This morning, a very important article came out about Anita Sarkeesian. No, not the suck-fest that Bloomberg Businessweek put out about her, which was complete with a ridiculous cover portraying her as a video game heroine. I would have to be on actual heroin before I believed it. However, some people are either really fucking stupid, or they just don’t have the time to research every issue, and form their own opinions. So they recite whatever garbage the mainstream media is peddling that week, and call it a day. It sucks, but that’s the attitude we’re up against. Luckily, not everyone is an unenlightened and incurious bird-brain. Thus, we have GamerGate.     

But the media still calls Anita a champion of women, and basically says you’re an evil piece of shit if disagree with her lies and distortions about the video game industry we all grew up with, and love. As we know, Sarkeesian only latched onto it in order to make a quick dollar. She’s admitted this herself. She’s a charlatan, an influence peddler, and a gender hustler, all rolled into one package:

Anyways, she’s a phony. We’ve always known that, but we’ve lacked some good dirt. Until today. Like I was saying, I woke up this morning. Eventually, I got around to reading Brian Whittemore’s DEEP investigative piece on Anita. To say I felt vindicated, would be an understatement. She’s the fraud we always thought she was. Now, we have the proof. I’ve read a litte about this before, but Whittemore lays it out beautifully.

Short version? She used to be in business with a conman who tried to teach men how to trick women into fucking them. What? That doesn’t sound like the feminist ideal to me. Maybe Jezebel can shed some light on it, but it doesn’t seem very consistent with their rhetoric.


So, she coordinated seminars where a guy called women sluts, and they went around making money off this trash. But the media hasn’t said one word about it. You wanna know why? I bet you most of them don’t even fucking know about it, because they never even took the time to look into this faker’s past. There might be one or two old school guys who knew, but the profession is so shit now, that most journalists are  just Listening and Believing.

Anita Sarkeesian is the fraudulent piece of scum that we thought she was. Yea, scum. Because only scum would try to latch onto an industry they don’t even care about, one that brings joy to millions, in order to turn a cheap trick.  The mainstream media is still not gonna report on this. I can guarantee you it won’t be seen on Kotaku. MSNBC won’t have Whittemore on to discuss his findings. We’ll just have to spread this around to our gamer friends, and anyone else who wants to take the reality pill. You’re not gonna win this one, you scammer.

UPDATE: If you haven’t read it already, do yourself a favor, and read the most comprehensive takedown of Anita to date, courtesy of @Nero.  Here’s a screen from it below, but you really need to read the whole thing. It’s amazing.




    1. You mean we can know she believes in and employs pseudoscience that is intended to manipulate others by careful placement of words and phrases according to an arcane (HIGHLY SECRET) methodology?

      1. She can very much convince a person that the ground your standing on is sexist . I remember pick up artist talk about this, he told people do not to use this for evil to manipulate women use it to gain a relationship with women if you use it for that evil you will find that the side effects of women will become mentally unstable and act crazy.The guy had to deal with stalkers after learning the hard way.

        Which Gordie Tait and Arthur Chu seems to show signs of acting strange base on their behavior.

        1. I think the “side effects” are the same effects on others from dealing a person having borderline personality disorder – they are essentially similar tactics – dismiss other people’s viewpoints and assert that yours are superior using language loopholes.

          It may very well work on highly suggestible people, however for anyone with any sense, using NLP (or acting like a Borderline) just means you are an asshole that needs help, lol

          1. You should see the video they made about “Privilege of being a Male Gamer” and one person name SG-17 on Neogaf posted his thoughts and some people reacted to him like he was crazy.

  1. *gets up sets off fireworks, shoots his fully auto rifle into the air* god bless you and MURICA sir *Claps and stuffs 3 cheese burgers down hsis throat and hammers it down with 4 gallons of Dew* I cried

  2. Ya that the sad thing. Not many people are going to really look into this. If it turned out bad or good. I would be happy if they just looked into it. no matter the outcome

  3. And thus ends the sad — but hilarious — tale of the R.M.S. Sarkeesian, which sank off the east coast of the United States after having its hull fatally breached by a giant fucking iceberg named Reality.

    Wait, that was the Titanic. Oh well, it works anyway.

      1. to accept the truth they would have to admit they let themselves get taken in and fought furiously for a liar and a cheat, they wont admit that to themselves so they’ll support her regardless of the truth

        1. Exactly, not to mention that these people simply love to be outraged and offended, they need their fix of victimhood otherwise their worlds come crashing down.

        2. If they were willing to accept the truth and showed just a little humility while they were at it, they’d have salvaged this whole GamerGate situation before it blew in their faces.

