GenjiKilpatrick

Member Profile

Birthdate: February 26th

Member Since: March 14, 2009
Last Power Points used: May 23, 2011
Available: now
Power Points at Recharge: 1   Get More Power Points Now!

Comments to GenjiKilpatrick

newtboy says...

I said "Don't be a smarmy dick"
Calm polite manner? This?
"GenjiKilpatrick said:
@newtboy
Don't Reply. Just Read. "
Calm, OK. Polite, not as I read it, it's kind of like trying to 'shut down comments', commanding a stranger to 'read this and don't reply', and is not polite IMO...especially when "this" is another unrelated comment. You brought me into that thread with that, no whining that I'm there.

Ahhhh, I see, the "cherry-picked strawman" argument is that you continue to ignore my clear, succinct, focused request for confirmation of a single point you made, and instead replied with a broad unrelated "she sucks" argument.
Well, OK, since I made it as clear as possible there was one detail I'm attempting to be discussing, and you continue on that line, that means that @Stormsinger is right, you can't be discussed with, and either can't comprehend that disagreement on a single detail doesn't mean opposition on every detail, or are trolling me.
Either way....
thanks for the discussion...for the fourth time I'll say that we can disagree on a tiny detail and be done now...good bye.
no reply necessary, but certainly allowed.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I think you mispelled my usersname there.

@newtboy @GenjiKilpatrick.

FTFY

Or did you miss the part where Newt called me a smarmy dick?

I approached this new thread in a calm, polite manner.

Then, when asked not to drag our personal debate into this new thread..

Newtboy proceeded to insult me & cherry-pick a strawman argument.

Two wrongs? Eye-for-an-eye? That's perfectly acceptable now?


This is why the videosift community is a joke.

newtboy says...

Only called you that when you told me how I must act/react as if you were my keeper/parent...I found that smarmy.
What strawman? Explain

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I think you mispelled my usersname there.

@newtboy @GenjiKilpatrick.

FTFY

Or did you miss the part where Newt called me a smarmy dick?

I approached this new thread in a calm, polite manner.

Then, when asked not to drag our personal debate into this new thread..

Newtboy proceeded to insult me & cherry-pick a strawman argument.

Two wrongs? Eye-for-an-eye? That's perfectly acceptable now?


This is why the videosift community is a joke.

newtboy says...

OK, re-read it...it said (among other things, and sorry to keep cut and pasting)...


Carrera is upset because:
Sar-sleaz-ian is an new-age-feminist hack who finds porn disgusting, and feels pity for any women who performs sex acts for money.
She belittles porn actresses like Mercedes & Cytherea as lowly abused victims.
Then, at Mercedes' request, refuses to support Cytherea when she ACTUALLY becomes a victim.
Yet, she denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".
This is why Sar-shittyhumanbeing-ian is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and [as Mercedes succinctly puts it] damaging gender relations.

Which to me all boiled down to me wondering if she's really that silly as to disenfranchise what I see as the most feminist of professions, or are some people just portraying one out of context quote that way, because I know there was a smear campaign against her that made some things up about her, and had other actual factual gripes, and they confused everything.

The reason I 'cherry picked' ONLY that part of the comment was that I already knew the rest of it from seeing evidence of it, her being a fraudster and con artist. I needed no convincing of that, and it had no bearing on the other point, which was new to me.
That's why I never disputed those other claims, so I don't feel I need to explain why they aren't implying all you said, and why evidence of them misses my focused question's point.
OK?

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Here's my original comment.

http://videosift.com/video/Porn-Actress-Mercedes-Carrera-LOSES-IT-With-Modern-Feminists#comment-1853296

Re-read it. Then explain why you'd cherry pick the legitimate claim that:

'[Sarkeesian] denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".'

Better yet, explain to me how my statement that:

'Anita is literally profiting off the fuax-oppression of women in gaming media & culture'

or

'This is why [Sarkeesian] is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and damaging gender relations.'

or

'Anita Sarkeesian is a troll and a puppet.'

or

'She's only stirring up shit to further her career.'

