anita sarkeesians

Here’s one thing I noticed on my time on the internet watching film and game reviewers. 

Female Reviewer: Makes calm and logical statement. Calmly explains her reasoning for the critique. Give benefit of the doubt to the art she’s critiquing. 

Guys: “You bitch! How about you take your feminist bullshit out of here and stop art policing!” 

Male Reviewer: Yells obscenities at what he’s reviewing. Calls what he’s reviewing worthless. Makes sketch where he kills creator of the art he’s critiquing. 

Guys: 👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀 good shit go౦ԁ sHit👌 thats ✔ some good👌👌shit right👌👌th 👌 ere👌👌👌 right✔there ✔✔if i do ƽaү so my self 💯 i say so 💯 thats what im talking about right there right there (chorus: ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ) mMMMMᎷМ💯 👌👌 👌НO0ОଠOOOOOОଠଠOoooᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒ👌 👌👌 👌 💯 👌 👀 👀 👀 👌👌Good shit

sleepy-savior  asked:

Anita Sarceesian is basically like the shitty extreme left activist of Video games, pretty much the same kind of person as Jack Thompson. She thinks that feminism in video games means every female is like her, with absolutely no sexual traits at all because that's sexist misogyny designed by males for males. She constantly makes false claims about video games and steals clips of other peoples gameplay for her videos. -

(cont) -She does stupid things like call out games for being designed by males when they weren’t, and completely misrepresenting entire themes. Example, she claimed Bayonetta was designed by men based off the character designs, when it was designed and written by a female, who based the designs on her version of a perfect, empowered woman. And Anita completely lied about what the plot is, like not only did she definitely not play it, she didn’t even read a proper synopsis.


I see.

Field Guide to MRAs: Introduction

I have found, in my journeys through the wilds of the internet, that the population of MRAs is much more diverse and complex than some may realize. I therefore decided, on my last trip, that I would prepare a treatise for the edification of my fellow feminists, as well as modestly suggest some best practices for dealing with MRAs encountered on the world wide web, as well as for those encountered in real life. I hope this can in some small way contribute to the knowledge of all who seek to bring reason, justice, and equality to the world.

A Field Guide For the Identification of MRAs and Anti-Feminists, Including Level of Severity, Recommended Response Tactics, and Safety Tips

Disclaimer: Some higher level MRAs will initially present at lower levels, so proceed with caution and revise tactics or disengage if a higher level belief rears its head. Levels are also often cumulative—a level 4 may open with a level 2 argument and proceed to a level 3 argument. All recommended tactics are based on actual beliefs; beliefs stated by MRAs in the wild may not be accurate or complete.


For each classification I will provide:

Level of Severity and Name:Level number denotes how far the MRA has bought into sexist ideology. As shorthand I have also provided a colloquial species name.

Basic Beliefs: What it says on the tin. The general belief system and common arguments made by each level.

Recommended Tactics: The response or responses that seem to be most effective at either changing the MRA’s mind or discrediting their argument with others. This is based purely on what I’ve seen and heard and is not necessarily complete. Please reblog with suggested tactics of your own!

In addition, I will also sometimes provide the following:

Safety Tip: Tips for interacting with the MRA without risk to body or mind, as well as common pitfalls of arguing with the type.

Demographics: Any interesting trends in the type population.

Identification Aid: Insistent terminology, odd focuses, or little quirks of a type that can aid in swift identification.

Descriptions of each level to follow. 

Anita Sarkeesian....

The best way to completely dismiss her research: In her kickstarter video she mentions that she wants to expose video games for being sexist but that it requires a ton of research into them. …Anita, that’s not how you conduct research. 

You can develop a thesis or a theory and look further into something of course. But you’re supposed to develop your theory AFTER non-biased research onto something. Also in her Kickstarter she mentioned that she’s a gamer and that she loves video games, yet there’s a clip of her that made waves across the net. It’s of her giving a presentation for video games in College, in that video she mentions that she’s not a gamer. 

