those who made videos, commenters) actually take the time and effort to listen to her points, formulate legit arguments against what she is saying and disclaim her on inconsistencies/misrepresentations of the theories she cites. Get other theories and arguments in the mix that counter hers. It’s like you can’t get past a certain point when someone is labeled ‘feminist’, because the only response is outright vileness and simplified onesideness.

    • +1. I’ve never even watched any of her videos, but Christ, her detractors are obnoxious. To put it diplomatically.

      • Chicken Puppet

        Perhaps you should watch her videos.

        The thing is, people who are deep into gaming culture know a phony.

        It’s like this:

        I know almost nothing about sports and I rarely watch them, but I have a basic understanding of how they work and I know enough that I could BS other people who don’t know much about sports into believing things about them if I push the right buttons and pretend to be some expert.

        But real sports fans would know I was just using the popularity and controversies associated with them to gain notoriety.

  17. Comedy is dead, gamergate killed it.

    This isn’t funny. Not because the subject of joke, but because I’ve seen it 10000 times at least. I don’t have problem with people disagreeing with me, even I disagree with Anita Sarkeesian on things, only I don’t make a complete ass out of myself over it, I watch videos made by anti-feminists (as long as they’re not overdoing it), but this has no comedy value. It’s just a live action version of many image macros made by people who never actually watched FemFreq’s videos, and thinks not being able to call minorities racist slurs is worse than the holocaust itself.

  18. This would’ve been a hell of a lot more effective if there had been more details about the specific things FF’s supposedly done wrong and less “hey, I can do a shrill-voiced impression of someone I dislike” lazy cheapshots. Like, where’d you get the 400K figure for the organization’s work? Where does the money go, exactly? Nonprofits are legally required to be pretty open about that sort of thing, I seriously doubt Anita is just hoarding it all, the IRS specifically investigates that exact kind of behavior. Where’d she steal the gaming footage? What the hell were you talking about being her producer? Us casual viewers were pretty left out here, it was mostly a bunch of inside jokes about how personally unlikable this woman is supposed to be and didn’t do much to convince anyone who wasn’t already on the video’s side.

  19. I have only one thing to say: ugh.

  20. Of all the hit pieces done on Anita, this has got to be the laziest. It’s a live action meme of all the same tired slanders gamergate and 4chan loves to throw at their favorite punching bag.

    It’s not worth my time to fully respond to but here are a few points..

    The main criticisms always come down to the same points:
    1.That Anita is a fraud and “fake” gamer
    2.That Anita rips people off
    3. That she “plays the victim”
    4.That Anita is a puppet of someone else

    I am a supporter and monthly donor to FemFreq and have been for years. Let me start with the first two points.

    Here is her mission statement from her website:

    “Feminist Frequency is a video webseries that explores the representations of women in pop culture narratives. The video series was created by Anita Sarkeesian in 2009 and largely serves as an educational resource to encourage critical media literacy and provide resources for media makers to improve their works of fiction.”

    She does not claim to be an expert “gamer” she never has. She is a social scientist who believes that pop culture is an excellent medium to examine social issues in a way that is easily accessible and takes the issues out of the academic world.

    Her series Tropes vs Women was funded by thousands of supporters and her work continues to be funded primarily by donations. We fund her because we find her information worth funding.

    2. Those of us who donate know exactly what we are funding. Do you really not understand what a non profit is? People who work for non profits still have to make a salary. It has become about so much more than producing content, we pay her and her team’s salary with pleasure as she has become an ambassador of social issues with speaking engagements around the world. You are upset that she paid herself $20,000 as a salary? First of all unless you gave to her it’s none of your concern, but that money is not even enough to live on in SF and it certainly doesn’t even begin to make up for the abuse and threats she puts up with on a daily basis.

    Which brings me to the 3rd point- playing the victim. If you are somehow ignorant enough to ignore the seriousness of these threats and harassment she faces every day I suggest you start with this article http://time.com/3510381/gamergate-faq/ and go on to read the comments on her Twitter page any day of the week. Then go onto read the comments on your own video.
    If you are truly so cloaked in your privilege that you think she and so many like her who dare to express an opinion are “profiting” off of the constant abuse they face then I feel sorry for you, but I suspect you know full well.

    Point 4, calling her a puppet. What always amuses me about this one is that it contradicts the other three. Keep your story consistent guys, is she a stupid fraud or a brilliant con artist? How can she be either if in fact her producing partner is “pulling her strings”? It’s an age old method to dismiss a woman as being incapable of thinking for herself. Unfortunately for you they are hundreds of public appearances and interviews proving you wrong.

    The real question here is this: why does she threaten you so? She is an internet commentator, like you claim to be, how is she a threat to you? Yes she raises money to fund herself but no one is forcing you to give. No one is forcing you to watch her videos. No one is forcing you to care. Why then the hatred? Why this obsession to mock, to destroy?

    I think it’s time you were 100 percent honest with yourself.

    And now a word to Channel Awesome below…..

    • I don’t think you understand the concept of a human puppet.

    • Excellent post, Sarah. Thank you for writing this. 🙂

    • “The real question here is this: why does she threaten you so?”

      Fallacy detected.

      I don’t know if people feel “threatened” by Anita Sarkeesian, but I feel offended and misrepresented as a gamer. I grew up rescuing Zelda and Peach, but also exploring deep caverns and firing death at enemies as Samus Aran and Laura Croft.

      None of those experiences made me hate women, just like study after study concludes that video games do not lead to violence no matter how much the advocates want the studies to say otherwise.

      • Dromedary Meat Cactus

        She didn’t say what you claim she said (rescuing Zelda makes people hate women), so you obviously have no fucking idea what you’re talking about and are in fact reacting out of fear. Fallacy detected.