Explain to me how all these statements aren't implying, suggesting, connoting, alluding, proposing, insinuating that Anita Sarkeesian is a fraudster & a con-artist.

Please explain those two things. No more, no less.

newtboy says...

No...THAT'S the point you missunderstand....

Because someone doesn't automatically adopt your position about one specific statement of hers does not mean they say "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"
You're operating on the "you're either 100% with me, or 100% against me" mindset, which is hilarious since I'm about 98% with you about her.


You might understand that if you read my post where I repeat over and over that I'm not a fan of hers and think she's a terrible speaker/spokesperson. Instead you have taken the position that, because you didn't convince me of one point, I disagree with you on all other points and therefore I'm a vocal supporter of hers....um.....no....that's not how it works....duh.

It means you didn't prove your singular specific point.

Understand?

Just like I said to you here long ago...
newtboy says...

I will say I do recall her being caught faking/making misleading videos about game footage, so I do think she is at least probably a fraud.
I also know she's terrible about constantly being insulting, even to those she's courting. Not good.
I don't want you to keep thinking I'm her supporter, I just need evidence I feel is trustworthy if I'm to make a judgment about the anti-porn star thing...it's just weird and anti-feminist.


Period.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Oh and as to "Obviously Mercedes Carrera is trolling if Sarkeesian views are so well known"

NO! That's the point.

Just because YOU & Carrera are unfamiliar with Sarkeesian's fraud..

Doesn't mean you can automatically assert that "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"

newtboy says...

You didn't say "she's a fraud"
you didn't say "she's a con artist"
You said she degrades and denigrates sex workers...so show me more than the single quote 'prostituted women' to prove it, or is that really all you got, like I'm beginning to believe?

Just read the titles of your videos and see that not one is on that topic, not one.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Open Letter to VideoSift:

Please don't support Anita Sarkeesian.

She's a con-artist whose tactics are damaging to the issues, causes, & movements she claims to advocate.

Here's my evidence:
http://videosift.com/video/Porn-Actress-Mercedes-Carrera-LOSES-IT-With-Modern-Feminists#comment-1854142

If anyone can succinctly explain how her history, tactics & actions don't amount to fraud, I'll concede & never speak out about her on the sift again.

Otherwise, I feel like it's an imperative to inform everyone - who finds her or her campaigns/messages relevant - of the behavior that Sarkeesian displays.

Con-artists should be called out.

No matter how politically progressive their platform might be.

Peace, happy debating.
Essie.

newtboy says...

I will say I do recall her being caught faking/making misleading videos about game footage, so I do think she is at least probably a fraud.
I also know she's terrible about constantly being insulting, even to those she's courting. Not good.
I don't want you to keep thinking I'm her supporter, I just need evidence I feel is trustworthy if I'm to make a judgment about the anti-porn star thing...it's just weird and anti-feminist.
I've spent more time thinking about her talking with you than I have the rest of my lifetime! LOL! ;-)
Enjoy,
Newt

newtboy says...

I thought your main (secondary) point was that she's a well known anti-sex worker/porn star that insults them with labels like 'prostituted women' and....well...and nothing, no other labels have been offered....so I guess she's NOT a well known anti-sex worker then? What IS your position? It's confusing.

I never have asserted any such thing about her, I only asked you to provide evidence of YOUR claims about her...I made none, so I have none to back up.
Again, I never asserted she was or wasn't anything, I did assert that your contention that she had no reason to disable comments or cancel one event except to silence critics, she had a very good reason besides that, and she didn't silence anyone because she held other events and (according to you) left open other venues for people to discuss her.
That's why your argument didn't hold water...and still doesn't, but you seem to have dropped that line and moved on to simply 'why do you love her' kind of strawman.

I'm defending nothing but truth in discussion, and your primary assertion ran contrary to that, and your secondary one needs confirmation one way or another.
I enable no one in that, but you might enable her supporters by putting forth easily dismissed reasons for disliking her. If you had good reasons you had shown me, I would dislike her (actually, I should say dislike her more, I've said time and time again I don't like her, I'm not a fan, she's a terrible spokesperson for anything)
So you can continue to ignore what I say and say I'm supporting and enabling a con artist if you wish, it won't make it true and only means you don't understand what I've said.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Oh and as to "Obviously Mercedes Carrera is trolling if Sarkeesian views are so well known"

NO! That's the point.