          I believe that the spin will go like a top, since Anita is both a woman and a self professed feminist. They’ll go to any lengths to both protect her by saying that her past is irrelevant in light of her enormous contributions to the fight for women’s rights and representation in games and to discredit the detractors by saying we’re digging up the past to smear this wonderful strong and independent woman, like the misogynists we obviously are.

          It seems though that, for Anita, it’s business as usual. She’s the spokesperson for a conman, fooling gullible idiots, raking in the dosh in the process. I wonder how she must laugh when she thinks that all those SJW idiots will get up in arms and defend her for a lie.

        3. Players of The War Z (now known as Infestation: Survivor Stories) will defend their broken, buggy, microtransaction-scamming purchase to the death. I’d expect the same sort of fanatical devotion from any con victim.

      2. I’m pretty sure she could demand that they pay her to poop on their faces and they’d still think she was legit.

        I know that is gross, but I seriously don’t think they would even notice.

      1. “Much of an iceberg is concealed underwater. Men have 2 to 3 inches of concealed cartilage in their penises. PATRIARCHY CONFIRMED! ICEBERGS ARE MISOGYNISTIC!”

        Seriously. Someone needs to make an “Illuminati Confirmed”-style meme out of “the patriarchy”.

  4. That’s kinda only how she started off, first it was the Handwriting classes telling people if they’re going to become rich or find love, then it was teleseminars and various pyramid schemes with Mandossian, she’s been involved in various scams throughout her working life and this latest one isn’t any different:

  5. As if the fact that every single “argument” she tries to make depends utterly on logical fallacies wasn’t enough evidence that Sarkeesian is a fraud. Or the fact that 25 times her crowdfunding goal somehow wasn’t enough money to make 1/2 as many videos as she promised despite using freely plagiarized footage. Or the fact that she goes on twitter plugging for donations 12 seconds after getting threatened by a sockpuppet. Or the fact that she refused to press charges when /v/ found the other guy sending her death threats, indicating that she only cares about attention. Yeah, this coffin is almost out of room for nails in it.

      1. Just one of the thousand reasons I left Christianity and am now an atheist.

        “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.” —Matthew 15:8

        They say they believe and follow their own holy book, but no, in fact, they really do not. They cherry pick just as badly as Sarkeesian does. The same can be said of moderate Muslims. Picking out all the good, socially-acceptable bits from your ancient text of choice doesn’t mean all the violence, slavery, sexism, and other Bronze Age bullshit magically vanishes therefrom. Either the whole book is holy and perfect or it’s not.

        1. You know, I grew up in a church too, but I do not have the same experience as you. All the people in my church are intelligent people that regularly go out to debate with others in colleges about Christianity. In the case of the Bible, the New Testament takes priority over the Old Testament, and while there are things that can be considered sexist, it never advocates that one person is better than others, as all have sinned.

          There are churches that cherrypick things to fit their agenda or are only in it for the publicity and the money, but for the humble Christian s that actually do believe the Bible that are innocent and willing to debate, it is not a good thing to cast them off as Christians. I myself consider myself agnostic, but at least I recognize that there are some issues that should be looked at both sides.

          1. I have a favorite little saying that I cooked up while I was still very much a young-earth creationist and gung-ho Christian: “There are two types of Christians: fanatics and hypocrites.”

            Hypocrites believe the good bits and ignore (or more often reinterpret) the bad bits. They mold their holy book to fit their lives, rather than molding their lives to fit their holy book.

            Fanatics cling to it all (like they should if they actually believe what they teach), and as a result become social outcasts.

            I was raised in a hypocritical secular church and my mother became progressively more fanatical over time. I’ve seen the schism between the two worldviews. One side preaches the cliché “gospel of love” and conveniently ignores the tough bits outside apologist acrobatics in theological circles (see also: William Lane Craig asserting that mass murdering babies is good and moral if God commands it), and the other preaches hellfire and damnation and clings wholeheartedly to Biblical views such as the following:

            Women are not allowed to teach men (1 Timothy 2:12 — New Testament)
            Women are the cause of all evil in the world (1 Timothy 2:14 — New Testament)
            Women’s primary purpose is childbearing (1 Timothy 2:15 — New Testament)
            Homosexuality is evil (Romans 1:26-27 — New Testament)
            Women must submit to male authority (Colossians 3:18 — New Testament)
            Children must blindly obey any and all parental instruction (Colossians 3:20 — New Testament)

            And that’s just the tip of the Bronze Age iceberg. I used to memorize whole books of the “Good Book” — there’s a lot more where those came from. We haven’t even touched on historical inaccuracy or internal inconsistency.

            There are no other options, friend. Either you believe it all, or you’re cherry picking. There is no middle ground. Either you practice 100% of what you preach, or you don’t. Most of the hypocrites don’t realize they’re hypocrites, though, and that is where compassion and logic come into play.

