RealGamerNewz - We Are Nex Gen

Anita Sarkeesian gets exposed as a fraud by Stephen Colbert

By Alexander Hinkley in Articles

anita3

Anita Sarkeesian went on The Colbert Report on Wednesday to talk about GamerGate, her perceived sexism in the video game industry, and the allegedly nonstop misogynistic harassment she’s received from gamers. She ended up getting a little more than she bargained for, however, and her appearance on the show made her look extremely bad (you can see her interview in this clip on the Comedy Central YouTube channel).

Many third wave feminists, Social Justice Warriors, and even other news outlets rejoiced after her appearance saying she “hit it out of the park” and (for the second or perhaps third time now) declared GamerGate was dead. This analysis shows that they are ignorant of what The Colbert Report is and does. The very fact other media was “signal boosting” anything on Colbert to begin with should have been a red flag. Normally Colbert and the media are not the best of friends.

The Colbert Report is satirical humor which frequently mocks the mainstream media for doing lazy and usually inaccurate reporting. When Colbert showed clips and headlines from mass media outlets categorizing GamerGate as a hate group harassing women, this wasn’t to inform his audience of the facts. It was to show how one-sided and absurd these news stories are. This is what The Colbert Report has been doing in the entire nine years of its existence. The show didn’t suddenly fall out of form for this one story in which it reversed positions and sided with the mass media. So viewers of the interview need to first understand that going into this coverage, the Report was already implying it legitimately was  pro-gamergate and the true object of ridicule here are the SJWs.

Then Colbert got to the interview with Anita herself. True to form he did crack several jokes using gamers and GamerGate as the punchline. Namely saying gamers were probably shocked women were talking to them at all and then his “separate but equal games” line. Both were good zingers which I will admit I laughed at. Feminists and SJWs mistakenly and quite ignorantly thought this meant Stephen must actually be anti-gamergate. He’s mocking gamers so he must be anti-GG right? Not so fast. Recall that Colbert is satire. In every episode he uses things that deep down he supports as punchlines for jokes. Colbert has mocked Dungeons & Dragons and the nerds who play it many times but Stephen is (or at least was) an avid D&D player in real life.

In his interviews over the years, you can usually see through the facade and determine Stephen’s true stance by judging the questions he is asking and what kind of information he beckons out of his guest. This is what you must analyze to see if Colbert is truly pro or anti gamergate.

And what you find is that he pretty much grilled her with questions that make her position look incredibly weak. Because he invited Anita on the show, he did catch himself a few times and relent, perhaps thinking he was being too harsh. For example, when Anita was talking about the damsel in distress trope and stated that damsels should be able to save themselves, Colbert started to mention we already have games like that (seen at 1:30 in the clip linked above). He stopped himself, shrugged, and simply quipped “I didn’t know you brought a posse,” remarking at the crowd’s highly unusual applause. This looked like a momentary slip from character where he was about to argue against his guest based on his actual thoughts but caught himself and stopped.

Immediately after that he brought up the Utah State University threat which caused her to cancel her talk there. He asked her about it, she said it happened, and then the interview clearly cuts to a different segment of the interview of him asking about something else. The USU threat is simply glossed over with nothing more than a passing mention. Is this an indication the editing team (and thus by extension the show itself) found this wasn’t actually pertinent information or that her explanation wasn’t credible (just like law enforcement officials said the threats posed absolutely no risk to students, staff, or her in a statement the day before her scheduled talk). This apparently wasn’t the only cut in the interview. An unverified comment on the KotakuInAction subreddit from someone who alleges he was at the taping of the show says that a lot of the truly hard questions were cut from the final airing and that Anita did not look at all happy with how things went. Again, this is unverified but judging by how any in-depth discussion about the USU incident was obviously cut, it does lend credence to the idea a lot of other stuff was as well.

