I'm sorry. I forgot to add that to this post, and I don't have the ability to edit still.
gmalivuk wrote:Considering that there are *always* rape threats against women who pubicly criticize sexism, I'm not at all sure it should be described as a misunderstanding at all.
I think the majority of people who make rape threats on the internet are probably not serious. It's a realm of fantasy toughness. However, without actual evidence, anything could be true, really. The number of known cases where a rape threat on the internet has escalated to actual rape is really what one should look at.
gmalivuk wrote:I've seen it said before that the comments on any online article about feminism do a pretty good job proving that feminism is necessary, and this is a similar case. When the response to someone pointing out rape culture is to threaten to rape that person, I'd say she pretty much hit the nail on the head and understands *perfectly* what she is talking about.
Feminism is necessary, but I don't think that trolls prove it. If calling trolls serious is the justification needed to say that feminism is needed, then it looks a lot more like it is not. I prefer stronger reasons: for example, in the first world, a number of countries lack maternity leave. Women are also outright oppressed in a huge number of countries around the world.
Rape threats are also to an extent just a matter of violence and social dysfunctional rather than feminism. If you look at murder threats and rape of men, I think it's clear that while feminism most likely plays a significant role, it's more broad than that as well.
gmalivuk wrote:Why? Her fans and donors are not the ones whining that she didn't do things "properly" (where "properly" will inevitably shift to always mean something *other* than what a person criticizing the majority in fact did.) As far as I can see, the people criticizing her on this point don't deserve any particular consideration on her part.
Even if someone does not know better, they still deserve more.
However, I think it is unclear, and I think some donors have been disappointed. I certainly can see her perspective, though. She's been hit with a deluge of abuse. It's not necessarily her fault that she did not do everything perfectly in response, and the most important thing really is that she is making the videos and standing up for herself.
Vash wrote:She at least needed to cite the videos.
I'm a fan of the "talk about stuff with YouTube clips behind you" genre, and I don't know of anyone who credits everything in their video. Tosh.0 doesn't personally thank every idiot who nuts themselves on a railing. PBS Idea Channel doesn't cite every lolcat meme they throw up in the background. People on this message board don't spell out that they did not actually create the image of Captain Picard placing his head in his hands, and that should be attributed to Star Trek, Patrick Stewart, and Gene Roddenberry, respectively. It seems to me like this is a made-up criterion that isn't applied anywhere else on the internet and is used to justify attacking this woman by people who want to attack her.
I've seen a lot of people credit, but I also see your point somewhat. Nonetheless, it's a professional project.
Tosh.0 might actually put people in the credits if they are identifiable. I haven't checked. It's not uncommon in a TV show.
Really, though, I kind of want to drop it, because I think Sarkeesian has gotten enough hate.
Vash wrote:She also has a budget so large that she could have hired someone to make footage, even if she did not want to do it herself.
That's just wasteful. I wouldn't want my money to go to paying hundreds of dollars to get something that is free on the internet. Sarkeesian's supporters didn't pay her to recreate footage. They paid her to make videos.
It's not wasteful, because it allows for a better video. From my perspective, I would always go to the original source if I was trying to make a truly solid rather than tentative criticism.
Anyway, I have to go.