Support NeoGAF

[Bam Bam Baklava]

It's nothing like a stock, it's a donation. People who donate money often want to see that it's been going to good use. A monetary investment implies monetary return.

Charitable organizations have very thorough financial reports detailing how they use the donations they receive. It's an act of good faith to ensure their donators continue doing what they do knowing the money is being used properly.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Ok the math isn't hard but here you go.
$158,922 X .44 = $69,925.68 for wages and salaries.

divided by 3 for an annual wage.

doesn't seem even close to worth it, given all the shit shes personally got from the interwebs for daring to suggest that there may be elements of videogames that are socially regressive.

=$23,308.56 annual budget for salary.

Yeah that not a lot of money to pay someone for non-profit work.

For reference, my office has 7 employees on staff and average weekly monies allotted for salary/tax/etc. is about 15,000 per week. Between 7-9K is actual pay out accounting for tax liab. and SSI and medicare.

If she's a recognized 501(c) I'll donate to her. I could use the tax deduction.

Glad to see FF is tackling male tropes as well.

 

[Puaru1]

She receive a consistent stream of gendered insults and threats because of a handful of 10 minute Youtube videos about the most entry level feminist critiques over video games. That would suggest those threatening her have a problem with feminists, women or both.

I always want to believe that gamers are a pretty decent bunch, but then I am constantly let down when I'm watching pro LoL and see what the twitch chat starts saying when they pan to the audience and a pretty girl is there or when the female translators are on screen.

There was a video I watched on youtube that was of an old Giant Bomb mailbag from back when they were Whiskey Media and the entire focus of the video was them messing around with this giant 5lb gummy worm they got, and there just happened to be a good looking female co-worker who was in a couple of the shots. I look at the comments and it's all people talking about how they want to bang her.

I want to think that other men aren't these drooling disgusting savage sexists that some people paint them to be, then I read shit like this and I'm embarrassed to be a part of this culture sometimes.

 

[Y2Kev]

I think the videos Anita has ultimately produced have been considerably more expensive and lengthy than she originally estimated, and from a "time talking into the camera" perspective, she's clearly done what she has said she would do. But I think she should complete the series as she promised, because it's the right thing to do and because I really enjoy the videos and want to see more of her work.

It's obvious that the kickstarter has been a smashing success, raising the profile of the cause and influencing developers directly. Gamergate, as an undoubtedly related reaction, has exposed a ton of garbage in our community and helped magnify the plight of the portrayal of women and minorities in our industry.

Anita needs to follow through on the videos but anyone who donated to the kickstarter (or like me, didn't donate but understands the importance of the goal and of the project) should be really happy so far with how she has served as a change agent. But yeah, give us the videos.

 

[akidnamededdy]

Maybe she should finish the video series people contributed money for before she starts talking about the next one.

 

[Palette Swap]

=$23,308.56 annual budget for salary.

Yeah that not a lot of money to pay someone for non-profit work.

For reference, my office has 7 employees on staff and average weekly monies allotted for salary/tax/etc. is about 15,000 per week. Between 7-9K is actual pay out accounting for tax liab. and SSI and medicare.

If she's a recognized 501(c) I'll donate to her. I could use the tax deduction.

Glad to see FF is tackling male tropes as well.

Sometimes when discussing kickstarters, I wish we had a framework that educates people a bit on the cost of doing business because a lot of reactions in these threads tend to show people have no idea what these amounts mean in manhours.
That and explaining why KS isn't an investment.

Edit: to be fair, half the people creating kickstarters seem completely out of their depth when it comes to budgeting. Figures that look too low are a huge red flag for me, way more than large figures actually.

 

[laser]

Holy crap at some of the replies/bans in this thread. You'd think that some people would learn after all this time, but it seems not.

Also, $69,925.68 is not much for an annual salary, let alone over 3 years.

Most of what an employer pays in the US is the side benefits, such as health insurance, life insurance, 401k, etc.

 

[foltzie1]

If you say "I don't like person X's work" you usually look at the work from person X. I'm not sure why a master thesis should be out of bounds. Especially when it's kind of her qualification.