Colbert then asked her to specifically name games she thought were sexist. She wouldn’t. He challenged her to name three games. This should be no problem considering all the games she talked about in her YouTube series videos. And yet she STILL refused to name any sexist games. This was puzzling. Perhaps she couldn’t remember the names of offending games that Jonathan McIntosh wrote in her Tropes vs. Women script (fun fact: McIntosh is the producer and writer of that series so things Anita is saying on video were actually written by him and aren’t necessarily her thoughts or research).  This seems pretty unlikely considering all the talks she’s given but why else wouldn’t she name any? Perhaps she thought that if she publicly called out blockbuster game franchises on national television as sexist, too many people in the “real world” would see she has no idea what she’s talking about because anybody who has played these games know the clips are cherry-picked. She begrudgingly did name one, Grand Theft Auto, the safest possible game to name since it is often scrutinized for its violence and adult themes.

So basically Anita didn’t say anything of any substance on the show.

A second reason her appearance on The Colbert Report reveals her as a fraud is the very fact she appeared in the first place. Anita supported the #cancelcolbert hashtag back in April. For those unfamiliar with it, it was a hashtag created by a Social Justice Warrior named Suey Park who accused The Colbert Report of being racist for a stereotypical Asian character he used in a few episodes. Park obviously got a ton of hate from Colbert fans who had the audacity to call her overly sensitive ideas “stupid.” Sarkeesian added her voice to the movement by tweeting out an article written by Katherine Cross which heavily supported Suey Park. Not only that, Anita highlighted excerpts from the article on her Feminist Frequency website which literally called Colbert fans the “virtual embodiment of the patriarchy’s crowdsourced police…”

anita

Then on another Feminist Frequency blog post highlighting yet another apparently important excerpt from Katherine Cross’s “must read” article on the subject, she literally uses the #CancelColbert hashtag!

anita2

So it is clear that Anita supported Suey Park and the #cancelcolbert movement and that she agrees Colbert viewers are the embodiment of the patriarchy. Why then would she want to go on his show? Not only go on it but seemingly be star struck when she gets there! She took pictures behind Colbert’s desk, standing side by side with Stephen, and was noticeably giddy during her interview with him. It was as if she had a crush on the man. But just six months ago she wanted him canceled!

It seems that Anita is not truly fighting for ideals she strongly believes in that will better society but is actually in it for the publicity and simply to further her career as a professional speaker. There is quite a bit of other evidence for this. For example, check out this video where a young Anita gives a video testimonial about a teleseminar conference she attended or this video with juxtaposed clips of her saying she is a gamer then saying she is not a gamer. Based on the fact she recently wrote the statement “Even though I was playing lots of games, I still didn’t call myself a ‘gamer'” in her article on the New York Times just a few days ago we’d have to conclude the latter is true and that she doesn’t consider herself a gamer.

But back to the point at hand. Anita was clearly willing to stuff all of her principles about wanting the show canceled in the trash and go on anyway because it was national television. This is the big time! She’s made it! But you have to wonder, if she didn’t really care about #cancelcolbert and yet she was supporting it, what other ideas is she falsely supporting in order to further her career and gain supporters under the guise of social justice?

Editor’s Note: The views expressed in this article are that of the author and may / may not represent views of the rest of RGN Staff / our audience. This article will not be removed and all takedown requests will be ignored.

Follow RealGamerNewz: YouTube | Facebook | Twitter | Google+ | RSS
  • Days

    Awesome article!! I too thought she seemed giddy/flustered. And also I came away thinking that Colbert thought what she was saying with her whole “video games make you sexist!!!” schitck was a load of bs since he said “i play mario kart but don’t drop banana’s out the back of my car”….. but hey… she and her followers think they’ve “won” and that gamergate is “dead” .. um, I can’t see how that’d be the case at all! She just looked silly!

    • Lt_dan

      If you watched the Colbert report, you’d know how full of shit this article was. Colbert acted as if he was on the side of the misogynists the whole time. The first thirty seconds was to inform people on gamergate considering a large percentage of his viewership would not know what gamergate is.

      • A Nut

        I honestly can’t take away from it as him siding one way or the other. He’s such a professional at satire and comedy, it’s hard to tell if he was being P.C. or not.

  • demfax

    #GamerGate for life. Feminists need to be pushed out of the industry.

    • REALLY?

      Congratulations, you just proved her right.