            Does the Bible contain moral statements? Sure. Does it also contain immoral statements? Absolutely. The book cannot be defended as a whole, and because the Christian doctrine is founded on the inerrancy of that one document, the Christian doctrine crumbles the moment its founding document does.

            “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” —2 Timothy 3:16

            The Bible claims it is inspired by an all-powerful deity that can do no wrong and makes no mistakes. If the Bible is filled with immoral guidelines for living (it is) and fails to be internally consistent (it does), it is indefensible.


          2. This is not the first time that I have seen these claims, and they’re still counterarguments to these claims. For example, you say that the Bible claims that women caused all the evil in the world, but in reality it is a combination of Adam’s lack of oversight over Eve, Eve’s disobedience towards God, and the snake that tempted her. The argument that women shouldn’t be pastors or teachers of the Church is that generally speaking, Adam was created first as the leader and Eve was created to support them. I am not saying that women cannot teach or lead anything, but that especially within the Church, according to the Bible the husband is the leader and the pastor is a man. There’s an analogy of the church being the bride and Jesus being the bridesgroom; we don’t see the church having dominance over Jesus, do we?

            Homosexuality isn’t so much evil than it is seen as unnatural in the Church. Despite the media trying to frame this with the recent Westboro Baptist Church’s antics, Christians do not want to lynch homosexuals nor do they want to harass them. They simply believe that since God intended that marriage be between men and women that homosexuality should not be encouraged. Even from an evolutionary standpoint, we see that homosexuality–while applicable to many species across time–cannot be transferred to the next generation due to the inability to have babies with sex with the same gender. It is not something that would contribute to the continued benefit of the human race. I treat gay people like regular people, but the fact that they are a minority means that the entire concept of marriage be reconstructed to meet their standards. This can be argued, however.

            Children should follow their parents, but the Bible also mentions that the parents has to treat them fairly and not drive them too hard. Same with the relationship between wives and husbands: while the Bible says that wives should submit to their husbands, it is also the husbands’ duty to love them as they would themself. God also has not condoned the mass-murdering of children in any form: God never intended to kill Isaac, and did you really think that God would kill Abraham’s only child after he promised to make his offspring as innumerable as the stars?

            You believe that there is no way that a simple book could be inerrant, which there is a possibility. However, the fact that a book would be able to be transcribed and passed down for thousands of years is impressive to say the least. I am not saying that it is the truth as I am agnostic, but it does address a variety of issues. The pastor of my own church, Truth Chinese Alliance Church, himself was an atheist that tried to disprove the Bible after he was expelled from high school, but he himself was converted after intensive reading.

            Atheism itself isn’t a perfect world view either: it suggests that the world and life was not created by intellectual design despite the complexity of life and the conditions needed for life to develop, even if you take into account trillions of years that evolutionists claim to have been made. After taking anthropology, I realized that the evidence that humans came from apes is circumstantial at best, and it is very possible that scientists have a confirmation bias about proving that natural selection over millions of years exists just as much as creationists have a confirmation bias that the world was created in 6 days. And if atheism is true, then life would not have purpose because it would suggest that all life was created as an accident, and that there was no higher purpose to our existence.

            I don’t know your circumstances exactly, but it is not about love nor is it about fear of going to hell: you are not automatically good once you are baptized as Christians do still sin, but the point is accepting your faults and your vulnerabilities. If there is a true Christian, actions do not mean that they really believe, but rather they accept Jesus and as a result of seeing their own corruption and sin, they change. While the idea of social justice is subjective at best, the Bible itself has changed very little over the centuries and does address a myriad of topics. People do abuse the system, but there are intellectual Christians that really do believe in the infallibility of the Bible and are willing to debate their stance. They don’t all strike me as fanatics or hypocrites, and they have basic human empathy like every other person on this planet. That’s all I have to say on this topic.

          3. If you dislike the negative connotations in my little maxim, simply rephrase it: all Christians either adhere to all Biblical instruction, or they pick and choose what to adhere to. That’s all it’s saying. There is nothing dehumanizing intended — I came from Christianity, and I know some of those folks are genuine. But factually, they are genuinely hypocritical, because they will readily claim to believe the whole Bible, yet disobey its clear teachings on many counts.

            In theory, I recognize the scientific impossibility of proving/disproving anything supernatural. In practice, since the presence of the supernatural is claimed but never proven, I behave as if it does not exist.

            I never claimed atheism was a perfect worldview. The difference between Christianity and scientific naturalism is that scientific naturalism actually looks for answers and tests its own assumptions repeatedly. Scientific naturalism has been demonstrated to work reliably in all areas of inquiry. If we don’t know something, we don’t know — but we don’t fill in the gaps with conjecture and assume our conjecture is true simply because it hasn’t yet been disproven. By contrast, the only major contribution the Bible has made to our collective knowledge is the discovery of the Hittite civilization, and that is only because nothing from that civilization survived into our time other than some mentions in the Bible. Not even the oft-cited oceanic currents can be attributed to a Biblical worldview, since these currents were known and used by ancient civilizations thousands of years before any Christian navigator read his Bible.