Just because YOU & Carrera are unfamiliar with Sarkeesian's fraud..

Doesn't mean you can automatically assert that "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"

That's the whole problem.

Most people are completely uninformed. That's how she gets away with her fraud!

You're defending a fraudster who is damaging gender relations and giving actual misogynists a leg to stand on.

That's why i'm so vested in this Newtboy.

You're enabling a con-artist.

newtboy says...

The thing here is, I don't have a bias about her, I barely have an opinion. I originally commented because you claimed she cut off her comments and canceled appearances solely to silence descent from her monologue. I disagree completely on that point, especially since she didn't cancel other public events afterwards, and I provided evidence that she had repeated disgusting, specific death and rape threats, giving her a legitimate reason to stop anonymous discussions online or to not have a public appearance where guns are 100%allowed even when specific death threats have been made about the specific event. EDIT: She even went so far as to petition the police to provide security and disallow firearms in the auditorium so she could continue with the scheduled appearance, but they steadfastly refused, THEN she canceled.
...But you ignore those threats and claim it was only about 'censorship' or 'silencing debate' because of your bias, your mind is made up, you think that she's wrong no matter how much evidence I put in front of you that there were other legitimate reasons for her actions. I did admit I was wrong about the police instructing her to cancel the appearance, but I still think it was the right thing to do (and I still can't believe the police actions in that instance...insane!).

As for her being anti sex worker, I have no opinion, I don't know, that's why I want evidence if I'm to have an opinion about her feeling on that subject. It seems wrong that someone who claims to be feminist would not see sex workers as empowered women, and I need to be convinced of something so illogical before I believe it, even about someone I don't' have a good overall opinion about....to convince me I need to hear from HER that those are her feelings about those women. If that's the case, it's terrible, but she's a terrible feminist, so no big surprise....I'm just not convinced yet....either way.

Again, IF her anti-sex worker stance is true, and publicly known (especially by sex workers) then this video was just a trolling attempt by the sex workers, because they know Sarkeesian is not a supporter!

GenjiKilpatrick said:

You're bias.

Your mind is made up.

You think that I'm wrong.

No matter how much evidence I plop in front of you.

It's okay. You're only human.

Night. Argue with you later!

newtboy says...

Well, I'll try to explain then.
I have a tendency to not take the word of someone that obviously has a pre-conceived opinion. The 'evidence' you provided was not ample...the written parts were nothing but commentary (and one was just commentary about Westborough Church) The videos were preceded by the explanation by the creator that they were simply nothing but re-edited videos made to say what he wanted, not reality. There's absolutely no reason to give such videos a look at all, so after the first one I didn't.
I refuse to acknowledge them because I found them lacking in actual EVIDENCE and full of nothing but comment and snark, and in the case of the videos, just admitted lies. I asked for evidence of her actions, not evidence that other people dislike her.
I tried watching that video last week, didn't like it, didn't finish it.
As I said repeatedly, I'm open to EVIDENCE, just not pure propaganda presented as evidence. That's all you've linked so far, propaganda. I have not seen a whit of EVIDENCE about her actions/statements involving sex workers from you yet.
If you care to provide some real evidence of her actions, not someone bitching about her, not someone taking 2 words she said and making a 10 minute video about what THEY say she meant. How about a single interview where SHE said something derogatory about sex workers. How about a single article where she's QUOTED saying something derogatory about sex workers...and as I've said I don't think the phrase "prostituted women" cuts it, that can be 100% non-derogatory if said in a non-derogatory way...so provide EVIDENCE, or give up trying to make me have an opinion about her...I really don't care a bit about her, and don't think she's a worthy spokesperson for anything...isn't that good enough for you? Does every thing she does have to be seen by everyone in a bad light? I don't see why.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I don't have any personal stakes in anything on videosift.