      • TacticalBigBoss

        no he didnt really… people like her should leave the industry… NOT every female in the industry… video games are a art and just as we dont tell a artist what he or she may or may not paint then video game devs should not be told what they can or cant not have in their games… nuff said.

      • Display Name

        No? She’s saying #gamergate wants women out of the industry. Not feminists or ideologues.

    • The whole nation is sighing at the irrational arguments of #GamerGate

      You guys are seriously lost. It’s weird because I don’t remember taking a time machine back to the men-are-better-than-women era.

      • Display Name

        Peeps are collating the radfems with the regular fems. Same as folks who say all Muslims are bad when its just a incredibly small minority being shitty.

    • LlamaAdventure

      Feminists can stay in the industry, and the radfems and Tumblr feminists can even churn out as many preachy, inclusive-for-the-sake-of-inclusivity walking simulators and choose-your-own-adventures as they want. There’s obviously an audience for that, however small, and they can sit in their little corner while everyone else gets their Street Fighter or Call of Duty on. It’s when they start pushing to change other people’s games to fit their ideals and make their voice the ONLY voice that it becomes a major problem.

  • Bob

    You’re a fucking idiot, you know that, right?

    • Brett

      You mad?

      • Bob

        You Stupid?

  • Dirk

    I would say trying to cancel his show and then going on it means she is a hypocrite in some form or fashion, but not necessarily what you paint her out to be. I have also watched Colbert’s show and HE IS A RACIST. Colbert is a person who made final comments on his show equating terrorism with all Muslims despite the fact that you have plenty of terrorists that espouse other religions or no religion at all. If that was probably satire by Colbert as intimated by the article writer here then Colbert isn’t very funny.

    • Brian

      To be fair the Quran has many violent verses. One I recall, Quran (2:191-193), specifically calls for violence against non believers.

      “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing…
      but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah]”

      That by definition is terrorism. Now you are right, not ALL terrorists are Muslim, but by definition the Muslin religion promotes terrorism.

      • Dirk

        You can attempt to take a literal interpretation of the Bible and find the same type of statements. The Muslims expert on that episode I saw most of whom were not Muslims themselves told him to take it literally was a mistake. Of course Colbert didn’t listen, talked over his panel, and wouldn’t allows others to disagree with him.

      • Tarek

        This is the greatest pack of BS I have read to date, putting aside the MDW joke sold by Bush. The translation sounds like it was made by a 5 year old boy.

        First, this verses are to be interpreted within their context. That is when Quraishi ( polytheists) started a war against those who rejected their cult and embraced Islam who called for monotheism. they were persecuted and exiled from their homes. So God authorize them to fight back. and God said also that if they stop fighting you, then you must stop fighting them, or it would be considered as an Unjust deed.

        Other BS is your interpretation of the world “Fitnah”. No. It’s not “disbelief”. It means “dissidence” which can destroy a country. So God asks the believers to fight the dissidence because it is worse that a killing, which make sense, because the killing affect just one or few people, but the dissidence during war can lead to a genocide.

        • Tarek the Idiot

          you do know what a dissident is right ? anyone who does not believe in what you believe, so YES it can easily mean “nonbelievers”.

          • Tarek

            Insult is the weapon of the weak-minded…

            I meant “Dissension” and not Dissidence. whiche means: riot, discord, civil strife.

            Now go _________________ for the sake of God.

    • dirk2

      Saying that someone is “racist” is not an argument.
      Also , when you say:

      ” If that was probably satire by Colbert as intimated by the article writer here then Colbert isn’t very funny.”

      Humor is subjective.

      Finally , you say:

      “Colbert is a person who made final comments on his show equating terrorism with all Muslims despite the fact that you have plenty of terrorists that espouse other religions or no religion at all.”

      And how is that racist ? Is being “muslim” a race ? If so , do you include christianity into the mix ?