            Now let’s take these counterarguments to task.

            “For example, you say that the Bible claims that women caused all the evil in the world, but in reality it is a combination of Adam’s lack of oversight over Eve, Eve’s disobedience towards God, and the snake that tempted her.”

            No, I didn’t say that. THE BIBLE SAID THAT. I gave you the exact chapter and verse. You can flip back to the Genesis account and read the original story back to me, but the book doesn’t need your interpretation — it claims it’s perfect, remember? The Bible said flat-out that “the woman being deceived was in the transgression”. The entire passage in context is talking about male superiority and women’s place as submissive homemakers. Did you even read what I sent?

            Christians TODAY don’t want to lynch homosexuals…mostly (see also: Africa). You seem trapped in a bubble of current Biblical interpretation as popularized by the current generation of church leaders. Those same passages were used to justify the ostracization and even the execution of homosexuals in years gone by. The fact that the interpretation of the passage I provided has CHANGED over the years should be proof enough that Christianity doesn’t really follow the Bible — only the most comfortable interpretation thereof, the one that agrees most readily with current social norms. If one reinterprets their “perfect” holy book on demand, what use is the book? Why not simply go by society’s moral code and skip the middleman?

            “God has not condoned the mass-murdering of children in any form”, eh? YOU DON’T KNOW YOUR BIBLE VERY WELL.

            Numbers 31:17-18 — God commands the slaughter of everyone (including children), except for the virgin women (who are effectively spoils of war).

            1 Samuel 15:7-8 — God commands very specifically that everyone, including children and infants, must be put to death.

            And before you jump in with the oh-so-predictable “but that’s the Old Testament” line, need I remind you that the Christian deity is the same “yesterday, today, and forever”?

            “The pastor of my own church, Truth Chinese Alliance Church, himself was an atheist that tried to disprove the Bible after he was expelled from high school, but he himself was converted after intensive reading.”

            Anecdotal fallacy. I went in the opposite direction, but I’m not claiming this as proof of Christianity’s faults. Rather, I’m presenting actual proof that the Bible is full of holes. That, and I’ve already admitted that the Bible does make some profound statements and some good moral judgments — with the clarification that it is NOT perfect and is NOT valuable as a guideline for the entirety of human life experience. Yes, the dedication of the scribes is admirable, but it has no bearing on the moral or scientific value of the contents of the documents they transcribed.

            End thorough debunking.

          4. “Actual proof”? I wrote out a really big comment, but I accidentally deleted it so I’ll just give a TL:DR version.

            1. Confirmation bias exists for some evolutionary scientists, and they will pull out half-assed conjectures in order to fill in the gaps of their reasoning. The claims that the missing link between animals and humans is dubious in many cases (Piltdown man, fragments of bones, etc.) and “actual evidence” is hard to say unless you travel back in time, trace the fossil evidence to a mammal, and bring it back alive.

            2. Biblic times was not a time where scientific discoveries were made, because it was more about explaining why certain phenomena happens instead of how, which is what science does. Historians have verified that the Bible, both Old and New Testament was based in historical truth according to Roman and Judaen records, and that it does discuss certain topics on the subject.

            3. Adam being dominant over Eve is irrelevant because they are both mere ants compared to a Godly entity. It is not about equality or superiority: it is about absolute humility in the face of a perfect God that has created roles for different people. We can make pointless arguments about which species of ant is bigger than who, but in the end, both are insignificant to a creator that made them for a purpose.

            4.Christianity is very splintered in regards to the Protestant movement, and definitely there are those catering to cultural norms or religious extremism deviating from the Bible that exist. However, there are also churches that do not bend to those pressures and maintain infallibility to the Bible while not being hatemongers. They are against gay marriage, that is typically true, but they aren’t the assholes you’re making them out to be: they are willing to discuss in rational discourse why they don’t agree with gay marriage.

            5. Old-Testament God hates unbelievers, especially pagans that worship false gods. God himself stated that he was a jealous god, and that he didn’t want to be replaced by soulless figures that did sacrifice babies, whored themselves out, and attacked anyone that didn’t believe in their religion (Baal and Jezebel come to mind.) God back then had to be taken SERIOUSLY to prevent his chosen people from following the wicked ways of Canaan and abandoning the thing making them so successful to the point which he killed anyone for looking into his altar. If people attacked not just his people, but also promoted that he could be replaced by a gold cow, then he would be pissed at them, including virgins and children. If what the Bible said is true, he made us, and its his right as a creator to destroy the things he hates if it doesn’t obey him, simply how traitors in wars get killed by peers or how children destroy Play-Dough if they want to remake another figure.

