Why Are You So Angry? Part 2: Angry Jack

Share this video on

What's Hot

What's New

Top Grossing

Top of the Chart

Recommend

Maxime Lebled : Amazing video, very articulate and informative. Keep up the good work!

InnerPartisan : Reiterating my praise: This is incredible. Can't wait for the next parts.

HippoCrit : this is pretty cathartic, i never really think about why i get angry. Seeing it put into words is nice, i feel like i understand myself a little better. I mean personally i don't agree with Anitas videos but i also don't get angry at them either. If i were to meet her in person i'd probably just tell her i'm not particularly a fan, or not mention it at all.

Sarah Clegg : Oh my goodness oh my gosh I think we've gone full mcintosh

Alex Krasny : Love it. Very well said. (I am vegan and atheist)

Westernden : The Amazing Atheist is about as likable as ebola.

Fal : I love the analogies you drew here. For me, it became a lot easier to rationalize being a feminist and liking problematic media when you simply take a step back and realize that no one is judging as long as you acknowledge that the stuff you like has problems. I play GTA V constantly. Does it gross me out? Yeah, all the time, but it's also pretty fucking fun. I hope the work of people like Sarkeesian, which, like you said, is just Feminism 101, encourages developers to better choices. If not, unless they do something that really offends me, I'll just keep buying their games and doing my best to call out what I think they could be doing better.

casersatz : Sargon clones in 5,4,3,2,1...

THRILLHO : This video touches on a much, much broader subject than just the Sarkeesian/Gamergate clusterfuck. It's kind of a shame it's relegated to being part 2 in a series like this. It asks enough worthwhile questions to be its own series. Either way, excellent work. Emphatic subscribe.

SheezyBites : I always find it weird when Americans talk about atheism as weird... in the UK the polar opposite is true and saying 'I'm Christian' gets much the same 'am I a bad person' response.

WizeOaldOwl : I've gotten quite a few looks from people when I tell them I don't drink alcohol, I guess because they think I'm judging them for doing so. Never mind the fact that I've often gone out with friends who were drinking because I wanted to hang out with them and have repeatedly offered to give rides home when they're a bit too drunk to drive safely. Nope, I'm just a judgmental prude who doesn't know how to "have a good time."

GigaBoost : "The atheist probably wasn't born an Atheist". Uh, I'm sure you must mean "wasn't RAISED an atheist", because literally everyone is born an atheist.

An Abra : What athiest doesent celebrate christmas? Maybe like some hardcore athiest pluser but i shure as hell do its just culture and tradition the same way we celebrate valentines day or april fools

James Mason : I've had a so many neruotypical people attack me because I asked someone else not to use ableist language (Such as Herp and Derp or S*ciopath and Psych*path and mental age stuff.) So this video connects to me on a fundamental level.

Red_Marmotte_stuff : I'm glad I found this channel with the Phil Fish video, I really admire how well written and clever these videos are. I guess I'm a little less dumber now, so thank you for that.

Freenix : Fantastic episode, well done. Just thought I'd get this out here before the Anti-Feminists show up.

AgeMarkus : Yooooo, this did not disappoint! I think you hit the nail on the head regarding this unspoken attitude and reaction that's surprisingly prevalent online.

ThatOneGuy : Please don't judge all atheists like you would TAA. Steve Shives and AronRa are more representative of some atheists, in my opinion.

Ole Gerko : Why being mad at Jack Thompson is ok, but at Anita is not? I defended gaming my whole life - first to ignorant old people, now to biased feminists. What's the difference? (ofc by "being mad" i don't reffer to threats, but a couple of swear words i think is ok). Can't you use the same arguments against people who was mad at Jack Thompson? "oooh - you just mad because deep inside you know that he's right and violent game will make you violent!"

Jesse Kwast : the amazing atheïst makes us all look bad

Sporkaganza : I kinda felt like this episode was a kind of awkward and not-totally-applicable comparison to establish something I already knew, but I guess for people who aren't as aware of social justice thought, this episode is a little necessary.

trolleyman : This was... great. Amazing. It explains so well why people hold their entranched beliefs.

3kbote : I dunno, it sounds really self absorbed for someone's first reaction when they face someone with alternative lifestyle decision to react with this anger. None of that decision has anything to do with you. It's their personal choice, not something they decided to do to spite you. Like when someone says, "No thanks on the sandwich, I don't eat meat," how the heck does that trigger some kind of existential questioning of yourself to the point you forgot to say, "Oh, my bad, they got veggie burgers too if you want."

TmluZXM : I don't think this is true. I think most people who are annoyed with Anita are annoyed because they disagree with her but aren't allowed the opportunity to voice any form of counter argument without being labelled a misogynist or suffering from internalized misogyny.

Rosie : This video is excellent. Thank you so much for taking the time to create it.