  • SSJ_Nugget

    Great article. I’m glad there are ones like this out there.
    No, no one should make threats to someones life for their beliefs, but when someone is making changes to an industry that are completely unnecessary to be in the spotlight, they should most certainly get called out on it. I hope she gets what she deserves.
    Now when I say unnecessary, I don’t mean jack about women’s rights. You want more female empowered games? Get a damn job in the industry. It’s just like politics, right? Want to make a change for the better? Get in and change the system from the inside. She’s doing it, but it’s all for herself.

  • Jonasen

    Though I don’t agree with Anita, when reading your article I found a reason for why she wouldn’t name drop games. She might be scared of hindering work an collaborations with the publishers of said games in the future (as well as just having a brain freeze when on national television). Though this makes here more of a hypocrite than ignorant, since she would rather collaborate and earn money then stand by her ideals.

    I think discussions on female in gaming (both their characters, in development and as part of the online community) is wanted, but having radical feminists lay down the “rules” for what is considered misogynistic is a bad starting point, and will put more moderate people from the discussion as well as bait trolls to join in.

  • corvusmd

    Admittedly I have not paid much attention to the whole gamergate stuff. It seems like just another cheap attempt to grab attention and create an issue out of nothing. Studies recently have shown that there are more women gamers than male gamers (if you include mobile and FB style games), there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of gamers around the world, unless she has at least 1 million people threatening her and trying to push women out of gaming (which I’ve never heard of a single person ACTUALLY trying to do that….most guys love gamer girls…pushing them out seems counter-productive), then really she is just trying to make an issue out of the EXTREME minority. I have no stats to back this up but based on personal experience, I’d say there are a lot more women that make fun of men for gaming and try to get men to stop gaming.

    As far as the “death threats” and such….again I haven’t been paying close attention, but I heard those were a hoax, and judging by everything else I do know about this…I’m inclined to believe that. Watching the video, she doesn’t look good in it at all. She admits that there is a wide world of gaming with all sorts of games approachable to everyone…yet she wants to attack ones that SHE personally doesn’t like…and claim that it’s because men are being misogynistic. Men are allowed to be men, women are allowed to be women….stop being upset when they have found things they are attracted to. “Feminisim” these days really has little to do with equality, and more to do with trying to control others, and telling them they are “wrong” for having a different opinion. My job has a lot to do with reading body language and reading into what people are saying (without knowing they are saying it). I do NOT get ANY indication from her that she has a true well-intentioned goal in mind. Her emotions aren’t in the right place. It’s all about how she is being attacked and how it’s these faceless misogynistic men that are keeping her down….oh wait…not men….a “boy’s club” that isn’t giving “dignified women” their due respect. Well she’s all about fairness…so does that mean that if men can’t look at women and appreciate their beauty that women can’t be attracted to men for their money and prestige? Not all guys play games because it has scantily clad women…I can’t remember the last time I did actually. All the games I play with women actually portray those women as strong women…most of the time, much stronger than they should be in real life. If ANYTHING, videogames have created a world where women are actually more equal to men than it is in real life (physically at least)….you mean to tell me little Chun Li would last even a second with any of those guys she fights? Or Lara Croft would fight off waves of mercenaries and gods? Or that Jill Valentine would survive SEVERAL Zombie Hordes?

    Based on the amount I know….this whole thing seems like a fraud….it’s focusing on the extreme I minority to create something out of nothing. I hope the gaming community stops giving it attention soon.

  • RB31

    I have to ask, while I appreciate your detailed article, and cannot disagree to the possibility of film editing( because it happens all the time), I’d like to know (whether you agree with Anita or not) whether you support/appreciate/acknowledge the conversation? That is to say the feminist analysis of portrayals of women in video games, as a fundamental and important step in hearing other voices outside of “gamer” culture.

    • No I don’t. Talking about illusionary problems that aren’t real divert attention and energy away from solving the actual problems within the industry so in the end you’re accomplishing nothing of worth. We already have plenty of strong female characters. Gaming is not sexist. Gaming is, however, corrupt. And THAT’S the problem we should be trying to solve.

      • Lord Monbodo

        Hi, I’m a gamer who’s new to this whole Gamer Gate thing. I don’t really pay attention to these sorts of things but I was really interested in hearing how the industry is corrupt.

