10 ms·
> There have been countless detailed refutations that dismantle pretty much every argument Anita Sarkeesian has put forth Does anyone have a link to such a ref
by raldi 11y ago
> There have been countless detailed refutations that dismantle pretty much every argument Anita Sarkeesian has put forth
Does anyone have a link to such a refutation? I've always found Anita's videos to be strikingly articulate, well-cited, and seemingly watertight in their reasoning.
If there's an equally intellectually rigorous rebuttal, I'm interested to watch it. But so far, the rebuttals I've seen have been lazy in their logic, or went after strawmen, or were splitting hairs over a one-time poor choice of words (the example embedded in the link above).
- gradstudent 11y agoInvariably such refutations fixate on the specific examples chosen by Sarkeesian and go on to make flawed arguments like e.g. (paraphrasing): > Violence against women in XYZ is not problem because XYZ also features violence against men! Which is completely besides the point and ignores the societal context into which these games are released. Other common "critiques" leveled against Sarkeesian, that I've seen anyway, are straight up strawmen. These include gems like she's in favour of censorship or that she argues games have the ability to directly manipulate people into violence or sexism. Innuendo Studios recently posted a great analysis of this phenomenon in their "Why Are You So Angry?" video series. It's really well done and worth checking out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y8XgGhXkTQ&list=PLJA_jUddXvY62dhVThbeegLPpvQlR4CjF https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y8XgGhXkTQ&list=PLJA_jUddXv... The OP reads just like an Angry Jack.