Tyler Haddad : I've actually been pondering the question of why people get so angry over little things lately. (One reason being the comment replies I got on the last video you put out) I also really like how you kept this video more general and then applied it to Anita. Helps the situation with her make more sense. Really great thoughts, and makes a lot of sense. Keep it up!

DOYLERULES69X : So the no impact MAN gets horrible hate and death threats on the internet.  So the WOMAN that critiques video games gets horrible hate and death threats on the internet. Congrats Feminists you've reached EQUALITY!!!!!

HaveGliderWillTravel : What is obnoxious about "that guy" at the party who doesn't drink, or the vegetarian at the table who doesn't eat meat, or that environmentalist who refuses to buy anything in Styrofoam, isn't the fact that they say "no thanks" when offered a beer or a hamburger on a foam plate, but rather they say "no thanks, I'm an X." For no reason at all they have to interject their opinions into the conversation when all they were asked was a simple yes or no question. There is no reason to do this other than to spark a discussion or to advertise your personal ideologies. It would be equally awkward if the person said, "sure I'll have a beer because I'm an atheist." The natural response is "ummm...oook?" It isn't that they are challenging your personal beliefs that you are attempting to ignore because you are afraid of the answer, but rather it is an awkward response outside the norm of typical social interaction.

Daniel Feldspar : 2:51 Strictly speaking, everyone is born atheist.

Commie Jesus : >Criticizes people for over-generalizing others. >Over-generalizes others Danning-Krueger Syndrome in action, ladies and gentlemen.

Alex Dunn : Man, dude. You smart. A+

Drprophetius : But Anita does believe in toxic masculinity and that video games make people misagonists. Also if you dont believe that, you are even more likely affected by it. I dunno, I like your presentation but this feels like a multipart strawman.

battlelon133 : I'm gonna say it. This video has many flaws. It doesn't come down to the actual points themselves just what they stand on. The biggest point throughout this is that gamer fear that Anita may be right and so they panic and knee jerk from the idea. The problem with that is that it's a false narrative. People got angry that Anita was misrepresenting games as a whole. Anita in her videos often take problem and blow parts out of proportion while never taking a moment to realise that video games have come just as far as other medias. Anita often targeted problems that either where already complained about by critics, not progressive of the rest of video games or didn't really matter to her arguments. The two golden arguments of this were the Arkham City cape debacle and the mannerisms of gendered characters. These two arguments show all three of the top problems. When it came to Arkham City she is correct in saying that Catwomen is oversexualised. The catch being that she then try to paint all characters like that which was wrong #LauraCroft , The source material and movies also depicted her similarly and critics like NerdCubed already complained about it. Had the same problem with walk cycles despite that Women Walk With A Sway IRL. Gamers didn't lash out (At First) because she knew to much but instead to little. The sexism in games to me come down to marketing alone so calling video games women signalization's simulators when movie are almost as bad (AClockWorkOrange?) Doesn't acheive anything. Plus when Video games are always such a targeted medium fan boys have become more religious and so are frankly tired. Love ya man but more research required.

Vernaculis : Your analogy about Anita Sarkeesian being that woman at the party who simply denied a beverage on the basis of "she doesn't drink," is flawed in one very extreme way. Allow me to correct your analogy. Anita Sarkeesian arrived at the party and told everyone there that they were alcoholics and terrible people for enjoying drinking. Then the people at the party said, "Screw you Anita, we'll drink if we want to." Then after that response Anita goes on to say how everyone at the party was an asshole to her, thus proving her hypothesis that they are terrible people correct. Now that I've sorted that out for you I hope you won't keep claiming that all Anita did was make lowly non-introspective peasants question their moral framework. It's ignoring what actually occurred and attempting (subtly) to make Anita seem like someone who was criticized for no reason other than "questioning."

Joshua Martinez : two episodes in one week? *gasp* Keep it up!

Radium J : Oh, I finally get it.  The cis-Jackbooted White Man is should not speak unless spoken to, and should never speak about anything that affects "marginalized people".  If he does, it can only be because he is angry.

Umar Soaries : And thus we get to the heart of it.   What does Anita Sarkeesian's videos change?  Nothing really.  She might make you think, but in the end video game companies have not change who they portray women just because of Anita Sarkeesian's videos.   VIdeo game are still racking up a collective billions.  Oh wait, it did change something.   Men who had cute comedy channels have stopped being funny because they focus most of their channel on Anita Sarkeesian.   Certain atheists (who are, in fact, assholes) stop talking about their main subjects to focus on Anita Sarkeesian.  They've turn what amounts to "morning zoo" videos into stalkers and hate mongers based solely on hatred of Anita Sarkeesian.  So yes, she made a change without meaning to.  She's made a whole lot of very stupid men give up on what they love to focus on her.  Because if they didn't, who would really know Anita's name, or about her videos?  A niche audience who think she has a point, and that's it.  And because they get so insane about this, they don't even see that they are the ones who made the woman famous.   She just did videos with an opinion that would have been lost in the crowd of opinions if they had left it alone.  That is the very definition of insane.

