Sarkeesian, Revisitedcomments powered by Disqus
Posted on Saturday, August 24 2013 @ 19:37:38 Eastern
The whole Sarkeesian episode has been interesting in a couple ways. Much like the Zimmerman case large bodies of opinion built up on either side of a quickly dualistic divide which had little relationship to reality. It then turns out the real situation is both much simpler and more complicated than previously expected, and almost everyone was wrong.
On that note, I offer the following video essay by Jordan Owen:
Anita Sarkeesian: the Early Years
Unless Owen's claims are flatly refuted by contradictory evidence I rest on his claims and other available information to the following conclusions:
-The harassment campaign was the real prize, not the money
-Sarkeesian's work has never held up to serious analysis, but was never meant to
-The multiple forms of plagiarism in the videos now makes perfect sense: when the videos had yet to come out (and were nearly a year behind schedule) the claims of fraud started to swell. When the pacing between the release took (and is still taking) ages to get out the claims of fraud start to again swell - each release was meant to push that tide back but since the releases themselves are coming under fire...
-Cameron Rodgers was wrong. Sarkeesian won't land next to Moviebob and Extra Creditz in the 'pretentious idiot' shelf and she won't be swept under the rug by anyone.
-Sarkeesian isn't just another loudmouth with an opinion and a megaphone; she's a hustler pretending to be one.