 Some have claimed that her “I’m not a gamer” was just a lie for college, but let me just say this. Doesn’t that mean that she’s lying in one instance for social reasons? What’s to say that she isn’t lying now? Especially since she clearly went in with an agenda to push, and a lot of her research is misleading. “Crystal starred in her own adventure in the unreleased game Dinosaur Planet” …no, Dinosaur Planet had TWO protagonists, Crystal and Saber. 

The latter of which was a male, that’s why DInosaur Planet was changed over to StarFox Adventures! Bam! Caught her in a lie, and that’s the first point she made on the first video of Damsels in Distress.


A note from Anita:

Every April 24th we mark the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, when 1.5 million Armenians were systematically exterminated at the hands of the Ottoman Empire. Every year we try to get people to remember, recognize, and accept that this horrific act that we feel in our bones, passed down through generations, is really, truly a genocide, and every year we face denial and dismissal of this undeniable historical reality. It’s sad and stupid, ridiculous and infuriating and heartbreaking that this is the case. Yet again, on this 102nd anniversary, it remains so.

Those of us with direct ancestry to the genocide grow up hearing the horrific tales. Tales like my great-grandmother leaving some of her babies behind to be raised by supportive Turkish neighbours, children who are never to be known or heard from again because it was too dangerous to take all her children with her. Both of my grandmothers could barely share their stories because they couldn’t talk about what happened to them without bursting into tears. Trauma like this endures over generations, passed down in the memories of things spoken and unspoken, living on in the enduring anguish that comes from how even today, my family and I can’t see where we come from because it is land occupied by Turkey. So here we are again, telling the same stories, year after year after year, because recognizing atrocities is a part of healing and trauma recovery. Recovery that we have not been allowed.

(Images from today’s rally in Los Angeles)


ok ok ok WOW HOLLY SHIT JUST TOO MUCH! HEEL TRUNS after cap just what the shit is going on here

……………………….my god no no nooooooooo!…….one is safe run just RUUUUUUUUN!

100 Days of Trump Day 60: 1984

     Welcome back to 100 Days of Trump, where we try to sum up WTF happened in 2016 in 100 recommendations.  Today we are going to talk to the ganddaddy of them all, 1984….and let me just get this out of the way.  Orwell was a Socialist, he was extremely left wing, his criticism of communism (and it is more than just communism he is critical of) wasn’t coming from a right wing place.  Now one of Orwells main theory was actually disproved, if you don’t have a word for something it doesn’t keep you from articulating it, usually by making a new word via language drift.  When Mao Zedong created Simplified Chinese he deliberately tried to remove certain phases and concepts from the language…but very quickly that failed, the Chinese just used new terms or loan words.  But what I do want to talk about with 1984 is the co-option of language, yes I am banging that drum again.  

    See the regime Ingoc is specifically said to lack any real ideology, its most defining traits is its inconsistency, “We have always been at war with east asia”  But a political regime must have ideological rhetoric, even if it has no ideology itself, and so lacking any core beliefs, they instead latch upon other ideas and concepts and co-opt them for their own purpose.  And the Far Right (though not necessarily the more ‘moderate’ right) doesn’t really have a coherent political ideology beyond vague “I oppose these things” when you leave them alone to make their own theories it just turns into absolute shit.  And the greatest irony is that if you look at their writings, not only do they all sound like each other with no discernible difference, they all use the same phases over and over again, like cuck.  But the thing I find interesting is…almost all of those phases are leftist terms they just stop (not cuck obviously).  Here let me give a list of their mindlessly parroted phases that the Neoreactionary Right just can’t get enough of

Politically Correct

This was originally a socialist/communist term used by people like Orwell and Troskey against Stalinist style communists, politically correct mean that they followed the party line mindlessly without questioning.  If you used the word in its originally meaning, then you’d be using it against republicans who put aside previous objections in order to work with Trump.  Then it came to mean basically “Corporate works trying to pretend to be progressive without actually being progressive” a decidedly left wing charge.  But the right got it so not it just kinda means “Giving a shit about social justice”   Speaking of which