    • This was a cogently argued, comprehensive post that saved the the time of posting many of these arguments. Thanks, Sarah.

  21. To which I respond with…

    If Anita Sarkeesian’s Haters Were 100% Honest With Us

    “Hello! This is my seventy second – wait, no, sorry – seventy FIFTH video about why I think this one woman on the internet is wrong.

    Why have I dedicated so many videos on my channel to her? Because PATREON motherfuckers! That’s right! Internet MRAs are the easiest source of money ever, since they’ll quite happily pour their money into any form of media that will tell them what they want to hear about feminism being evil and wanting to censor us all and take away our video games.

    Never mind that there’s not a single actual utterance by Anita or anyone involved with Feminist Frequency, be it on YouTube or Twitter or otherwise, to actually indicate any desire for censorship, we’ll just keep claiming that’s what they want regardless of lack of evidence because how dare she have a YouTube channel that she expresses opinions on!?

    She never delivered what she promised! She’s a fraud and is just in it for the money! This despite the fact that there is no advertising to be found in any of her videos nor her website, and it doesn’t actually cost me shit to watch her videos since I’ve never donated to her. So in fact, the only way Anita is making money from her videos is if people willingly donate to her, and there’s a curious lack of people I can point to among her backers who are at all dissatisfied with the end product.

    Even though I don’t pour my righteous anger onto the other 84% of Kickstarter projects that arrive late: http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/18/technology/innovation/kickstarter-ship-delay/ , I’m still going to treat Anita as if she’s the only person in the history of ever to have an overfunded project subject to delays, and I’m going to completely ignore the numerous valid reasons related to increased scale and scope why overfunded Kickstarters like Tropes vs Women tend to ship late: http://money.cnn.com/gallery/technology/2012/12/18/kickstarter-ship-late/index.html . I’m also going to ignore that Anita initially promised videos of only 10-12 minutes of length which would have made a total of 2 to 2 and a half hours worth of video, and that she’s since produced over 4 hours of video. Awkward… but then why let simple math get in the way of my hate boner for her?

    I’m going to keep on claiming she’s not a gamer based pretty much entirely on a cherry-picked snippet from a video of a talk she gave six years ago. Never mind that she has clarified those remarks in articles like http://kotaku.com/how-anita-sarkeesian-wants-video-games-to-change-1688231729 and http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/29/opinion/anita-sarkeesian-on-video-games-great-future.html?_r=1 and the fact that six years is a LONG time that is plenty enough to adjust your views.

    Meanwhile, I’ll give all the benefit of the doubt to guys like Milo Yiannapoulos and accept him as truly being an ally to us “Gamers” even though he was blaming video games and gaming culture for Elliot Rodger’s actions, and also despite the fact that he actually described gamers as “pungent beta male bollock-scratchers and twelve-year-olds”. But it’s fine! HE is allowed to have altered his opinions! But nope! We can’t ever allow the possibility of Anita having adjusted her views!

    I’m going to try not to be bitter at all that despite many years of campaigning against her and instigating harassment against her, those campaigns have been ineffectual at most and laughably mediocre at worst, since she gets to travel all around the world giving speeches to plenty of people who want to listen, has gotten to meet and chat with lots of interesting game developers, has been showered with awards, is part of a $300 million diversity partnership with Intel, and of course has appeared on The Colbert Report where she was being loudly cheered by the audience by the end and Colbert was very enthusiastically shaking her hand.

    Help! How can we get rid of her?! Maybe my seventy-sixth video on her will do it!”

  22. Contrary to popular belief, there isn’t just 2 sides to every issue, there’s at LEAST 4; Red, Blue, “can’t we all just get allong?” And “fuck ’em all”
    Bloods; red. Crisps; blue. Innocent people; peace. L.A.P.D; fuck ’em all.
    Montahues; red. Capulettes; blue. The Priest; peace. The Prince; fuck ’em all.
    McDonalds; red. Burger King; blue. Cows; peace. Animal rights activists; fuck ’em all.

    Red is right because censorship is bad, and I have always utter loathed anyone who tried to get between me and cartoons. Still do.
    Blue is right because inequality is bad. We need more half-naked men!

    Red is wrong because they go way too far to defend games, thus making us all look like ACTUAL CRIMINALS! Look, here’s what you do; when someone arbitrarily complains about a game, don’t threaten them, don’t hack them, don’t send death or rape threats, don’t do anything like that, just buy the game and tell them you baught the game SPECIFICALLY because they did a review of it, and then maybe do a civilized, matter-of-fact debunking of the review, pointing out any innacuracies or anything they blatantly lied about. In other words, don’t turn them into martyrs, turn them into Terry Rakolta. I promis you, this will piss them off 10 times more than “FUCK YOU BITCH!” Ever could.

    Blue is wrong because I’ve seen them complain about “the treatment of women” in games where EVERYONE is treated that way.
    They complain that women get kidnapped in Arkham games. However, I am seriously not even kidding, if they don’t die, almost every single character in the series is held hostage or kidnapped or brainwash or blackmailed or trapped or arrested or Detained at some point. Most of the above happens to Batman himself. But the worst part isn’t even complaining about “damsels” in a series where kidnappings happen more often than sunrises. The worst part is when they say “it’s not the same! When it happens to a man…”
    Double Standards are not helping!
    Also, complaining about games you haven’t actually played gives the “Ew, cooties” croud all the amo they need. If you say anything innacurate, they can use that against you to undermine anything else you ever say about anything ever. Boy Who Cried Wolf, you see.

Leave a Reply