        I was wondering if you could explain how gaming is corrupt. Are we talking about exploiting underpaid workers in Latin America? Embezzling retirement funds? Stealing the intellectual property of young designers trying to get their big break? I’ve gotta know.

        • Solkard

          GamerGate started as a protest for transparency in gaming journalism. It was backlash against leaked evidence of collusion between different media outlets to present a communally agreed upon opinion among all the media sites, rather that individual opinions of each particular site. This was just the icing on decades of allegations of coersion and bribery amongst media outlets and publisher/developers.

          Things took a turn for the worse when the information that was presented focused attention on certain a female game developer who allegedly had sexual relations with members of the media, which may or may not have resulted in publicity or favorable reviews of their afflicated games.

          After female individuals were dragged into the discourse, the ensuring arguments for and against such individuals shifted the subject of GamerGate from media and industry corruption to cultural sexism.

          If I’m speaking in uncertain terms, it’s because a lot of the “evidence” presented is accusation and defense are contested by either side. A lot of it is also based on interpretations, just like this article. Pro-GamerGate people see it to mean one thing, Anti-GamerGate people see it as another.

          The thing I find the saddest is the utter intollerence shown by members of either side. Neither side is completely wrong in all their ideals. But then neither side is willing to reach for some sort of middle ground; it’s one or the other. If you’re not already involved, I’d suggest you stay away from the whole derailed mess.

  • VideoChums

    How come people seem to be more upset by sexism in video games than the equal (if not more) amount of sexism on TV and in movies? I say just play games and have fun and if you get offended then play something else since the vast majority of games are not sexist. In other words, if you actively look for sexism then you will find it, but if you do that then you’re not seeing the big picture.

  • duh

    what, a girl saying anything and everything on camera to try and get famous….. now way, that’s just not possible……..

  • Brett

    This guy can article!

  • Roxie

    So, white is black and up is down, now?

    I can’t see how you can possibly view this segment as advocating for #GamerGate. Colbert was totally supporting Sarkeesian, not mocking her. Really, just accept the hit and realize that most uninvolved people see #GG in a negative light no matter how hard you spin the media coverage to be in your favor. #GG has lost the PR war when it took the focus off of ethic and on to harassing a few individuals. And if you look at how many Tweets Sarkeesian received after Colbert calling her a “cunt”, the harassment just continues.

    It’s really bad that #GG are so emotional and lash out instead of talking about the issues that concern. They make this dispute personal and Sarkeesian is only getting attention because of the harassment she received which is due to trolls. So, if you dislike her, blame the trolls…she wouldn’t have been in the NYTimes or on Colbert if it wasn’t for trolls calling in bomb and shooting threats. They made her famous.

  • HinkleyHadAVision

    You gamergate morons are as delusional as everybody says you are apparently. Then again what does anybody expect from this garbage site.

    • Pauly from Bensonhurst

      Yes….let the butthurt flow through you…can you feel it pulsing through your veins?

  • Anonymous

    This is what Gamergaters consider “ethical” journalism? This headline is worse than clickiest Kotaku clickbait. Also for a site called “realgamernewz” I don’t see any distinction between “newz” and “editorialz”. For shame.

  • SMH

    This is possibly the funniest thing I’ve read online all day. Apparently the author here has never seen Colbert, or perhaps doesn’t understand the concept of satire. Colbert plays a character who pretends to be these things (another commenter mentioned how Steve is a RACIST and compared all Muslims to terrorists) to mock them. Think of him as a meta Rush Limbaugh. It’s articles like these that simultaneously give me hope and cause me distress. They give me hope because I realize how reductionist and simple the thinkings of the pro-Gamergate crowd is, and then it causes distress when I realize… well, I assume that anyone in this camp has GOT to be too young to think in another person’s perspective and thusly, *sigh*, they are the future of gamers.

    I’ve been gaming my entire life and I’ve never been so embarrassed to admit I do. Cut it out, guys. Grow up.

  • Mark

    White men stay in their feelings about the dumbest shit. I can’t.

  • DT

    This just needs to die already. Both sides are making both sides look terrible, but only to either side. Nothing is going to change.