There is a point when you venture over into ad hominem attacks. Would you be willing to share some of your college work with us for review? Honestly, the fact that she posted it at all is gutsy. I think I've said already, but I'm not sharing my masters thesis. I don't have the time to make it bullet proof, and besides I already got an A on it, so I'm good.

Actually googling various sentences from his post just lead me back to this thread. So I'm not sure if it's just copy pasted.
Also, I don't think he really said that the underlying thesis is wrong. Just that it's not sourced. I guess you can argue how relevant this stuff is to the overall subject, but to harp on it in a "how dare you post this" sort of way seems also strange to me.

I'll quote myself.

You are asking us to believe that during the existence of this thread you went surfing the Wayback machine, found this missing post, downloaded the PDF, read it, ran some numbers on the appendix, found a discrepancy, typed it up, and shared it in the thread?

Please forgive me if I apply Occam's razor.

If you want to critique the topic, Anita, or FF, there are many valid avenues. He wasn't, just as you aren't, pursuing them.

The only "how dare you" being given is when it is suggested that non-serious commentary be treated seriously.

Adult topics deserve adult consideration, not the mewling of the immature.

 

[Trey]

Still don't see why it matters how she spent the money.

It doesn't. People want to pick nits for some sake or reason.

 

[Mononoke]

Holy crap at some of the replies/bans in this thread. You'd think that some people would learn after all this time, but it seems not.

Also, $69,925.68 is not much for an annual salary, let alone over 3 years.

Most of what an employer pays in the US is the side benefits, such as health insurance, life insurance, 401k, etc.

Also, depending on the state, living expenses can be extremely high. I think Anita is out in California? As a fellow Californian, I can tell you living expenses here are really high. Anyways, I still think this discussion about what she's done with the money is very strange and doesn't make sense.

Who cares if she got an insane amount over her goal. People were willing to pay it. She can do whatever the hell she wants with it. Her only obligations if putting out the product people donated for. Some either say: she hasn't lived up to that (because she's taking so long). Some says she's fine, because it takes time and she's put more money and time into each video then originally projected.

Whatever. I still don't see why the money is relevant here. Focus on the product she's put out (or not put out). Unless you are a backer who feels she's taken too long and are criticizing her, I don't see why people are talking about what she did with the money.

 

[Puaru1]

Holy crap at some of the replies/bans in this thread. You'd think that some people would learn after all this time, but it seems not.

Also, $69,925.68 is not much for an annual salary, let alone over 3 years.

Most of what an employer pays in the US is the side benefits, such as health insurance, life insurance, 401k, etc.

For an annual salary, it's damn good. For 3 years? It's getting close to the poverty line.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

It doesn't. People want to pick nits for some sake or reason.

Reasons that have nothing to do with misogyny, obviously. They're just asking questions.

 

[Raist]

Also, $69,925.68 is not much for an annual salary, let alone over 3 years.

Most of what an employer pays in the US is the side benefits, such as health insurance, life insurance, 401k, etc.

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

 

[Mononoke]

Reasons that have nothing to do with misogyny, obviously. They're just asking questions.

It's the nature of KS. Someone comes up with an idea or project, gives you the END goal, or the promised product they will put out if they get funded. Then any money that is given past that original goal, is pretty much for the person running the KS to do whatever they want with it.

Why people are asking about the money and what she did with it, given what KS is...yeah. I'm going to be skeptical about those asking for this info.

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

Why does it matter if the money she made salary wise = an an amount of work that is suitable for that salary? This is a KS project, people donated money to her. I'm confused why we are looking at what the salary break down is, and whether it justifies her work.

To be clear, I don't like Anita Sarkeesian. I don't like her videos, and I often don't agree with her examples she uses. But I have zero idea why people are obsessed with the money she's gotten, and obsessed with her "worthiness" for the money she received. Criticize her work. Discuss and debate her work. All of that is fine. Asking about where the money has gone, and trying to figure out an exact break down of how she's spent the money, is bizarre and doesn't seem relevant at all (when this was a KS project, where people were free to donate however much they want, and people decided to over pay her based on her goal). She just has to deliver the product promised.

 

[FlyinJ]

People are seriously angry that she paid 23,000 a year to wages? And most likely that was split between multiple people?