Social Justice Warrior 

This was actually a left wing term, I’m serious, I remember when it was first spreading around left wing internet and I was like “god damn this is a useful term”  And holy crap did that get co-opted fast.  SJW originally was a word to use for leftists who advocated a much more militant and “Us vs. them” mentality, basically for the modern day Marat or Robespierre.  This time of liberal disagreement goes back for quite a long way, the question of reform vs. revolution, and its not necessarily an ideological difference as it is a practical one, and it was nice to have a term to those people who fetishize the idea of violent revolution utterly ignorant of its results (spoiler warning, it doesn’t end well).  But not it is just a blanket term to mean “people I don’t like”

White Knight

Man i remember when this was a feminist term, it was a great term, it basically referred to men who try to defend women out of a desire for sex, which is a creepy thing that happens all the time.  Problem now is that any man who like…doesn’t think that Anita Sarkeesian is trying to take over the world is a white knight by default.  

Virtue Signalling

Basically this is when somebody obstains from doing something horrible and then calls attention to it so that everybody will value and respect them, social justices entirely for the praise.  Good term, we have all met that one guy who does that.  Problem is now that anybody who is like “Man, it is really awful the way women are consistently harassed on the internet” and the immediate response is “well you are just virtue signalling”.  


MLK’s entire existence has become one giant use of Rightists misusing him to support their argument, and then in response leftist pretending he was somehow  a violent revolutionary cause that makes sense. 

Regressive Leftist 

This one originally means to people who are supposedly left wing but actually seem to hold really non left wing views 

Ethics in Game Journalism

This might shock you but long before Gamergate was the glimmer in Ejoni’s empty souless eyes there were a lot of people talking about how corrupt games journalism is, because it fucking is but guess what? Most of them didn’t join up with GG, in fact many like Jim Sterling actually opposed GG and none of them were talking about indie devs interacting with games journalist for good reviews, they were instead talking about giant corporations buying adds on gaming journalist sites to get good reviews, the giant corporations that GG didn’t spend its time talking about in favor of how an indie game developer and a youtube feminist are somehow responsible for everything wrong in a multi billion dollar industry.  

Orwell himself

And of course, Orwell himself suffered this, despite being, I will say this again, a socialist, you see the term orwellian used to refer to the very same ideology Orwell held, its fucking maddening.  You have folks online like RedbloodedAmerican who literally say “Socialism has never produced anything of value ever” and then use the term Orwellian without any bat of irony.  

Part of this is that when these terms of defined, they are usually only defined in what they are, not what they aren’t, which makes them very easy to co-opt, after all the original definition didn’t not mean this right? Good hint for future leftist term makings, when you make something up, very specifically say what it isn’t.  Orwell would have done better I feel if he had very specifically made it clear what his regime was not as much as what it was.  

but we don’t just see this in a political context, I mean take the term 

Mary Sue

It is suppose to mean a character who is way too powerful for the narrative and around whom the narrative revolves because they are always correct, and now kinda means “thing I don’t like” 

But the right doesn’t just always co-opt the left, they have lots of neat little terms that instead exist to sort of hide to themselves and others how utterly abhorrent the whole lot of them are.  I mean when you say 

Family Values

When being homophobic or anti feminist, it basically doesn’t mean anything, I mean….what do families as a collective unit produce universal values?  All of them?  I mean the Judeo Claudians were a family should I take advice from them?  What defines a family? What if a family disagrees?  How does that mean anything at all?

Intelligent Design

This literally exists to make creationism sound less stupid than creationism, but of course every single person who believes in Intelligent Design is of course a creationist. 

White Nationalist 

Rather than just saying ‘I’m a nazi” they use this cute little term instead, because their beliefs are basically the same as the nazis except Pan European rather than just German.  