            6. If the Bible is not indicative of a moral standard, then atheism is much worse. At least the Bible shows that there is value in life and the things we do while we are living; atheism does not. Atheism implies that since life came across as an accident over trillions of years, that our existence and everything to do is merely a result of an coincidence that has no more meaning to it than a grain of sand. Without any meaning, humans would make up meaning by themselves, but because that is so subjective, one person’s or society’s morality is very different than someone elses. I could kill thousands of people, and still not be morally wrong according to atheism because life is merely an accident that will eventually fade out in due time. People do not want to be held accountable to what the Bible describes as unnatural or unethical, so they make up “actual proof” in an attempt to prove that God does not exist and that they don’t have to follow his standard.

            You’re right about the anecdotal fallacy tho, so I’ll just leave you an email address to this pastor I mentioned (who studies apologetics) so that he can better address your claims if you want to continue going. I admit I am not an expert of the Bible, so I hope that he can address your claims better.
            [email protected]

          5. hehehehe… This thread of comments echoes a lot of my own musings after leaving the church.

            The longer I’m out though, the less I find that personal beliefs are important. Western culture places a premium on belief, and most take their beliefs too seriously. Even some atheists are so dogmatically anti-religious, they’ve lost the benefits of not being tied down to a set belief system. And then of course, we have the SJWs, who made a religion with a caste system out of “social justice.”

            So, TL;DR: I have a strong belief that one should avoid strong belief. lol

          6. I think the proper term is passion. The more passionate atheists, religious or etc type of people are, the more they seem to be prone to arguing when really they should be more mellow and calm. But I guess the majority of humanity will always be too emotionally passionate to just sit down and relax without taking things too far.

          7. lol, this is something a Vulcan would say, however I disagree – One can be passionate without thinking that their viewpoint is the only good viewpoint.

            In my mind, it all comes down to some primal tribalism in human kind where a large amount of the population feels the need to control others, in order to protect themselves from unknowns.

      2. Jesus, the guy whose entire ministry revolved around palling around with tax collectors and prostitutes, would kek at this whole non-“story”

  6. Alex Mendossian… Isn’t that the real name of Speed Seduction founder Ross Jeffries? I recall reading a VERY long time ago in Thundercat’s PUA Review website that his real name was Alex. I may very well be wrong though, since I don’t recall a surname being given.

  7. Honestly when it comes to Anita, I’m not even angry, after all she uses stupid SJW and extremist feminists for money… some type of natural selection imo. If people and academia want to waste money on her by giving more fat cash to McIntosh, let them. When genuine honest idiots will take in hands a diploma called “women studies” and understand the trick, let them deal with their own sh-t.

    1. That would be the case if she was just some lone scammer but like a leech she’s latched onto a far more dangerous group of people and the parasite has become the saprophyte. She helps to promote their evil narrative on a wider cultural level too.

  8. Can anyone score a copy of one of Anita’s old rape books? I’d love to read exactly what garbage she was peddling. Maybe this Baggett fellow could share.

  9. Note the name – “Mandossian”. “Sarkeesian”. There’s some sort of family connection there for sure – both are Armenian names.

    1. Extremely unlikely. From Wikipedia on family name suffixes, the Armenian “-ian” ending originally meant “son/daughter of”. “Mandos” and “Sarkees” are nothing alike.

          1. Now i can’t think of this debacle without thinking of Law and Order sound effects. hilarious. DUNDUN

  10. Almost became a backer here – Thank God I didn’t press the button although I must say her first video was a quick ‘eyeopener’ but it came down the road when her Double Dragon review is up and forcing the ‘Damsel in Distresses can save herself’ idea.

    This is probably the almost perfect scam I’ve known in a game review history.

  11. After the event known as GamerGate, the TV media helped the people to grow more cynical than ever unintentionally rendering its existence meaningless and pure propaganda garbage material.

    1. It’s like whistleblowing. What? Somebody called out our shit? Slander and discredit them as hard as you can! That way no one will listen to them!

  12. Who cares if she is a gamer? It is about the arguments she makes, not who she is. Personal attacks (ad hominems) are logical fallacies.

    1. 1. Is that all you got out of this article?

      2. It is not an ad hominem to point out someone is changing their story as that effects their credibility.

      Do you think there’s a lawyer alive who wouldn’t bring up the fact that the opposing witness is contradicting their previous statements?

      If you can’t understand how acquiring $160k while claiming to be a lifelong gamer, while saying the year before “I’m not a fan of video games” is shady, then you aren’t rational.

      1. That’s what drinking the kool aid does to you. As long as someone is saying things you agree with, who cares what their credentials or background might be?

