I'd say his views are sincere enough, but he understands that it's his job. Political commentary is how he makes money. It's literally his career. So he does what keeps his paying customers happy. In the end it doesn't matter if he really believes as far as he says, but his boomer DW customers who pay the bills want to watch someone who appears to believe that way, so that's what he provides. I'm sure he doesn't like video games, but his real disdain might be a 4 out of 10, while the paying customer wants to see 10 out of 10 hatred for video games, so that's what he gives them.
To me this is a distinction without a difference. I didn’t care whether Anita Sarkeesian was doing what she did purely as a money grift and didn’t hate video games at all, or if she merely disliked them but played it up, or if she was/is a true believer.
The damage is the same whether or not the human garbage that espoused it was sincere.
To me this is a distinction without a difference. I didn’t care whether Anita Sarkeesian was doing what she did purely as a money grift and didn’t hate video games at all, or if she merely disliked them but played it up, or if she was/is a true believer.
The damage is the same whether or not the human garbage that espoused it was sincere.
Calling Anita human is quite a stretch.