This one honestly confuses me, because Spengler was right wing I mean did any of them actually read Decline of the West

The point is that we just see words used not for a method of communication, but instead as a way to create a larger point 

    The list goes on and on but I want to get to my main point, I want to talk about the psychology going on with this constant revisionist of language, it isn’t because they are stupid (I mean it is but that isn’t the main point) its about keeping people angry, about creating a constant sense of anger and embittered paranoia.  Because here is the dirty little secret of the Far Right, if you actually calm them the fuck down and don’t have an enemy to oppose….they don’t really have all that much in common.  IN fact a lot of them have beliefs that are actually really left wing.  Again and again we have found that if you poll Americans based on specific issues like “Should healthcare be affordable”and “Does this country have too much of a wealth gap” and “Do the rich not pay enough in taxes” and a lot of hardcore republican suddenly sound like socialists.  CGP Grey noted that if you abstract enough and talk to people about the electoral college they will almost uniformly come out and say “Wow, that is awful” but the moment they realize that they benefit from it, they will instantly start to change their tune.  Because to a lot of Republican voters, it isn’t actually about the issues, its about fucking over “The enemy” which in this case is the democrats, and as long as people are fucking pissed, they don’t really fully listen to the whole platform of the guy they supported.  I had this issue with Obama/Clinton supporters where their supporters just stopped listening when they got to things they didn't’ like about the candidate, because it isn’t actually about the core issues, its about fear and hatred of the other side.  But maintaining that level of hatred is actually pretty difficult, because the moment people calm down a tad and go home, watch TV and find out the world hasn’t ended, they start to realize that you are kinda hyperbolic and most importantly, might become vulnerable to leftists pointing out that they actually agree on most issues.  So you need to keep them mad, constantly perpetually mad, just endlessly angry, so that they never really have that moment of calming the fuck down and actually thinking about the issues.  And Angry people aren’t famous for rational decisions

Yet again reminder of why Hitchens is an utterly worthless pseudo intellectual who reminds me a lot of Alex Jones, who is basically the result of a human being who has been angry for decades and has never calmed down.

  This is also why these buzzwords are so important, they distract from the issue as a whole, because family values…I has family, and I don’t wants family to change gah.  Rather than sitting them down and talking to them about what a changing modern society actually means for a family they just kind of vaguely panic because they aren’t in a head-space where they are ready to reason (This is worse for single issue voters).  Like i’ve spoken to people about the Iraq War and once I get to “So how do you win a war on terror” they suddenly kinda stop and go “Huh….wait”  or “How do you win a war on drugs” if they aren’t viewing in from the lenses of a culture war, they  become more receptive.  So the point of the right (who i remind you, have interests which most of the country doesn’t like, as Trump’s supporters are finding out right now).  I mean literally at this moment, we are seeing people go “Well I like the ACA I just don’t like Obamacare” when they are the SAME FUCKING THING  

And that is where the Right wing Media empire comes in and by that I mean the two min of hate, where you can take all of your collective insecurities anger and frustrations in life and everything around you and blame it on one nebulous force of “Them”.  Huh where have I seen that before?

If you watch folks like THunderfoot, Sargon or other anti feminists, they fixate a fucking tone of attention on this extremely standard video series, it is notably shocking how much time they spend talking about really basic theory level stuff and then you realize….Anita, Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu and Hillary Clinton are literally the whole feminists they know.  Like they haven’t read any of the material, they don’t know any of these people, they don’t even know what feminism is other than a vague “bad thing” that that they don’t like and blame for all their problems.  This is why so called “Free speech” advocates” are totally ok with GSM folks having videos put down, why devout Christians vote for a man who admitted to sexual assault, why people who hate the Eastern Elites are always getting in bed with Goldman sachs or why the working class voted for Trump, it isn’t actually about the issues, its about screwing the other guy.  

It is into this environment that Trump thrives, because pointing to a vague, undefinable, conspiratorial other is where he thrives and he serves as the culminate conductor of rage (that should be a title of a book on this subject honestly)

i haven’t been able to find the post itself but a couple months ago i said “the only good thing about 2017 is that we haven’t talked about anita sarkeesian or brianna wu”

femfreq recently gained notoriety for criticizing a man for jacking off to a star fox character, and brianna wu is now running for congress

I have never been this wrong in hindsight in my entire life 

cool/powerful female video game characters that aren’t too sexualized in their games for future reference

in no particular order

alright here we go, credit to @rainbowloliofjustice​ and @imeatingfries​ for helping to make this list and feel free to add on in reblogs

