I don't disagree, but you're talking about the form and tone of conveying an argument, whereas I am addressing the false equivalence between marginalized and harassed individuals exposed to hate speech and someone who feels hurt because their self-identified label is being criticized.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Boogie2988: I Am NOT A Bigot. Are You?
- Thread starter HUELEN10
- Start date
I don't disagree, but you're talking about the form and tone of conveying an argument, whereas I am addressing the false equivalence between marginalized and harassed individuals exposed to hate speech and someone who feels hurt because their self-identified label is being criticized.
So, what's the joke? I'm usually fairly good with the whole comedy thing, but this wheeze is eluding me somewhat.
I fucking hate hashtags. They're just a quick way for people to pop off a smug one-liner without needing the imagination to actually say something witty or clever.
It's comical to the point of transparency.
I won't comment on the whole journalists attacking their audience, it's what they've done for so long it barely register.
They've taken their audience for a bunch of saps for so long and now that they're not willing to shit on some indie dev for some random reason it's OMG they're more corrupt than old Rome in a satanic orgy with guests from Sodom and Gomorrah.
As if there wasn't reason enough to make fun of stereotypical gamers.
Next time someone ask me if I'm a gamer, I'll answer that I'm not 12 anymore.
I'm staying in OT now.
Yep! She's a gamer too ya know.
Cherry picking specific sections of the article and misunderstanding the context of them isn't going to prove that she's attacking everyone who plays video games.
jim2point0
Banned
Wow. I had no idea all this was going on. So that was a weird video to watch.
I uh... just like to play video games. I never imagined so much drama could be tied to such a thing O_O
(sorry, I know this post is probably useless but seriously... I had no idea)
I uh... just like to play video games. I never imagined so much drama could be tied to such a thing O_O
(sorry, I know this post is probably useless but seriously... I had no idea)
plutoknight
Member
Isn't all hate speech rooted, in one aspect or another, in the definition of identities and labels? (We attack 'feminists', 'black people' do that, 'muslims are evil!' as examples of hate speech)
I think that's more of an issue of her writing that in the moment, and pointing out she's a gamer is an inherent flaw (or strength?) of her argument. She could have argued her point infinitely better without belittling people in the process.
Displaying females as objects is fine because capitalism; displaying gamers as as neckbearded, misogynistic, hatefueled, ignorant, homophobic, idiots is not fine because (male) gamers; harassment, threats are normal and women shouldn't overreact; jokes like #KillAllMen are dangerous, stupid and harmful.
You should know it by now.
Edit: Indeed, you are reading sarcasm.
It should be, but it's pretty obvious by now after all the insane conspiracy theories about death threats being faked and self-doxxing that a very vocal portion of the audience is out of their minds. And they either take something like "#killallmen" literally or they're being deliberately obtuse and will pretend to take it seriously in order to make more noise, which makes it even harder for a real dialogue to exist. At some point people have to take the high ground and leave behind The Baiting of the Morons.
I don't understand your question or its relevance to what I was talking about.
Again, both of you are misunderstanding the point of all the articles who advocate the "Death of the gamer". They are not talking about everyone who happens to play video games or enjoy the culture around it. They are specifically targeting a specific subset of gamers. Read Plagiarize's and Marrec's posts about it, in this thread or the Games Journalism thread to understand why this has nothing to do with you and your playing video games.
That's definitely true.
Yes, but that's how you get everyone to look at your criticisms.
Yeah I get the article wasn't saying all gamers were bad. But isn't the push to get rid of a label? Okay, well some people like the label, and aren't the assholes she's writing about. So it's understandable why some people are feeling under attack when there is a push to get rid of the label (or telling people how they should or shouldn't identify with labels). Again, I'm not saying woe is them. Obviously the oppressed in this industry have it infinitely worse. But I also understand why you get reactions like the ones you get from Boogie. I don't think they are handling this argument well at all (presenting it to the gaming industry/consumer).
Unless I'm misunderstanding the push to get rid of the gamer label. If so, please let me know.