Parralyzed : Wow, I agreed 100% until the Sarkeesian part.. Why ruin such a great concept by working toward such an unfitting (the Sarkeesian thing is really not at all like all the other examples you point out) and frankly irrelevant climax?

Kamodomon : I'm so happy I'm subbed to you!

AFGNCAAP the great : I have many friends. Some of whom are vegans and some of whom eat mostly animal products; some of whom are feminists and some of whom lean toward MRA and gamergate; some of whom are religious and some of whom are total anti-theists. I identify as none of these things (although I am an athiest and I do eat animal products) and find, for the most part, I can have healthy, balanced and informed discussions with all of these people without either of us having our sensibilities offended. This is a good thing, obviously. However, there are people who I do _not_ consider my friends, who fall under all of these categories. And these are the kinds of people who are fundamentalists. They're aggressive and defensive and often feel that they're beyond scrutiny. I've had them tell me that I couldn't possibly understand their position because I'm cis/male/eat-meat/not religious, because they believe that fact absolves them of the need to simply expand on their reasoning. As someone who values themselves as critically minded, I find these people to be offensive. I find their disregard for reason and their own minds to be upsetting and, when I have found myself unable to leave their presence, I have become hostile in return - our conversation descending in to petty squabbling. It's not something I'm proud of, but it's the truth. I _think_, that is to say I have a suspicion, that Anti Sarkeesian is one of these people. I've watched all of her videos and her tendency to flatly misrepresent the material she refers to, and to state rhetoric as _fact_ without explanation make suspicious of her. Unfortunately the pure, liquid, molten hatred being directed at her by people I have no respect or time for, has prevented legitimate criticism from being addressed and I suspect it never will. Honestly I forgot how I was going to tie this up.

Vahr Kalla : Being someone who used to be fervently opposed to Sarkeesian for the dogma that you outlined, I found this video very eye opening. Good work! I've been here since 'blood is compulsory', looking forward to more

Matthew Crawford : I don't know people who think like that. The thought that they don't like what I do so they think I'm a bad person.

OMGltsFred : But isn't that true the other way around? When People bring forth truth about the pay gap, not being related to sexism. Isn't the people bringing forth that statistic, "that person at the party" and the feminism, and others who believe the pay gap is due to sexism, they now have to think about something uncomfortable, becuase they have believed a lie for a long time.

DigitalZ : The problem with the big argument of this video, is that you're saying that Anita's detractors are criticizing/harassing her because she's a woman. People dislike and oppose Anita for plenty of actually valid and well thought through opinions. We could be having an immensely important discussion about Anita's *ideas*, but instead you chose to make it about who *Anita is as a woman*. It surprises me that you haven't actually viewed any meaningful criticism of her ideas. If all of her detractors were just people calling her a bitch and giving her rape threats, then yes, you'd have a point. The issue here is that rape threats are not criticism. Rape threats are not a conversation. People are trying to discuss her (potentially dangerous) ideas. Arguments like "She's only receiving hate because she's a woman, I'm allowed to say this because I'm a man." are conversation killers. Instead of talking like "white male capitalist patriarchy" is a given, let's try to discover if it even *exists.* We don't "let you say" shit like this because you're a man. We let you because you're intelligent. Because unlike Anita, you don't make anything up, you don't lie, and you don't make money from doing so. Not all arguments boil down to "She's a woman so criticism is sexist." Let's have a real conversation.

Jef Rouner : These are SO good. Please keep up the good work.

jackka82 : 6:16 This idiot talks as if he's cleverly figured out why all these unintelligent people are so angry at Anita Sarkeesian. And he's not even close.

christoffer98 : This video is built on generalisations and wrong in so many ways

Andrew Sheneman : But Anita Sarkeesian isnt just saying "I'm a vegan' she waving pictures of dead animals while yelling about how we are murders.   She isnt just saying "I'm an atheist" shes calling us ignorant bigots while explaining how the Nativity was stolen from Mithras.   I have no problem with people who dont like games, or even who dont like AAA action games.  Thats their opinion.  But if you are going out of your way to insult people, or things they enjoy, while misrepresenting facts, then yea you're going to piss some people off, and should expect a response.   Yea some people went too far(death threats are NOT cool), but it takes a LOT of willful ignorance to think that gamers shouldnt be annoyed with what Anita is saying.

the Spycrab : Do people really react to things like: "No thanks, I'm vegan" with the feeling of being told to be a bad person? I don't! I don't know anyone who does and If one was to think at least a second about what the other just said they would realize that! (at least I hope they would) Anita isn't saying, not even like this, that we are bad people for playing games like this. She straight up made information up out of thin air. Ignoring inportant things from the games she is talking about! People get angry because she is lieing and making others believer her lies are the truth!

Luke Johnstone : I feel compelled to correct you. "We are not born Atheist, they probably grew up believing..." No, we are all born Atheist, then our parents indoctrinate us into a religion or belief system.