Zelda/Sheik from The Legend of Zelda

Paula Polestar from the Earthbound series

Faith Connors from Mirror’s Edge

Ellie from The Last of Us

Maya Fey from the Ace Attorney series

Dixie Kong from the Donkey Kong Country series

Wii Fit Trainer from Super Smash Bros. 4 and Wii Fit, if you consider that a game

Cream from the Sonic the Hedgehog series

Amy Rose from the Sonic the Hedgehog series

Misty from Pokémon (I used her anime appearance because it’s so much more known, please don’t assault me)

Whitney from Pokémon Gold/Silver/Crystal and HeartGold/SoulSilver (If you’ve dealt with her you know what I’m talking about)

Diantha from Pokémon X and Y

Champion Iris from Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 (she was in Black and White, but was only a gym leader)

Cynthia from Pokémon Diamond/Pearl/Platinum

GLaDOS from the Portal series (identifies as female, and is basically Caroline)

Chell from the Portal series

Lara Croft from Tomb Raider (now, before you get your panties in a twist, I’m talking about the more recent version, not the older one)

Elena Fisher from the Uncharted series

Pikachu Libre from Pokkén Tournament

Samus Aran (with her suit, despite the fact that even without it she isn’t all that sexual) from Metroid

Daisy from the Mario series

Rosalina from the Mario series

Princess Peach from do I really have to say who she’s from?

Palutena from Kid Icarus

Meryl Silverburgh from Metal Gear

The Exo Stranger from Destiny

Mara Sov (Queen of the Awoken) from Destiny

Legate Rikke from The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim

May from Pokémon Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald and Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire
(You may be wondering, “But G-T-A, what about the others?” Very good question. The thing is, May is the only one with a differing personality from her counterpart, as of X and Y. whee.)

Professor Juniper from Pokémon Black/White and Black 2/White 2

Linkle from Hyrule Warriors

Lucina from Fire Emblem Awakening

Ashley from WarioWare (I know there are many MANY more, but Ashley is my favorite and I don’t know much about the rest)

Viridi from Kid Icarus

Clementine from Telltale’s The Walking Dead

Actually, why don’t I just put in all the female characters from that game? Shoutout to all the females in this game, namely Sarah, Jane, Rebecca, and Christa.

Zarya from Overwatch

Mei from Overwatch

Anita Sarkeesian vs Rise Kujikawa: or (Why Modern ‘Feminism’ Misses the Point)

I’ll start this off by saying that I am not against feminism in any way… or at least real feminism. I am however, against blatant agenda pushing and the misuse of a term that is meant to signify equality. 

This is a really dumb tweet.
Let’s dissect it. 

A quick analysis tells me a few things:

  • Anita Sarkeesian has clearly never played Persona 4
  • Anita Sarkeesian is judging this character purely by her looks
  • Anita Sarkeesian has absolutely no clue what she is talking about

The character on the press badge is Rise Kujikawa, one of the main characters of the video game Persona 4. Rise, is a 15 year old former Japanese idol who has starred in films, television series, and commercials. Oh, and she’s also a pop star.

Now surely its not too hard to imagine that a pop star would be dressed that way, right? Especially when considering that this is all an advertisement for a DANCING game.

“We idols aren’t just dolls to be gawked at! – You just can’t connect with anyone unless you let them in to see the real you!” - Rise Kujikawa

Rise’s entire character arc throughout Persona 4 revolves around her realization that she is much more than Risette (her idol name).
She gives up all fame and fortune because she is tired of being a sex object and wants to be respected. 
Near the end of her arc, Rise also realizes that there is a part of her that wants to be Risette, and that is perfectly okay.

Rise is perhaps one of the most well written female characters in video game history and to judge her at face value is to spit in the face of all that feminism stands for. 

True feminism is about empowering woman, telling them that they can do anything they want regardless of what society says. Not slut-shaming a fictional character because she has a bit of her midriff showing. 