    2. Fair enough. Except there are times when a person’s credibility are most certainly relevant and important, like here. For sake of argument though, her arguments are shit and constantly refuted. The problem with that? She refuses to address them. Because she’s clueless, unless her puppet-master McIntosh writes her rebuttals for her. Which are also shit because sophistry.

      So… yea.

  13. Couldn’t this all be simply answered that as she grew and her perspective changed on these issues through new experiences she then found a calling to pursue these social concerns. I am not a big fan of AS but people do change and work she did years ago may not reflect who she is now.

    1. If this is the state of “academia” today then I am so happy to be long done with my education. If these “feminists” were really serious about doing things to advance the cause of women they would move out of their fancy apartments in San Francisco and move to 3rd world nations where women really do face discrimination on a daily basis. I hear the Boko Haram still have not released those girls they kidnapped. Maybe she could start there. Silly me, I forgot that there is no money in actually fighting oppression but there is big money in being a professional victim.

    2. People evolve as they be grow older and wiser but it’s not all that often their opinions shift a 360 like that, usually that only happens after a massive life changing event. The things that disgusted me when I was 19 still disgust me now I’m 29.

    3. If Anita’s perspective has changed and she turned her back on what she used to do, the righteous course of action would be to denounce it; especially in light of her old boss’s devious and misogynistic attitude. Instead, her feminist diatribes deal with things that are either extremely subjective, like the supposed oppression that comes from women being sexy, or old news every gamer already concluded, such as Peach being a wimpy, needy bitch. Bart Bagget may be quite an affront to feminism, but he’s a nobody and Anita probably knows that; very little publicity could be gained from fighting that battle.

  14. I have been telling people about that video and linking it for the past TWO MONTHS. You know what the legions of SJW retards say? “THAT’S A LIE”. Lol, because evidence of something is in fact not real. These people are farm animals, not people.

    1. It’s how they operate.
      Post a video debunking AS and proving she’s a liar = “Pfft, it’s a Youtube video by some MRA. No one cares lololololol”.
      Post a blog piece with credible sources to prove AS is a liar = “That’s not a blog, it’s a manifesto, you cishet MRA scum! HARASSMENT!!!!!!!”

      There’s a proverb that goes here….I think it’s ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know’.

          1. I wasn’t aware gay men had any inclination to hate women, seeing as how we have no sexual interest and therefor no motivation to do them ill. Now, since you’re clearly retarded, or just a typical SJW cunt, and think you can redefine words, misogyny is a hatred of women, for BEING women. Why would anyone had a woman for being a women? They’re kind of, you know, essential for the species to keep going on and the only thing different about them from me is two X chromosomes instead of an X and a Y. It’s idiot white knights like you (or feminazis, but frankly you write like a white knight) that are the real misogynists, secretly thinking women are cowering fragile flowers who need your protection and for you to speak on their behalf, when really all you’re doing is using them to inflate your pathetic, shriveled ego and fantasize about being a hero and getting all sorts of sex you’re never going to have.

          2. So you are telling me that there is not resentment on the part of ho mo men for the attention to les bo issues? Seriously? Its an ancient war…

          3. LMAO says the obvious hetero! Get a clue, gay men don’t give a shit about “les bo issues” – issues that are expressly “les bo issues” are their concern. If it’s a broader human rights concern, then it affects everybody. Just because a woman likes to dive for catfish on annie defranco lake and two peter’s enjoy puffing each other doesn’t make them somehow indistinguishable. I’d accuse you of something like racism, but I think you’re just a blind, ignorant “privileged” loser trying to jump on the “oppressed” band wagon in order to feel special instead of mediocre, which is evident through your impotent internet rage. And frankly at the end of the day people are only as oppressed as they choose to let themselves be.

          4. Silence’s not a Vampire and women aren’t lycanthropes. You however are a Jackass and everyone can see that. Well done, your out and proud, fascist.

          5. Are you really that desperate that you are following me around? Stalking is an offense in some countries.

          6. its called disqus… Two clicks and all your inane, incoherent posts are there for the world to see.

      1. Aww are you following me now? That’s cute. Just what I always needed, a little homophobic cunt to walk around in my shadow and be ridiculed.

        1. You don’t have the intellect to ridicule me. You are a poser. Someone claiming to have graduate degrees that never learned to spell.

          1. Really? I’m pretty sure I’m doing a beautiful job ridiculing some little loser on the internet who hasn’t the intelligence to background check their role model, or the intellectual parity or honesty to not follow a sociopathic con-artist. I can only assume you are either a blind ideologue, worthy of ridicule no different than any young earth creationist, or a psychopathic authoritarian parasite. Either way, I’m sure you get far in life. Unless being a nasty, pathetic little internet troll is the sum total of your existence, in which case you are doing MAGNIFICENTLY.