Do you guys have any idea what a contracted video producer would have been paid for a single 30 minute video of that quality?

I just don't know what to say.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

It's the nature of KS. Someone comes up with an idea or project, gives you the END goal, or the promised product they will put out if they get funded. Then any money that is given past that original goal, is pretty much for the person running the KS to do whatever they want with it.

Why people are asking about the money and what she did with it, given what KS is...yeah. I'm going to be skeptical about those asking for this info.

I was being sarcastic, sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[Opto]

decent video production costs money

 

[Palette Swap]

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

Do you have a ballpark for what a typical amount should be then? I honestly don't but it doesn't seem obvious one way or the other.

 

[Mononoke]

I was being sarcastic, sorry if that wasn't clear.

Oh I was agreeing with you. I knew your intent.

I just find it really really fucking bizarre people are focusing on the money she's made and how she's spent it. As someone that doesn't like her work particularly, at least it seems to me, I can tell those that are being civil and want to have a discussion about that work. And those having questionable motives if they are going after her on the money she's made.

When things turn to "she made x amount of money and didn't deserve it"...."what did she spend that money on"...."the work she's putting out doesn't justify the money she got"...

I'm sorry, but that is pure bullshit. I'm not going to take you seriously. KS again, is a place where people ask for money to do projects. She has no obligations beyond delivering the product promised. All the insane money she got past the goal, is what people chose to over pay her. She doesn't have to live up to that amount of money, or do anything in particular with it.

 

[FlyinJ]

Do you have a ballpark for what a typical amount should be then? I honestly don't but it doesn't seem obvious one way or the other.

Between 20 and 30k for a single video of that quality.

 

[Raist]

Why does it matter if the money she made salary wise = an an amount of work that is suitable for that salary? This is a KS project, people donated money to her. I'm confused why we are looking at what the salary break down is, and whether it justifies her work.

To be clear, I don't like Anita Sarkeesian. I don't like her videos, and I often don't agree with her examples she uses. But I have zero idea why people are obsessed with the money she's gotten, and obsessed with her "worthiness" for the money she received. Criticize her work. Discuss and debate her work. All of that is fine.

She got that money and that's fine. I mean there's also people earning hundreds of thousands in youtube ads for putting silly videos up. Although, arguably she did set goals when she started that fundraising that she clearly did not fulfill.

I just completely disagree with all the attempts at rationalizing the amount like "oh it's a lot of research" or "well it's like an average salary so what?".

 

[Vice]

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

Depending on what you do that's not too far off. Wedding video producers can often make that much for a handful of jobs.

 

[Puaru1]

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

Which is why it was smarter for her to take donations from kickstarter vs making some kind of deal with a website like ScrewAttack to produce a series.

 

[Mononoke]

She got that money and that's fine. I mean there's also people earning hundreds of thousands in youtube ads for putting silly videos up. Although, arguably she did set goals when she started that fundraising that she clearly did not fulfill.

I just completely disagree with all the attempts at rationalizing the amount like "oh it's a lot of research" or "well it's like an average salary so what?".

Fair enough. I just don't know why we are even discussing her salary equaling (or not equaling) to the work she's putting out. Again, who cares. This was a KS project. She just needs to put out the project she promised. People chose to over pay her past her goal. She has no obligation to that money (making an amount of work that = to that pay).

I feel like some people are obsessed with the fact that, they don't think she deserves the money she got. They are obsessed and focused on the fact that, the money she got doesn't equate to the work she's done. And I'm just baffled why that is the discussion. Talk about the work she's done, and why you disagree with it. Or hell, if you are backer, talk about why don't think she's releasing them in an acceptable timely fashion.

 

[sn00zer]

They shouldve done this a LOOOOOONG time ago. I remember a lot of the bad blood began with the delay between the Kickstarter and actual vids. There was a ton of support when she began, really odd how it all turned around in a huge wave.

 

[jschreier]

I don't agree with her message, I think she twists things to fit her narrative, and I think it's shitty she doesn't seem to entertain counter arguments (along with websites who regularly promote her, see Kotaku's Stephen Totillo who promised to run articles featuring opposing views to Anita which he never made good on). But I do respect her sticking to her guns and I do agree with the general idea that women need better representation in games.

I just want to note here that I have personally tried multiple times to field pitches and publish counter-arguments or responses to Anita Sarkeesian's videos, but I have yet to hear or find a single one that isn't coupled with attacks on her character or assertions that she shouldn't be criticizing games in the first place (complete with Jack Thompson comparisons). I know Stephen's tried to publish some, too.

 

[FlyinJ]

So now the irrational Sarkeesian hate has created an army of armchair video professionals.

What next.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Sometimes when discussing kickstarters, I wish we had a framework that educates people a bit on the cost of doing business because a lot of reactions in these threads tend to show people have no idea what these amounts mean in manhours.That and explaining why KS isn't an investment.

Edit: to be fair, half the people creating kickstarters seem completely out of their depth when it comes to budgeting. Figures that look too low are a huge red flag for me, way more than large figures actually.

That's a whole other can of worms, but I'd like to say that it's incorrect to call something an investment in financial terms if it isnt: an asset, doesnt appreciate/depreciate in market value, and does not produce cash flow.

 

[Brakke]

They shouldve done this a LOOOOOONG time ago. I remember a lot of the bad blood began with the delay between the Kickstarter and actual vids. There was a ton of support when she began, really odd how it all turned around in a huge wave.

"Turned around"?

Do you think the backlash comes from the same people the original -- and ongoing -- support came from?

 

[HarryHengst]

I don't think any employer would pay that amount expecting you to produce 6x 20-30mins videos over said period of time.

No, but most employers would not go and threaten to kill you or make your life a living hell, so she can be forgiven for not being as productive as she was planning to be.

 

[Puaru1]

I just want to note here that I have personally tried multiple times to field pitches and publish counter-arguments or responses to Anita Sarkeesian's videos, but I have yet to hear or find a single one that isn't coupled with attacks on her character or assertions that she shouldn't be criticizing games in the first place (complete with Jack Thompson comparisons). I know Stephen's tried to publish some, too.

That's fair enough, I'm sure you guys are probably looking for a needle in a shit stack to find people who aren't just obviously assholes.

 

[Oersted]

They shouldve done this a LOOOOOONG time ago. I remember a lot of the bad blood began with the delay between the Kickstarter and actual vids. There was a ton of support when she began, really odd how it all turned around in a huge wave.

The hate began when her Kickstarter started. The long periods between the videos then have been another excuse for the hate.

There was no turn around. Those who hated the message, hated her. Period.

 

[Opto]

How come no one asked where all the funds went for Shovel Knight? It doesn't cost that much to make pixels jump, I've seen people make that stuff for free!

 

[Mononoke]

I just want to note here that I have personally tried multiple times to field pitches and publish counter-arguments or responses to Anita Sarkeesian's videos, but I have yet to hear or find a single one that isn't coupled with attacks on her character or assertions that she shouldn't be criticizing games in the first place (complete with Jack Thompson comparisons). I know Stephen's tried to publish some, too.

That's one of my own personal issues with Anita and her style of criticism. I think there is always room for debate (on some things, especially if we talking about media interpretation). Not even feminists always agree on the things they think are misogynistic. If your approach is that THIS IS 100% misogynistic, and if you disagree you are wrong (and in some areas, you are then accused of being misogynistic for not agreeing)...that to me is the wrong way to approach this.

I say this as someone that considers myself a feminist. And even if you 100% believe something you are saying is right, your end goal should be to educate people to convince them to come to your side, not beat them over the head with it. I don't find this approach effective. It just tells people that already hold these views, what they already knew. It will educate some people, and that's great. But it also alienates those that think we have a sexism problem, but don't agree on all the criticisms she has.That's the only issue I take with her series (it not being open to counter-discussions). THAT SAID...with all the whacky crazy people out there, I have no idea if apart of her approach is to avoid these kind of people who don't want to discuss, but burn the whole place down.

So maybe we are in a place, where we can't actually have counter-discussions. Although I do think Kotaku or some media outlet doing it (since it's more of a closed forum)...would work. So no idea why she was against that idea.