    Feminist want more strong female characters? Make them. The gaming industry is a boys club because there are more boys that play and develop games, and it’s been like that for ages. You have to appeal to the right market to be successful. It’s not purposely trying to be exclusive.

    Boys make games for boys, what’s wrong with that? Seems incredibly sexist to try to shame male developers into making female-friendly games. Females have an equal opportunity to develop games for whatever crowd they want, so exercise that right instead of trying to limit the rights of others.

  • Logical_mayhem

    I saw the interview and I did not come away with same take as you. He (Colbert the person, not his tv character) was, for the most part, on her side. And believe me, I watch him every day, have since his show aired, so don’t say I don’t understand who he’s satirizing. Maybe he didn’t think the issue was as extreme as she does, but he at least thinks she’s got a solid point. It’s clear when he thinks someone is a complete joke. Those people don’t get a desk-side interviews. They don’t get leading, nice questions. That picture in your article says a lot. When was the last time he interviewed some ignorant pro-deportation nut, then appeared in a smiling picture with him after? Never.

    And the fact that you seem so passionate about this says a lot man. You think she doesn’t know what she’s talking about? Fine. So then ignore her. That you felt the need to write a long detailed article examining every inch of a short 5 minute interview, that you seem obsessed about making sure to “expose” her, it’s hard not to see the exact type of sexism she speaks about. You think games aren’t sexist and she’s wrong? Then just keep playing and stop worrying about her.

    • Gamer27

      There’s nothing wrong with engaging in a discussion with someone you think is wrong. That’s how dialogue works.

      • Logical_mayhem

        Fair enough, you’re right; I shouldn’t just said “ignore her” as engaging in real discussions with those that disagree with you is something this country needs more of. That’s why I’m responding. But that’s not what this author is doing. He’s got a fairly obvious agenda here. He’s seeing what he wants to see in that Colbert interview. And I don’t even really care about Anita. I’m more defending Colbert because this author is misportraying Colbert’s views to advance his own agenda. Go back and watch the interview. At one point he asks about the foundation of gamergate being about ethics in game journalism, and he compares it to Hollywood journalism, asking something to the effect of “if we can’t trust TMZ who can we trust?”. This sets up Anita for a fairly easy response about how it’s not about journalistic ethics, it’s about misogyny. And you see author responds in the comments section about how gaming is not sexist, end of story, with the real problem being the corrupt gaming industry. That is completely at odds with Colbert’s point, yet he came away from seeing the interview as if Colbert was on his side. That’s someone with an agenda.

        Look, agree or disagree with Anita, I’ve got no issues there. You’re not a sexist for disagreeing with her about the state of the gaming industry. Where the author (and many of the commenters here) really expose themselves is how casually they dismiss the threats of violence, death, and rape that Anita, Brianna Wu, and other women in the industry have faced. The author says the harassment is “alleged” and makes her seem like the bad guy in the USU threat. In another article this author digs up an example of how a random student created a false account to post fake threats against herself. I’m not saying that one example of fake threats isn’t true, but you can’t just hand wave away the thousands of threats and misogynistic comments many other women have faced. You have to agree there are some seriously sick assholes out there. Death threats like the USU threat? Ok it wasn’t a real threat, but that is serious shit. How many of you have had threats like that come your way? None, so you really need to shut the fuck up.

  • Deadpoolio

    What a full of shit article LMAO…..He did no such exposing and you could tell he was on her side if nothing else…WOW talk about the people she is talking about grasping at straws LMAO

    • Must be why he and his next guest were cracking jokes about how absurd the things Anita said were right? Because they were totally on her side. That other guest was just playing a character, too.

      • Logical_mayhem

        Are you talking about the woman who wrote the Wonder Woman book? They literally do not mention Anita or gaming once in that interview. Not a single time. You’re just digging the hole deeper for yourself. Just stop already.

    • Bob

      Such a desperate, desperate “article”.