          2. I dont care who she is. Are you that clouded in your judgement? I was attacking your your lack of substance in your posts.. And you inept rhetoric and inability to spell… A surely tell tale sign of NOT someone with multiple graduate degrees.

            You were doing victory laps without even attempting to justify it logically.

            And for the record. Yeah you are right. My comments about your sexuality were pathetic.

            And i regret them…

            I had too much wine…

            But apart from that my main points about your delusion of being some kind of critically thinking crusader still stand.

            Some of the stuff you said was pathetic.

            And again. My comments about you being the third persuasion were pathetic.

            And i know it…

            And i apologize.

        2. Ever lord needs a jester, now you have your own jester…. Sure its a little backwards, most people get the fiefdom first.

          1. Indeed, I could use a little fool wandering around to help me look even better by contrast.

          1. Homophobic coward. You know what’s worse that your made up claims of misogyny? documented claims of violence against a gay person, with a clearly expressed hatred of gays in the threat. :O

            If you want to have a slap fight over who’s had it harder (heh), gays or women, you’ll learn first hand just WHY the SJWs shitlords stopped trying to speak on our behalf a long time ago.

          2. I lived in the gay ghetto of a major north american city for half a decade.

            I am well versed in the phenomenon of men of your persuasion being angry and bitter over the attention that the lesbian community get. Its a strange and unexpected source of misogyny… But it exists in spades.

          3. “Fags need to die!”


            “I’m not a bigot!”

            “I live near you people!”

          4. Yeah i grew up in a city where the LGTB community actually got somewhere… They where relegated to a ghetto but it thrived. And now they cannot be ignored. Biggest pride parade in NA…

          5. I see how you put the T in front of the B. Yeah, no. LGB, T, you know which one of those things doesn’t have anything to do with the other? Transgender. Every transgender person I’ve met is either “straight” or flat out fucking crazy. Go to a gay bar sometime, you might see some Female to male, but I cannot recall the last time I’ve ever seen a male to female. And frankly, we worked too hard as a community to let a hyper minority co-opt people being able to love and be attracted to who they are without facing discrimination. Pro Tip: There’s a reason a lot of transgender people will pay $$$ to go over to Thailand rather than get the surgery done in the U.S. The reason is that in the U.S., because gender dysphoria is a real psychiatric condition and people have to go through a minimum waiting period (to try and keep them from killing themselves when they get the surgery and realize it didn’t resolve their emotional/identity issue) before they can undergo what is tantamount to very aggressive cosmetic surgery.

            And I don’t see where you allegedly grew up having anything to do with excusing your previous, ignorant, homophobic comments. What do you mean by “got somewhere”? Where precisely where they supposed to be going? There are these things, called laws, that ensure equal protection. We get them passed, and then we put assess in jail until people act fucking correctly. Problem solved. And bitch no one is “relegated” to the ghetto – you live where you can afford to or you move the fuck away and you find another job. No one is making anyone stay anywhere – this isn’t the 13th century. You don’t understand the purpose of Pride one bit, typical straight person who thinks they get what it’s like to have to hide and feel ashamed for being who you are.

            How about your remind me of the last time a women had to hide the fact she had a vagina and be ashamed for it in your life experience? I’ve never met a woman who grew up hating herself because she had a vagina.

            In fact, I’ve only ever met women who’ve had it pretty fucking good because of how many laws there are to protect them and how hypersensitive people are about political correctness. Unless you’re ascribing to that “washed up has been” school of though espoused by Rose McGowan who in a desperate plea to stay relevant took a shot at the gay community with her homophobic ass cause gay man don’t give two fucks about some women crying about how “he tried to kiss me and it made me uncomfortable (therefore it’s somehow rape)” and shit like “trigger warnings”. It’s called take your ass to therapy and get the fuck over it; people who’ve actually suffered their entire lives haven’t got time for people with their 1st world problems and their constant appropriation in a pathetic attempt to get special treatment they don’t deserve.

          6. And you’re a bigoted, homophobic, sexist asshole. I’d say, “even”, but we’re not remotely close.

  15. I’ll just be honest, the way the article is written, it is not going to be the smoking gun we all want it to be. He may have uncovered what we all already knew, but it needs to be presented with all the details in tact, and with pictures or video that show exactly what is being talked about for it to be a self-evident, undeniable truth that we can spread to skeptics.

    Even someone following his links and sources and just rephrasing it in more concise, and obvious fashion would be worth it.

    I expect that people will start to make videos on this content. Thunderfoot needs to hit this.

  16. Please let this be fo’ real fo’ real. I can’t stand to hear about this “feminist” any longer. I think critique from a feminist-perspective could be good/helpful for games as a whole, but not if it’s this new “progressive” (I prefer “american progressive”) aka SJW aka professional victim kinda stuff.