 

[Raist]

I just want to note here that I have personally tried multiple times to field pitches and publish counter-arguments or responses to Anita Sarkeesian's videos, but I have yet to hear or find a single one that isn't coupled with attacks on her character or assertions that she shouldn't be criticizing games in the first place (complete with Jack Thompson comparisons). I know Stephen's tried to publish some, too.

Well her whole basic argument on the issue is as silly and unsubstantiated as "violent games create violent behaviours". Since she's making the claim, she should provide evidence for it based on all that research she's claiming to be doing.

 

[Trey]

All the counter argument videos I've seen have been horrible, and focused mostly on attacking her credibility rather than her arguments.

She's not infallible, but her detractors make their motives exceedingly clear.

As for the series, I actually learned something from her earlier videos. I think the biggest problem I have with her videos is that she's preaching to the choir. It's an issue that is consistent with talking about racism. The people who really need to hear it generally won't listen.

 

[Oersted]

Well her whole basic argument on the issue is as silly and unsubstantiated as "violent games create violent behaviours". Since she's making the claim, she should provide evidence for it based on all that research she's claiming to be doing.

Which claim are you referring to? You only mentioned one which her videos aren't about.

 

[Mononoke]

All the counter argument videos I've seen have been horrible, and focused mostly on attacking her credibility rather than her arguments.

She's not infallible, but her detractors make their motives exceedingly clear.

As for the series, I actually learned something from her earlier videos. I think the biggest problem I have with her videos is that she's preaching to the choir. It's an issue that is consistent with talking about racism. The people who really need to hear it generally won't listen.

Those aren't counter-arguments. Anyone focusing on Anita's credibility, her worth, the money she's made (and whether she deserves it), and isn't focused on her actual content, is NOT a counter-argument. Those people don't deserve to even be considered.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

That's one of my own personal issues with Anita and her style of criticism. I think there is always room for debate (on some things, especially if we talking about media interpretation). Not even feminists always agree on the things they think are misogynistic. If your approach is that THIS IS 100% misogynistic, and if you disagree you are wrong (and in some areas, you are then accused of being misogynistic for not agreeing)...that to me is the wrong way to approach this.

I say this as someone that considers myself a feminist. And even if you 100% believe something you are saying is right, your end goal should be to educate people to convince them to come to your side, not beat them over the head with it. That's the only issue I take with her series (it not being open to counter-discussions). THAT SAID...with all the whacky crazy people out there, I have no idea if apart of her approach is to avoid these kind of people who don't want to discuss, but burn the whole place down.

I don't think she's the one who created the "you're either with us or against us" environment. I think that has more to do with the army of morons attacking her constantly. Sure, I don't always 100% agree with her points, but when I see all the shit being said on the internet every time her name is mentioned, I don't particularly feel like trying to calmly discuss her videos among the dozens of "man-hating agenda!!111!!!" comments.

Well her whole basic argument on the issue is as silly and unsubstantiated as "violent games create violent behaviours". Since she's making the claim, she should provide evidence for it based on all that research she's claiming to be doing.

Here's a good example of what I'm talking about. How can you have a decent discussion when this is the average comment in a Anita Sarkeesian thread? And Neogaf is far from being the worst place for that... Fucking hell.

 

[impact]

That's a lot of money she's getting. The Internet is crazy

 

[FlyinJ]

All the counter argument videos I've seen have been horrible, and focused mostly on attacking her credibility rather than her arguments.

She's not infallible, but her detractors make their motives exceedingly clear.

As for the series, I actually learned something from her earlier videos. I think the biggest problem I have with her videos is that she's preaching to the choir. It's an issue that is consistent with talking about racism. The people who really need to hear it generally won't listen.

Every developer I know from indies to AAA have watched the videos and almost all of them have been enlightened to the problems with the games they have created.

These videos have had a huge influence on the development side of the industry.

Several of these developers have publicly cited her videos as having a direct effect on how they developed their projects.

 

[DoktorEvil]

I just want to note here that I have personally tried multiple times to field pitches and publish counter-arguments or responses to Anita Sarkeesian's videos, but I have yet to hear or find a single one that isn't coupled with attacks on her character or assertions that she shouldn't be criticizing games in the first place (complete with Jack Thompson comparisons). I know Stephen's tried to publish some, too.

Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkessian should not be mentioned in the same breath together and it pains me to see journalists do the same.

Jack Thompson sought out cases where he could shove video game sex/violence into the narrative. Anita is offering to observe & critique common tropes in video games with a video series. How do people find ways to equate one with the other?

 

[Mononoke]

I don't think she's the one who created the "you're either with us or against us" environment. I think that has more to do with the army of morons attacking her constantly. Sure, I don't always 100% agree with her points, but when I see all the shit being said on the internet every time her name is mentioned, I don't particularly feel like trying to calmly discuss her videos among the dozens of "man-hating agenda!!111!!!" comments.

Yeah. Well to be fair, I wasn't saying she created it (I don't view Anita as this evil dark force that some insane people think of her as). Just that, I've never been a big fan of that kind of criticism (the closed forum format).

But I kind of feel like given the environment we are in (that she gets death threats for instance), I don't really think we can have an open forum w/ counter-arguments. Although I liked the idea Kotaku proposed (of doing editorial pieces where she responds to them and they have discussions that way). That seems fair to me.

Because again, even feminists don't always agree with some of the view points she proposes. And that's fine. What's not fine is not being able to discuss why.

 

[Raist]

Which claim are you referring to? You only mentioned one which her videos aren't about.

That the common depiction of women in video games favours a patriarchical, mysoginistic society.

 

[sn00zer]

The hate began when her Kickstarter started. The long periods between the videos then have been another excuse for the hate.

There was no turn around. Those who hated the message, hated her. Period.

"Turned around"?

Do you think the backlash comes from the same people the original -- and ongoing -- support came from?

I knew a few people personally who gave money for the kickstarter who were frustrated. I agree there was already a lot of people hating the idea especially considering that was around the time the red pill and MRA groups started growing.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

That the common depiction of women in video games favours a patriarchical, mysoginistic society.

Hmmmm... All are videos are evidence of sexism in videogames. I'm not sure what you're asking for.

 

[Brakke]

That the common depiction of women in video games favours a patriarchical, mysoginistic society.

That claim is well-supported in the videos.

 

[Jigorath]

She expanded the initial scope of the KS, as already said and proved. She is still working on the project, and she raised awareness on the issue to the point that most key figures in big companies acknowledged her works and the debate she brought up. Even if she stops doing videos like right now, her KS is nothing but a huge, huge success.

That's good. I'm happy her videos have reached members of the industry. I know Neil Druckmann is fan of her work so it's great to see one of my favorite developers actually care about this sort of thing.

 

[Trey]

Well her whole basic argument on the issue is as silly and unsubstantiated as "violent games create violent behaviours". Since she's making the claim, she should provide evidence for it based on all that research she's claiming to be doing.

Seeing as it's Tropes Against Women, women telling you their experience is evidence. The reaction to women trying to talk about these issues are evidence. The (small) number of women working in the industry is evidence. The past and present marketing of these devices are evidence. It all fits together. It's similar to how racism is shown to exist.

Jack Thompson had none of these links. There are also elements outside of the sphere of gaming that contribute heavily to violence and have a much stronger causal link, namely gun laws and poverty.

 

[Raist]

Hmmmm... All are videos are evidence of sexism in videogames. I'm not sure what you're asking for.

Many of them are reaching. If not flat out misrepresenting.
She favours a very suppressive angle of feminism.
IMO her own views on how media should portray men and women are incredibly sexist.

That claim is well-supported in the videos.

Well if you think that, then IMO you have to also agree with the stance that is "playing violent games can make you a violent person".

Seeing as it's Tropes Against Women, women telling you their experience is evidence. The reaction to women trying to talk about these issues are evidence. The (small) number of women working in the industry is evidence. The past and present marketing of these devices are evidence. It all fits together. It's similar to how racism is shown to exist.

Jack Thompson had none of these links. There are also elements outside of the sphere of gaming that contribute heavily to violence and have a much stronger causal link, namely gun laws and poverty.

I'd like to see a single study showing that people playing video games are more likely to be sexist that people who aren't. Since that's the claim, and most video games are sexist according to her, that shouldn't be very hard to demonstrate.