EDIT: And to be clear, I'm not feeling personally attacked here lol. And even if I was, I wouldn't be that offended given the kind of abuse others get in this industry. I'm just stating why I think this is a poorly handled argument. But if I'm wrong, I'll admit it.
FF Seraphim
Member
Are being serious with this post?
It is all a matter of perspective, you know this right?
No matter who it is, if you attack a person's belief/hobby/etc... people will go on the defensive and rational thoughts and discussions just go out the window.
To you and the individuals involved the "mob" is way more stressful. To the people who view the articles as attacking their "hobby" or what they called themselves for several years is equally hurtful in their eyes because it is attacking a part of them.
The only way to end this on both sides is to stop with the silly hostilities,of course you cannot stop everyone but you can try your best to educate people on the situation no matter how crazy you think they are.
SerTapTap
Member
"everyone who plays video games" no, but it's clearly an attack on the "traditional" gamer and seems to lift mobile/etc above "basement dwelling" people which is just bullshit. There is absolutely no need to tar "traditional" gaming as something inherently inferior, asocial or directly associated with/responsible for assholes.
This is the obvious topic of the thread and yet an amazing amount of people on both "sides" seem to deliberately ignore it.
plutoknight
Member
This has nothing to do with games; this is a debate on the term 'gamer' and the overwhelming negative connotation the term is being given because of a small subset of people.
The part (the assholes) doesn't represent the whole (all of us gamers) and we want to make that message known.
Waylon Drums
Member
How about this: if you're not bigoted, great. Continue with your non-bigoted ways. If someone implies you might be a bigot because of a hobby you partake in, FUCKING RELAX and realize "this person doesn't know what he or she is talking about" instead of pissing and moaning that someone was mean to you.
It's meant to satirize the straw man view of feminists (that they all hate men). Not a particularly good joke, but not something people actually believe.
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
Is there somewhere that summarizes what this is all about? I have no idea what's going on.
ShadowKingpin
Member
It's very dangerous when dipping into a major controversy, but I absolutely respect Boogie for standing up for something he believes in.
Camp Freddie
Member
Damn this thread moves quickly!
I think we actually agree with each other.
Again, this is the problem with arguments mediated by short-form messages. It's just impossible to convey context accurately.
I wasn't saying that every gamer needs to actively hunt down the bigots and confront them. I was just saying that when we encounter bigotry we ought to stand up against it.
If you and the gamers you know aren't bigoted then that's great.
I'm certainly not saying that gamers should be constantly apologising for being gamers because of bigots that they don't even know.
That's why I've been posting. I'm not apologising for being a gamer, and I don't feel like gaming is under attack from SJWs.
But I see people here on GAF posting out of context twitter/reddit scapbooks like some Chemtrails conspiracy theorist and calling on me to watch InternetAristocrat's "5 guys" video to get the 'real' story.
I'm seeing bigotry here on GAF and on other sites I visit. So I'm trying to oppose it rather than trying to argue that it's no big deal or (worse) to argue that it's actually me that should feel victimised by anti-bigot extremists, or that it's some sort of left-wing media conspiracy.
I think that what scares women away from gaming is not just that there might be a few misogynists that insult or threaten them. What scares women away is that they thing that the majority of gamers will not support her if she complains about the insults and threats (either by taking the bigot's side, ignoring her, or saying it's no big deal).
That begs the question "AND?".
I rather enjoyed Every Day The Same Dream. There is bog all to it, not much in the way a technical nous but it was incredibly striking.
Hate speech is direct towards people who cannot freely choose their own identities or who are being ascribed by the majority to belong to a certain already marginalized group.
Identifying (or being ascribed to be identified as) a 'gamer' is not equal to e.g. identifying as being African American. And the harassment and marginalization and the discrimination of being a 'gamer' is in no way comparable to what it means to be African-American, which should hopefully be clear to anyone with knowledge of history and current state of affairs.
What she was attacking was the marketing driven stereotype of gamers. A strawman that she clearly defined and set up before laying into it. That strawman exists in the extreme minority amongst gamers but is largely the target of marketing and media stereotypes. "Traditional" gamers, as you put it, have a very specific stigma that isn't helped by bullshit like the "quinnspiracy" gaining traction in the enthusiast community.
if gaming is as important to a person as a deeply held moral conviction or religious belief, i think that has the potential to be problematic, yes.
plagiarize
Banned
my issue is that a group of hateful people seem perfectly comfortable to be openly bigoted here in the gaming community. demonstrating that such behavior is inappropriate will discourage those people from exhibiting that behavior which will in turn limit how many people sign on to that philosophy in the first place.
we got to the point of having less racism by first demonstrating to people who were openly racist not to be openly racist. they remained racist but because they didn't want to be a labelled a racist and suffer negatively as a result, the next generation heard less racist propaganda and grew up less racist.
I mean, sure, it'll be lovely if I could just give all the sexists candy and politely explain to them why they need to stop being sexist, but I don't see any evidence that such tactics are effective.
Arkage
Banned
I think one of the largest problems in this thread is that despite claims that this isn't a two sided "us v them" issue nearly everyone in this thread or involved in this conversation in any way is posting in that exact mindset.
It seems almost everyone is either:
1) concerned about mysogyny, and says little to nothing about the nepotism that took place or deny it exists or say it's off topic.
or
2) concerned about nepotism, and says little to nothing about the mysogyny that took place or deny it's relevance to the twitter tags or say it's off topic
Group 1 is being labelled the SJW crowd and group 2 is being labelled the "gamer" crowd. Is there anyone in this thread other than me that actually thinks both things are important, and that dismissing one in favor of the other is just going to cause more pointless arguments instead collaboration?
This ultimately looks like a giant game of verbal diarrhea of "my cause is more important than your cause," which is essentially a race to the bottom in which case a person can just play the #firstworldproblems trump card.
It seems almost everyone is either:
1) concerned about mysogyny, and says little to nothing about the nepotism that took place or deny it exists or say it's off topic.
or
2) concerned about nepotism, and says little to nothing about the mysogyny that took place or deny it's relevance to the twitter tags or say it's off topic
Group 1 is being labelled the SJW crowd and group 2 is being labelled the "gamer" crowd. Is there anyone in this thread other than me that actually thinks both things are important, and that dismissing one in favor of the other is just going to cause more pointless arguments instead collaboration?
This ultimately looks like a giant game of verbal diarrhea of "my cause is more important than your cause," which is essentially a race to the bottom in which case a person can just play the #firstworldproblems trump card.
FF Seraphim
Member
Oh lord I wish most people would did this, however that is easier said than done because as you can see a lot of people are overly sensitive to the issue or easily manipulated by their peers.
Calm down, and game on.
plutoknight
Member
Most identities (outside of race) are self-identities, however. Not all females are feminists. Not all people who live in the Middle East are Muslims. Not are men are gamers and not all gamers are men, so calling gamers misogynistic and trying to peg the term with such a definition hurts everyone.
If you want to make it known that not all gamers are assholes, why don't you go after the fucking assholes instead and defend, help and support the people who are targeted for harassment by these fucking assholes instead of repeating ad naseaum "not all gamers are misogynistic assholes!!!" to the affected parties?
FF Seraphim
Member
So you will say that is true for all hobby enthusiasts? Or just for gamers?
This is my main beef with all this "debate". It's not about ideas, but about identities, like pretty much every modern "hot topic issue".
Which is why noone wants to discuss ideas. Everyone just want to build a label to identify with or taint the rival's so they can define theirselves in opposition to an exogroup (said rivals). It's pathethic.
wikipedia said:
Wait there's a someone from the family of a journalist that was granted favors?
edit : or do you mean cronyism or something else?
Yes. As I'm arguing in the other thread, we need to fill the vacuum of apathy with positivity for diversity and progress instead of this false persecution and bile.
"Gamer is dead" making you mad? Then turn towards assholes like "The Internet Aristocrat" and tell them THEY are killing "Gamer". Let them know that slut shaming shouldn't be part of the conversation.
SerTapTap
Member
Hate speech generally includes hateful speech against religion, which is as much a choice as enjoying games. Hate speech is generally just hateful speech targeted at a group. I would say the bigger difference between typical hate speech and "hate speech" against gamers is there's no (that I have seen) serious incitement towards violence, it's an issue of degree rather than classification.
So, I definitely haven't seen "hate speech", but hate speech doesn't inherently only include people who cannot freely* choose their association (can we freely chose our hobbies, though? I didn't chose to like games, I just do. That doesn't feel very different from my sexuality, honestly. Practicing is a choice, preference is not.)
CombustibleNate
Neo Member
Even if they don't believe "the joke", how does this make it anymore acceptable than any other racist, sexist, or any other hateful joke that anyone says? I know you never said that it was acceptable, but the 10 year old saying rape jokes are okay for the sake of comedy is not okay and receiving death threats for it on top of that, while saying #killallmen is perfectly okay to probably some of the same people?
I get there are tons of wackos out there that make the rest of the group look worse than they might be. Why aren't we pinpointing those people and working on shouting them down versus attacking a group for the actions of an individual?
I think the problem is that...
I. Misogynistic assholes that don't want their hobby to be criticized, are rolling that into the "nepotism argument" and issues with the "gaming media" debate.
II. Because of this, any actual legitimate discussion to be had about nepotism/problems in the industry on the media side, are ignored as being a disguise for the misogynistic/closed minded pushing against any kind of change.
Fact is, I think there are legitimate people that have issues with the media. But they are getting roped into a campaign who's roots/true intentions are NOT legitimate criticism of the media (ie. nepotism), but are instead a resistance to change and criticism of their hobby by both activist and those in the media (or gamers themselves that are speaking up for these changes). That is why you have so many angry gamers who are saying they aren't misogynistic or assholes. And it's because it's probably true. But they got swept up in something that has a lot of negative undertones to it.
And all the while, the other side that is being attacked, goes about the argument the wrong way (IMO), and have just made it more easy for good gamers (the people they want on their side) to jump on the side of GamerGate (with their whole lets abolish the gamer label push).
DoktorEvil
Banned
Labels are labels, you know. They are only attributed as much value as the person or person or group that holds dearly to them. Context clues tell you what labels can be used with people and whether or not those generalizations/stereotypes are true or absolute rubbish.
I may identify as a gamer on GAF, but that doesn't mean I do so off of GAF, you know?
I wear a cross around my neck, its safe to say I'm a christian, but you don't know what sect of Christianity I may follow and what my church teaches with respect to the good book.
What people on GAF tend to do, especially argumentative posters, is generalize based on identifiers that may be used. That creates a strawman for anyone to argue or belittle others for not adhering to that particular worldview, when context clues make the difference in labels.
plutoknight
Member
How are we going to go after the assholes in the 'gamer' circle when the link has been made that "All games are misogynistic assholes" in the public eye? At that point, it's too late to argue anything else; the damage is done, and barring a sweeping political movement to change the definition, we're then stuck with it.
While that's an admirable idea, context clues are often the cause of these things as much as they are the solution. We use symbols in society to provide context clues, and when symbols get attached to negative definitions, this causes the kinds of violence that create irreversible mental links/stereotypes that then get perpetuated regardless if they are good or bad simply because they seem like truth.
Arkage
Banned
One cannot do both? This is a false binary choice, in which you think gamers who are defending that specific title are also not helping, defending or supporting people targeted for harassment. You're pushing the identity politics platform and it isn't helping.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
Well fucking said Boogie.
No, it's not. Because we still have 'gamers' like Zoe Quinn and Rhianna Pratchett and Leigh Alexander who want to play games and participate in the community.
Right now though, across the enthusiast community, people are trying to figure out how to drive as many of these people out of the industry as possible. It's so fucking counter-productive and mind-blowing that we as gamers have allowed the narrative to shift around to 'corruption' that seems to center all on a few women.
Admiral Woofington
Member
Has boogie come here to expand on his point of view? I don't think he regularly comments on threads about his own material. Just curious.
http://ellaguro.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/on-gamers-and-identity.html
Another really fantastic piece by Ryerson. If you're at all involved in these debates I would really, really recommend reading the whole thing.
Another really fantastic piece by Ryerson. If you're at all involved in these debates I would really, really recommend reading the whole thing.
CombustibleNate
Neo Member
Like I said in my other post, we need to target the problematic people on "both sides" of this. I don't quite side with one or the other wholeheartedly, but I definitely don't appreciate being lumped as a misogynist (because yes I am a gamer and frequent 4chan) simply because the acts of other people.
The same reason the "opposing feminists" get mad at "gamers" is the same reason "gamers" get mad at "feminists". We both have kids and even immature adults who either haven't fully developed, have mental issues, or even just are misguided. But acting like one group is above the other is bullshit and you should know that.
treemasterx
Banned
This is very well said, finally someone else is speaking some sense. If you don't agree with them, don't call them a Nazi. They did not kill millions of people with there post.
If you seriously are still questioning why you should do something about the assholes instead of trying to defend your hobby: Actions speak louder than words. Do something to prove that video games culture isn't bigoted. Prove that you don't take no shit when assholes yell slurs at women, non-Whites, LBGTQ, etc. Support the voices financially who are experienced in how video games culture can be more diverse and inclusive. Defend and speak up for the ambition of diversifying the video game landscape and welcome change.
There is SO MUCH you and everyone else (and Boogie) can do to prove that video games aren't exclusionary instead of telling people who are discriminated against that "I am not a bigot!".
redwolflim
Neo Member
To be honest how are you going to start proper conversation, or argue about gamer term when other people mocking against you due to the misinformation made by Video game Journalism (Gamer is dead click-bait articles)? Like this example:
http://imgur.com/2Qgn6cx
This is why various countries of gamers are pissed off and start to rebel.
http://imgur.com/2Qgn6cx
This is why various countries of gamers are pissed off and start to rebel.
NewEraBlood
Banned
I don't get the accusations of "slut shaming". Spoiler, Zoe Quinn, if the statements about cheating on her boyfriend are true, is a piece of shit. Sexual freedom and liberation doesn't mean getting in a relationship with another person who understands it to be monogamous and proceeding to sleep with other people. And I would use equal verbiage to describe a man who does the same. If you're in a relationship that you haven't agreed to be open or poly-amorous, then sleeping with other people makes you a piece of shit, not "liberated" or "enlightened".
So let's turn that around. Instead of African-Americans saying negative stereotypes and portrayals in media are false and offensive, they should do something about those perpetuating the stereotype instead of voicing their opinion and concern that it's false and offensive?
It's not my job to moderate other people's comments or to take a hurt feelings report. If someone starts yelling stupid shit online I mute them and move on. Instead of giving money to a con artist like Anita I would just rather marginalize and not engage the toxic elements.
yes, go back to the start of the thread
Wait what? Where did that happen?
I know it's not your job. But can you explain to me why the push to get rid of the "gamer" label is a good thing? Or rather, what it hopes to accomplish? Because the way I see it, I think it's a poor way to handle this entire thing, as I think it alienates a lot of people that I think they should be trying to get on their side. And while I understand that is not their intention, I think that's the effect (given that the gamer label is a pretty widespread thing, and identification a lot of people have. Gaming is a massive hobby).
I understand that the origins of GamerGate was not legitimate criticism of the media (nepotism etc.), and was instead a push back from a certain sect in this hobby (who are resisting change, and don't wan't their hobby being criticized - period). But I think pieces like Alexander's, and the overall push to get rid of the gamer label, has pushed the people they want on their side to the "GamerGate" nonsense. Again, I know her piece wasn't saying all gamers are assholes (it was the opposite of that really). But I don't think these pieces and the push to get rid of the label has helped the cause at all, and has instead backfired as it's put a lot of people on the defense. And these are people that should be their audience.
You're telling me that the group of people who can't shit on mobile and anything not aimed at them from a height big enough can be perceived as exclusionary?