    I hope Anita will be replaced by someone better.

  17. Jordan Owen made this link to her and Baggett a long, long time ago. It was shrugged off then. It will be shrugged off again.

  18. Not to be ‘that guy’ but I saw these videos over a year ago, and in fact numerous YouTube commentators even referenced these videos in their own videos. It’s very very old news. I support the sentiment however. Keep fighting the good fight #GamerGate

  19. The reason why Anita can be debunked over and over and have it not phase her as much as we would like is because she is the prototype of internet 21st century feminist activism. She is the movements internet champion and you can bet your asses very high profile feminists have been watching her closely and taking notes.

    She has been backed by the likes of Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti, Jaclyn Friedman(WAM) and others. She gained a massive amount of influence very fast, people are waking up to her bullshit.

    She plagiarized lets play videos with footage and apparently stole art that wasn’t hers.

    Notice how she chalks it up to “I missed the email” when the artist contacted her about the “stolen art” after several times of not answering the artist emails once she got the fiasco signal boosted.

    Personally, I think she’s in trouble, #gamergate has opened a lot of eyes toward her bullshit. It is all downhill for her from here.

    1. Unfortunately there are a lot of eyes that remain closed to her and most of the other side of anti-GG’s horseshit. My brother’s gaming group in college is a good example. I got into it with him about this over thanksgiving. “Our group is all about equality. All we see is harassment and bullying from GamerGate. People like Anita Sarkeesian and blah blah are harassed and chased out of their homes”.

      I hate feeling disappointed in my own brother, but… I’m hella disappointed. He always had a knack for looking past the bullshit on things but he’s not on this.

      Anita’s NLP horseshit in action? I don’t honestly know. But I do know of a group of at least 60 or so people who meet every friday that at least 2/3s believe her shit.

      Like I said. Disappointing.

      1. The way ones vocal tone is modulated, it’s pitch etc, are all a means to keep the listener calm and relaxed.. which then allows deeper penetration (it’s the same reason why you can’t reason with an angry person, or someone already entrenched in a particular mindset). Choose the right words and it’s a very powerful tool of persuasion.

        1. It’s basically a ripoff of certain parts of hypnosis, marketed under a different name.

          After awhile it becomes less persuasive, especially if you understand the word patterns used – Then its a red flag for a scam artist. lol

      2. “Anita’s NLP horseshit in action?”

        We can see an example of her work in her Kickstarter video. Jordanowen42 covered this – “Anita Sarkeesian The Early Years Part 2” (Part 2 deals just with the kickstarter video and the phrases, part 1 deals with the background info, similar to the above article)

  20. Feminist SJW’s deep down they really know Anita is not telling the truth, yet they swarm around it dreaming of that utopian world where everything is filtered by their own insanity.

  21. Anita Sarkeesian’s past doesn’t matter because of her contributions now. That comes from the same people who say Gamergate can’t do good for charity and expect it to wipe out their past misdeeds. It is literally all about double standards with those morons. That’s why they’ll never get the message. No point engaging them, leave them to carry on shooting themselves in the foot while we make real world progress such as with the FTC. 🙂

  22. Its embarrassing for the crap she spouts get lumped in with “feminism” because feminism isn’t just a joke. there are some real issues that they do raise but people like her who hide behind that label and make the entire group of us look less credible.

  23. and… IT’SF***INGNOTHING.GIF again

    every single time #GamerGate comes out with some MIND-BLOWING REVEAL, which is now like several times in the past week, as if in some desperate attempt to not be buried by Ferguson or something, there’s absolutely no substance to it. it’s gotten to the point where I feel like it would be statistically more likely for #GamerGate to stumble into something legit, just from the sheer number of SHOCKING EXPOSES, but none of it ever is.

    she worked with some PUA guy AT SOME POINT IN HER LIFE. big whoop. we know nothing about what happened between then and now. now she can never change her views? now we’re gonna pull the intolerant SJW nonsense of it’s literally impossible to redeem yourself from your past associations?

    come on. if she were working for this guy NOW, she’d be a fraud.

  24. While I agree this information is “the smoking gun” in the story of Sarkeesian, this news has been out forever on Jordanowen42’s youtube channel under Anita Sarkeesian The Early Years Part 1 & Part 2 – He even goes through her kickstarter video and finds around 60 NLP phrases embedded in her video…. Hopefully we get more of said investigation of Anita when the Sarkeesian Effect is released.

    I’d love to see a reporter ask her about said “coincidence”.

  25. I would willingly pay good money to have this smeared all over every single news network around the world. As well as showing evidence that Quinn faked death threats against herself. After all if she did she basically threatened public facilities even if the tweets were fakes. If this were to happen 3 waves would start to crumble under that weight of how stupid and naive they have been.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *