The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soygen

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,585
45,256
I've seen that Phil Fish video and he basically was trying to place blame on the internet and gamer culture for Fish's terrible personality. What's the quick and dirty review of these "Why are people angry at Sarkeesian?" videos? I would try to listen, but his voice is unbearable.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
There is no "quick and dirty". For one thing, only 2 of the videos have been released so far. For another thing, it's not as simple as "people are angry because X". It's a nuanced issue.

Guess what? A lot of people have terrible personalities and don't get anywhere NEAR the hate Fish got. What's the difference? Internet and gamer culture. Your use of "blame" implies he's putting people at fault, but that's a silly way to look at it. People are the way they are, and they hate who they hate. The video basically took a wider view of what leads people to villainize internet celebrities and it did a fantastic job.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
27,058
56,616
Who says we hate Anita or are angry at her? She's doing what people have done forever... marketed tripe aimed at idiots. If I personally am upset about anything it's the number of idiots buying into the whole SJW ideal, of which Anita is a symptom not a cause. I'm disappointed that there are so many people so dumb that they think these things and actually believe them.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Cad: "Who says we hate Anita or are angry at her?"

I dunno, dude. Not the video, that's for sure. But there are a heck of a lot lot of people who ARE angry with her. The videos attempt to explain why.

Cad: "She's doing what people have done forever... marketed tripe aimed at idiots. If I personally am upset about anything it's the number of idiots buying into the whole SJW ideal, of which Anita is a symptom not a cause. I'm disappointed that there are so many people so dumb that they think these things and actually believe them."

Awww... poor widdle Caddie, disappointed because people exist who have views he doesn't share. Well, at least we know it's because they're "idiots" and "so dumb", right? We've even got a perfectly vague little label we can use to group them all together and judge them. How dumb these idiot SJWs are, amirite? Not like you, though! Nope, you got it all figured out.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Tanoomba_sl said:
There is no "quick and dirty". For one thing, only 2 of the videos have been released so far. For another thing, it's not as simple as "people are angry because X". It's a nuanced issue.
Click to expand...
This is Tanoombaspeak for saying the person blames it on gamer culture and excuses Anita and Fish of blame. Yawn.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Fana: "I've got nothing interesting or relevant to say, I just wanted to participate in the group mentality-driven popularity contest."

You're always welcome here, Fana.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
56,318
140,075
no tanoomba this isn't your place to welcome anyone, but I would say you're always welcome here, it's a comfy place for you.
 
Intrinsic

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
15,745
14,497
The first video could have been better. It is only 10 minutes but doesn't take long to deteriorate from "Why are you so angry?" in to "Why are white cis males so angry?" You can discuss the issue without trying to apply the narrative and focus on the facts. He also hand waves any criticism away of her work and groups it together with the harassers by just saying that feminists were doing it in the 60s, so it must be a good thing... I'll give the others a couple of chances to see if he actually discusses anything relevant, but that first video was just a big pity party about Anita and mean things people say about her, with about 30 seconds devoted to "who" she is.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Keep in mind, the videos are about why people are ANGRY with Sarkeesian, not why people disagree with her or criticize her.

There is a decent number of entirely fair and thorough videos and articles critical of her work that don't contain a trace of anger (not nearly as many as there are angry character assassination videos, but that's YouTube hit farming for you), so if it seems like he's "hand-waving" criticism, perhaps it's because criticism is not justification for anger.

She could be entirely wrong in everything she has ever said (hypothetically, of course) and that still wouldn't justify the angry backlash that spawned.
 
Intrinsic

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
15,745
14,497
That's actually a good point and in considering it have decided I have no interest in the rest of the video series. The extent to which I care about 'why' people are angry at Anita begins and ends with "it is the internet." No further justification or investigation needed. If we wanted to discuss why people on the internet are so 'angry' that might have merit. Apparently the white cis male hetero is villain enough to the SJW as Anita is to the, how did you put it, CJW?
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Quaid: "Complains about snark.

Is snarky.

That's our Tanoomba!"

Wait... Are you suggesting the Sarkeesian hit pieces are anything other than low-brow, dishonest clickbait? Brother, I hope that's not what you're suggesting.




Intrinsic: "That's actually a good point and in considering it have decided I have no interest in the rest of the video series."

I hear you. Personally, I find it very interesting. The second video shed light upon a phenomenon wherein people take it as a personal attack when others take a critical look at something they had taken for granted, especially if the one doing the evaluating comes to the personal conclusion that change is desirable. The whole "You came to believe that the thing we have no problem with actually has problems, therefore you MUST be saying we're the bad guys!" attitude is something I have seen manifested many times. Heck, it's pretty much the driving force behind the entire anti-SJW movement.
 
Quaid

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,860
8,266
Tanoomba_sl said:
Wait... Are you suggesting the Sarkeesian hit pieces are anything other than low-brow, dishonest clickbait? Brother, I hope that's not what you're suggesting.
Click to expand...
How does what I wrote bring you to that conclusion? This thunderfoot dude you appear to have a year-long-hard-on for is only slightly less insufferable than Ms. Sarkeesian herself.

I was calling you a hypocrite for praising 'arguing without snark' when you employ it so frequently yourself.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Right, and when I checked to see what you might have been referring to, I naturally checked the post immediately above yours. The only thing remotely snarky was my jab at the nuts whose YouTube income spikes every time they go off on another rant about Sarkeesian.

If your comment was about me using snark in a more general sense, I will admit that I can definitely be snarky. I replied to Fana's sarcastic, valueless post with snark, for example. Not EVERYTHING is a debate. Having said that, I will not use snark instead of arguing my point when there is a discussion going on. I will not abandon rational discourse to focus exclusively on mocking my opponent. I may on occasion take a jab at my opponent (especially if he throws the first snarky punch), but it will be in support of the actual point I am making and not an abandonment of my argument.
 
Mario Speedwagon

Mario Speedwagon

Gold Recognition
<Prior Amod>
19,525
72,216
Still not clear on whether or not she was talking about hitman. Maybe this will finally be cleared up when the new hitman game comes out and legions of shitlords derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the unsuspecting bodies of virtual female characters. It's a rush streaming from a carefully concocted mix of sexual arousal, connected to the act of controlling and punishing representations of female sexuality.
 
Chanur

Chanur

Shit Posting Professional
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
30,386
50,753
Anita is a grown woman. Her work should be able to defend her. If it cannot ...well you should think about why that is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.