I'm just wonder what makes you think the way you do.

I've provided ample evidence.

You refuse to acknowledge it because your mind is set in stone.

Watch that CGP Grey video about mind viruses.

Or research the study that shows even tho during Obama's tenure, millions of jobs have been created..

People who dislike or disagree with Obama - even when shown the proof of job creation - refuse to acknowledge the millions of new positions that have re-open or been created. i.e. lantern, bobknight

You're bias.

Your mind is made up.

You think that I'm wrong.

No matter how much evidence I plop in front of you.

It's okay. You're only human.

Night. Argue with you later!

newtboy says...

You seem to have a high personal stake in getting someone who doesn't think at all about Sarkeesian to think about her in a bad light. Why is that, I wonder, and do you realize that bad publicity is better than none (for the publicized)?

newtboy says...

How would I know what the video was about if I didn't watch it. After the first one, that was nothing but a waste of my time, juxtaposing comments and (faked? Likely considering it's made my McIntosh who makes a living faking videos) web page screenshots, I ignored the other 4 assuming you put your best foot first.

So wait, you're saying the anti Sarkeesian "faked" video you linked was made by her 'partner'?!? WTF?!? Now that is odd.

Yes, we know she's a bad example of a 'feminist' trying to change gaming. I'm not a fan, as I've said repeatedly.

You contend she's also vocally anti-sex worker (waiting for the quoted proof)...which begs the question, if she IS a well known anti-sex worker activist, why would said sex workers go to her for support?! That means this entire video is based on a fraud, by the sex workers, pretending they thought she would 'support' a sex worker rape victim when they really were just trying to troll her because they don't like her stance...allegedly.

I'm still waiting for non-faked clear evidence of what you say about her to convince me....if you care. I simply don't, I haven't thought about her since gamer gate was in the daily news. Maybe she is totally anti-sex worker, fraud, liar, trixter, hustler...but you have not provided a whit of evidence to that effect beyond her use of the words "prostituted women", which carries the connotation you bring with you so is not proof of her distain.

I'm mid 40's, white, and lived (among many other places) in the murder capital of the world (East Palo Alto) when it was just that, the murder capital of the world (more murders per capita than anywhere on the planet in the late 80's) so sheltered is not a word I would use to describe myself. Untrusting of people who have an obvious bias, yes, I am certainly that, but I am always willing to examine new information with a critical eye (but not propaganda like the first set of videos you linked, or non sequiturs like the third article you linked) and I'm always willing change my viewpoint if it seems it's wrong in light of new evidence. I'm waiting for that evidence. The 3 articles you linked were 2/3 on topic, but amounted to only commentaries lambasting her for saying two words, that's not evidence of her tone/meaning when saying them, the third was completely off topic, as was the first video (the only one I wasted my time with) and I don't take the word of someone who obviously hates her with a passion as evidence, sorry.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Did you even watch the videos?

Even if you ignore the beginning with McIntosh stating "I 'politically remix' media to fit my agenda"..

The rest of that video is just screen captures of Sarkeesian's twitter.

Her twitter posts parrot those of McIntosh.

McIntosh & Sarkeesian are a couple. McIntosh the brains, Sarkeesian is the face.

She's not even a "gamer"!!

Google Sarkeesian + Exposed

Google Sarkeesian + teleseminar

Google Sarkeesian + early years

Google Sarkeesian + Bart Baggett

Sarkeesian is a troll. She's making money, nearly half a million, off it.

She's gone from "yearly income to monthly income", a phrase you'll recognize if you watch the Sarkeesian + teleseminar vids.

Sorry you can't wrap you head around my dislike of fraudsters.

I feel bad for you. You probably get caught up in ponzi schemes and duped by "homeless" women with babies on their hips.

I'm sorry, Newtboy, that you're so entrenched in your beliefs that you can't see my perspective.

Btw, how old are you? I'm a 27 black/hispanic male. I wonder about your life experience and what makes you so.. sheltered? gullible? trusting?

Anywho, thanks for contributing to the sift.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Member's Highest Rated Videos