  • Shaz

    I have to agree with the logical mayhem guy, I’ve been watching Colbert for a long time now and The picture of them posing together really does say a lot about whose “side” he was on. I don’t think Colbert understands GG for what it really is so I wouldn’t really discredit him because of it. She hides behind feminism to push an agenda in the gaming industry. There’s no way he could figure that out when he’s not passionate about the gaming industry. I think he just see’s the feminism part of it and is inclined to agree. The sad thing is, I know some true feminist that hate Anita because they see what I just outlined. She’s literally counter-intuitive to their cause because she uses it to push an agenda that has nothing to do with feminism. You don’t see men complaining about being portrayed as slobs, alcoholics, sexist pigs, or psychopathic killing machines with no personality in TV or games. Most women I know that do game, could careless about what fictional women wear or how they’re portrayed. Because it doesn’t effect anything in real life; that’s why men don’t care, and that’s why most women don’t care.

  • Iskelion

    Sadly i disagree, i watched and re-watched the interview and colbert really was on anita’s side, and he obviously didn’t quite make a background research about the issue at hand. Thunderf00t in his youtube video showed how different colbert treated sarkeesian compared to other figures….
    such a shame

  • Amal Iel

    “Ethics in journalism is not what’s happening, in any way.” Wow, for once I agree with Anita, though unfortunately she just misspoke in this case.

  • Brian Hull

    Colbert could not take her seriously that was very obvious. When he takes his guest seriously he asks pointed questions that contribute to their thesis, here he was pretending to make fun of gamers and actually making fun of Anita. She’s a media vampire at this point don’t think her feet will be on the ground any time soon. She started a great debate, but the adults will have to finish it.

  • Regressive Goosesteppers

    You’re giving Colbert way too much credit. He’s a hack propagandist and he wasn’t directing any degree of satire at Sarkeesian.

    • R McLaughlin

      Rofl. Pleb.

      • Regressive Goosesteppers

        LULZ Goosestepping retard.

  • Preedance

    This article makes you look like a fool. He’s treating her with the respect you ought to be regardless of whether her opinion is wrong headed or not.

    • Riviera

      Get a grip you mug… Respect is earned and she shows little to others, so why the hell should she automatically have anyone’s respect? White Knight spotted me thinks!

      • Elijah Wood

        I think your right, Me chump

      • Preedance

        Gamer Clone spotted me thinks. Respect is only ‘earned’ if you don’t know what matters, otherwise it’s lost. Sorry, mug is you.

        • Riviera

          No… Respect IS earned by treating others with respect. It’s a mutual thing, yet brainwashed femtards like yourself will continue to kiss her arse while all she does is lie, exaggerate and plagiarise… Oh and don’t forget the whole kickstarter scam.

          Do one you femtard zombie!

          • Preedance

            Practice what you preach. The self deceit of your post is stunning. If you want to know the meaning of respect start showing it to strangers on the Internet.

          • Riviera

            Flawed argument… You clearly lack the intelligence to discern why.

          • Preedance

            I’m not arguing, you idiot. I’m just pointing out, if you want people to earn your respect then learn to earn it yourself.

    • Rain Alexandria

      She doesn’t deserve respect, she’s scum.

      • Preedance

        Colbert was being wonderful, and cares about what it means to be good. Following the crowd is not – and also it would be humiliating to be cowed by the gamers into doing nothing about the extreme bullying in their ranks towards Anita.

        • Rain Alexandria

          Anita deserves it. She’s a scammer.

  • Ryan

    How do u actually think that colbert did anything but praise this girl for being a crazy liberal?

  • Steven Guy

    Sarkeesian is a con-artist scammer. She’s basically low life scum.

  • Regressive Goosesteppers

    So, Colbert kisses her ass like the Regressive propagandist he is, and because people still labor under the delusion that he’s a comedian, you’re mistakenly thinking he’s skewering her.

  • FreddyB

    Uhm, how is she getting away with using the money donated to her “charity” to fund her anti-Trump movement. Are not organizations that are given tax exemption from the IRS supposed to be non-partizan? Pretty damn sure the IRS woudn;t turn a blind eye if enough Americans filed the form avail at IRS website. I tried but it was plain out rejected because I am a Canadian. Not too sure why it would matter as all I was doing is letting them know someone is breaking the law.