100 Days of Trump Day 91: The Colbert Report

Welcome Back to 100 Days of Trump, where we try to explain WTF happened in 2016 in 100 recommendations…lets talk about Fox News.  Or specifically, lets talk about the tradition of the Right Wing Pundit, with the Platonic Pundit Bill O’Rielly leaving Fox with 25 million dollars for sexually harassing his staff, I think we should reflect on why these utterly horrible people always seem to get such an audience.  Because looking at Bill, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Tucker Carlson, Megan Kelly, Sean Hannity, and of course more obscure people like Alex Jones, they all have these massive egos and so little to justify it.   They are comically uninformed about pretty much every topic that comes up to it but pretend they are experts, they are dismissive of any information that contradicts them or challenges their views, they love to simplify every issue that comes before them, they aren’t funny and of course despite beating their chest a great deal, all of them are massive cowards who fold at the first sign of difficulty and the entire lot of them are massive chickenhaws.  They are also gigantic hypocrites watch any of their shows long enough and you will massive contradictions in their logic or world view.  But this produces two questions

Why are these massive dicks popular?

What Purpose do they serve for the Republican Party?

   The former can be especially hard for liberal audiences to understand, after all, a person who really does think they are the best at everything despite constantly being proven wrong is suppose to be a joke character, something we mock, so why are people taking this so seriously? I mean pretty much anything Sean Hannity says is always wrong.  

   Well to answer that question, we need the most blovated, arrogant, and moronic of them all….Stephen Colbert.  Yet again, I think if he was still on air in 2016, the election would have gone differently.  Sadly…Comedy Central doesn’t allow any of the good clips on youtube, so please just go and watch the whole series or at least as many episodes as you can, trust me it is worth it.  

   The Character of Stephen Colbert, not to be confused with the Comedian Stephen Colbert, is a perfect facsimile of all of these Right wing pundits, from the ego to the macho postering, to the fucking inane relationship to language.  “I am America and So Can You” isn’t really that different from most of these guy’s terrible books which they pretend are great philosophy.  

  The point of a pundit is effectively to tell people what to think, and yes, I know that sounds like i’m saying Fox News Viewers are mindless sheep but no, hear me out here.  Republicans don’t trust the news or officials, or much of anyone at all, they mostly just trust the loud people to talk plain truth to them.  ANd this isn’t uniquely right wing thing, if I hear about something where I am not informed, I tend to go to people who I trust to get their take on it before I believe the mainstream media’s take on something, its that instinct.  For the record, I’ve started in the last three years to double check everything people who I trust tell me with other sources, so I suppose my relationship towards media is

Trust No One

 The problem is that Fox News Viewers are too distrustful of mainstream sources, and too trusting towards their own, and they are uninformed on basically every subject, which makes them really succepitable to this type of “I speak for you”  Robert Ailes, the former head of Fox news who was fired after being given 45 million dollars for sexually assault women (notice a pattern here) use to do a thing where he would take a bank of TVs and watch them all on silent, and pick the one which he found to be the most convincing, even though he couldn’t understand what was going on.  Which is why they rely on emotion more than actual argument.  

    But here is the kicker, a lot of Fox News Watchers might not actually buy the Republican Party line if you gave them some time to think about it.  Take a fox new grandpa away from Right wing media for two weeks and talk to him while he is happy and calm, he might be far more willing to engage with you (and no this isn’t about my grandparents, nobody in my family watches Fox thank god).  The whole point of the Right Wing Media bubble is to keep everyone scared and angry so they won’t engage.  It is also to help deal with doubt.  Remember back when the news showed the drowned Syrian boy Alan Kurdi and for a brief moment the world started to seriously consider not treated refugees like garbage and actually abiding by basic human rights?  Well you might have seen a certain meme go around in right wing circles of

