Disclaimer: I have played Infamous 3, but not First Light.

Its been proven beyond a doubt how she intentionally cherry-picks for her videos and I do find her to be a perfect example of the problems with modern feminism but still, the people threatening to kill her are far far worse. Its not even in the same ballpark.

I have no problems with violence in video-games no matter…

I think this woman's full of shit and kicking a hornet's nest intentionally to make money and to play the victim card as soon as the hornets attack her. Its not right to be attacked, but seeking an attack to prove your point is rather stupid. Anyone intentionally putting themselves in the line of fire for the sake of…

I do think this industry has a big-time sexism and objectification problem. Look no further than Nintendo last week announcing with glee that a cartoon in their fighting game now shows midriff.

...and you're missing my point entirely.

So, in your mind It's okay for violence to happen to someone because of their gender, as long as its the right one, because history. Correct me if I'm wrong, but thats how it comes across.

History is a poor means of excusing people's shitty behavior in the present. Its a…

"Contrary to popular belief, the system of patriarchy has not always existed"

Nobody who thinks sexism is bad disagrees with her core arguement. However for someone with an master's degree, I expected better work from her with her supporting arguement about the individual tropes. Her earlier videos were weak arguements and had plenty of holes you can sink a few titanics in. Her evidence was…

I think that's definitely part of it. Anita doesn't strike me as someone who plays games or even digests them in any meaningful ways - she just looks for surface-level examples, cries out sexism and moves on, as if that's actually enough for an argument.

The more I watch this, the more I think she's cherrypicking in very dishonest fashion. She wants to use Dragon Age, Far Cry 3 and Red Dead Redemption as examples of violence being done to "helpless" women for narrative shock value (dog kicking trope) and involving sexual objectification.

You and many other here have pointed that out but it seems you can't critique Saark here because the you are the idiot-strawman-troll-whatever deflection you can think of. She is the worst activist for this type of situation and really as much as the term is hated it really defines the SJW stereotype when her fans…

So... why do The Young Fine Capitalists recieve so much support from even sites like the "EVIL" 4chan? Maybe because they don't depend on cherry picking and yelling "SEXISM!" everytime a female character dies in a video game? What's the difference between Anita Sarkeesian and TYFC? Think about that.

Spoken like a true narrow minded...ummm...whateveryouare?

Seeing scenes from GTA V, Assassin's Creed II , Far Cry 3, The Witcher, Red Dead Redemption and other games stacked one after the other does highlight how prevalent this device is in AAA video games writing.

While I think this argument is dumb, I think we can all agree that you shouldn't threaten someones life just because they annoy you.

Eh.

Femfreq gives you two options:

Im the opposite. I'm out. This shit is not worth my time because a special interest is asking for exceptions yet again. Yeah there's a violence problem. People are nasty, petty, mean, and violent to one another, news at 11.

I dont give a damn if its a woman or a man, noone deserves to be a victim of a violent act but…

What I hate about people like this is they talk for the sake of hearing themselves talk, full of hot air and little to no brains. How about you leave my video games alone and go back to living in your hole.

Seriously, people turn everything into a big deal issue now days... Its uncalled for.

The way of Anita's thinking is very simple; any kind of violence against women in video games is bad and it should be banned, while violence against man is ok. So yeah, here You go, it sum up her all videos on that topic.