“How about we take care of homeless vets before we give a shit about refugees”  This originated on Fox, or at least was popularized by it.  And the thing about this is…that doesn’t make any fucking sense.  Like if you engage with that question even a little bit, you realize how totally full of shit these people are.  Firstly, we aren’t helping the homeless in this country in large part because of Republican policies, because they view ensuring that homeless people have their basic needs met as giving a hand out to the poor (because god forbid we actually tax the rich).  Secondly…of course we can do both, we are the richest country in history, duh.  And of course, if we aren’t going to help the homeless anyways, i’d rather help at least some people than not any people at all.  Its a total bullshit argument but it isn’t designed to convince people.  It is designed to justify other people’s opposition to a very basic decency.  See a lot of Republicans oppose the refugees just out of racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia and want to mask it, but at lot more actually would like to take in the refugees but hesitate because…well the liberals want that, and we wouldn’t want to agree with them would we?  So this little message is a great way for them to believe in something they kinda know is wrong, because opposing the left matters more to them than enforcing their own ideals.  I mean its the internet, we have all seen people take a position on something in order to win an argument when you know full well they don’t believe that.  

“I Give people the Truth, unfiltered by Rational Argument”

Or to use another example, remember back in the golden days of 2015, people had a very negative view of the electoral college, Donald Trump himself famously called for it to be abolished.  But then…Donald Trump won the election despite losing the popular vote by almost 3 million votes and suddenly a lot of Trump supporters started to get edgy.  Because most of them know in their hearts that the Electoral Colledge is total bullshit….but they also really want to win.  So how do they reconcile that?  Well that is where you get that whole “Electoral College Protects the little states” meme on Fox News that we have seen 8 million times.  It doesn’t make any actual sense unless you are telling me that Florida is a small state now or Vermont is a big state.  But its point isn’t to make sense, its point is to help Republican viewers not have to think critically about their own previously held beliefs, and help them adapt a position they actually disagree with because it is useful to them.  They don’t want to engage in an actual argument with facts because well

“Reality has a well known Liberal Bias”

And this isn’t just a right wing thing, they just do it better.

   This also helps them work out their internal contradictions, I mean the Republican party isn’t really an ideology, its a bunch of competing contradictory ideologies.  After all how can you be against the goverment getting into your personal life and then want it to outlaw abortion and gay marriage?  How can you want to balance the budget but increase military spending while reducing taxation for the wealthy?  How can you oppose Assad or ISIS while hating the very people they are killing?  That is the poitn of the pundit, to explain away these contradiction and tell their audience “shhhh, its ok, you don’t have to think

 And of course, this isn’t exclusive to fox news, we see this sort of rationalization on the internet 

Thanks to @randomshoes for this amazing image.  

  It is really telling that the crazy batshit response to Feminist Frequency came not in response to any videos she produced, but in response to a kickstarter video where she said she was going to produce a series, before she actually said anything (sounds familiar?)  Because they didn’t want to engage in any arguments, they wanted an excuse to not have the discussion at all, and when the strategy of “Scream incoherent rape and death threats en mass” didn’t work, they start saying “She is a con women” “She hasn’t played games” “She is trying to censor Games” all of which can be extremely easily disproven but they aren’t actual arguments, they are excuses not to have an argument in the first place.  The Irony is that there are a lot of reasonable criticism you can have of Anita Sarkeesians, I have a list of them myself, but in order to make those, you need to engage in what she is saying rather than what Thunderf00t or Sargon of Akkad are telling you that they are saying.    I mean, Gamergate as a movement started to really fall apart after this clip here 

It is worth noting when I searched this video on youtube series, I found two videos by Thunderf00t on rebutting it, one called “Stephen Colbert losses his balls, because a lot of Gaters really liked Stephen Colbert, and when faced with “Engage with the argument” and “Let the exact type of people who Colbert is mocking tell them what to think they….well you know what happened.

Also because I mentioned Anita, I am going to get so much more shit for this post than I have for the much more critical posts I made on works they haven’t actually seen.  

    Pundits tell people what to think but more importantly tell them what not to think about, they don’t so much say ‘mindlessly listen to what i have to say” as they go “this argument isn’t worth enaging with, and if you think about it remotely critical, you are giving the abstract imaginary enemy of “The left” a victory, but in mindlessly regurgitating my propaganda points, you can score a victory against them”.  And that is what Colbert perfectly embodies. 

plus he is fucking funny.  

Also I heard that some people haven’t seen this so….fucking watch this even if you watch nothing else by this man