#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
Well I have. So I can't exclude myself.
When Wind Waker was unveiled there were petitions to have it destroyed. And lots of angry, angry fans. I'm not sure how much of that reached Nintendo, but I still feel bad about it. Same with the 8.8 fiasco. Either way, this is common behavior from people who get angry over stuff really easily online. I don't intend to exclude myself from the problem, I get excited over this stuff too. :\
I, however, draw the line when the targets turn into individuals who have had their information, reputation and privacy ruined for indefinite periods of time. At some point you have to realize that mobbing individuals is one of the worst crimes you could do to someone. How could anyone willfully contribute to something like this, without a moment of reflection, is beyond my understanding. In situations like this...it's important to see yourself in your "enemies."
When emotions are high, empathy goes out the window, the primitive mind clicks on and it won't be for a very long time until we look back and say..."Yep, that was tribalism."
It seems there's a whole added can of worms: https://twitter.com/TheQuinnspiracy/status/520397800757293056
Just from a cursory glance at the links contained in that above image, people are happy to have someone championing their cause that very often voices a disdain and dislike of people that are of Jewish descent and people that are not white.
He also, from what I read here, has a swastika tattoo on his chest and contributes to a white supremacist blog. There are people that are actually saying that having a neo-Nazi supporting your cause is a "big win." A cause, mind you, that they repeatedly say is about seeking equality and bringing about integrity to the industry.
I just... I can't even wrap my mind around this.
Edit: I should add a note that not all of those that are for GamerGate are for the support of that person to their cause. A look through on Twitter seems to indicate that many are actually opposed to being associated with him. At least there is some good sense going around.
lmao they're actually proud of it. THIS IS WHAT GAMERGATERS ACTUALLY BELIEVEEEE
Just from a cursory glance at the links contained in that above image, people are happy to have someone championing their cause that very often voices a disdain and dislike of people that are of Jewish descent and people that are not white.
He also, from what I read here, has a swastika tattoo on his chest and contributes to a white supremacist blog. There are people that are actually saying that having a neo-Nazi supporting your cause is a "big win." A cause, mind you, that they repeatedly say is about seeking equality and bringing about integrity to the industry.
I just... I can't even wrap my mind around this.
Edit: I should add a note that not all of those that are for GamerGate are for the support of that person to their cause. A look through on Twitter seems to indicate that many are actually opposed to being associated with him. At least there is some good sense going around.
Tell that to every entertainment and political reporter/news magazine ever. Once you become a "public" figure, everything is fair game. Ask Bill Clinton, ask any football/baseball player, ask any other famous person who was involved in a sex scandal. Ask women who shack up with famous people and end up caught up in their shitstorms. What you are saying is irrelevant would be true if she was simply some random person, but she isn't.
Now if you're suggesting the entire media's coverage of people's personal lives is wrong, thats a entirely different matter. Hell Pat Obrien was covered TO DEATH by his own station after his crazy personal life antics came out.
These things happen, it gets covered, proven false or true and that's that.
So now I have to ask what exactly do you want to see happen to Gamergate? People have denounced the crazies on it time and again, people have talked about it and have said what they stand for or don't stand for.
And Erik Kain isn't the only one saying "hey, time to talk to those people,". After the Intel thing other people said "well maybe we do need to engage them", because most people in that movement don't hate women, nor wish inequality on anyone, so we've acknowledged that, the assholes have been called out, people making threats have been handed to the authorities supposedly, so why not move on and get to discussing the issues they have, or the ones you have, instead of turning every discussion into how Gamergate is a evil, woman hating phenomenon.
And no, you'll never get rid of the horrible people saying horrible things, but if people stop mentioning it over and over, constantly pointing fingers at the few bad apples who everyone knows are bad, they die out eventually. Or we can keep bringing up how this person was victimized over and over again, constantly.
My point was putting the onus on one side to housekeep, while not calling for the other side to do the same it futile and just further tribalism.
It's not about which side is worse (that much is pretty clear), but there are enough anti-GG commentators who are just as damaging to gaming. For as long are the are articles, tweets and comments decrying all gamers are misogynist and bigots (an entirely toxic viewpoint), it will just add fuel to the fire, which gives more ammo to the abhorrent proponents of GG.
More_Badass
Member
^^^
And that's why, zeldablue, I say, don't say "we. Because saying stuff about Nintendo or whatever isn't even on par with this Gamergate stuff (or a subsection of it, to be fair), not even close to that kind of behavior or ideals.
Hell, it's not even about "games" anymore; it's just harassment and disturbing stuff like supporting a Neo-Nazi
And that's why, zeldablue, I say, don't say "we. Because saying stuff about Nintendo or whatever isn't even on par with this Gamergate stuff (or a subsection of it, to be fair), not even close to that kind of behavior or ideals.
Hell, it's not even about "games" anymore; it's just harassment and disturbing stuff like supporting a Neo-Nazi
If you Google search "gamers are misogynists" return nearly 3.5 million pages.
"gamers are toxic" it returns over 8,000 pages.
And then you have such intellectual comments like 'gamers are worse then ISIS".
Unless you're trying to argue that saying "gamers are ..." and "all gamers are ..." are completely different things, which is patently not the case.
Edit:
Have the assholes been called out? Because it seems to me like the crazy prominent asshole brigade keeps joining up with GG, like Alex Jones and now weev. Yeah, they denounce the death threat guys while in the same turn retweeting Milo and Thundef00t's implications the death threats and harassment aren't real. The assholes aren't the fringe given how massively popular the most prominent leaders are with members.
D
Deleted member 126221
Unconfirmed Member
If you Google search "gamers are misogynists" return nearly 3.5 million pages.
"gamers are toxic" it returns over 8,000 pages.
And then you have such intellectual comments like 'gamers are worse then ISIS".
Unless you're trying to argue that saying "gamers are ..." and "all gamers are ..." are completely different things, which is patently not the case.
Edit:
Hope GG will DDoS Google and dox its CEO!
EDIT: Sorry, I just found it a bit ridiculous that the proof that there's an opposing side to gamergate adding fuel to the fire is... google search suggestions.
1) I'd argue that Zoe isn't (or wasn't) famous enough to be considered a public figure. Just because you work in entertainment doesn't automatically make you a public figure...you have to actually become well known to the general public. Zoe was unknown even to the general gaming community before her ex posted about her.
Now her name is possibly one of the most recognized women's names in gaming (after Anita Sarkeesian), which could make her an involuntary public figure...except she's still only known among gamers, and only among gamers who read gaming news. The general public at large still has no clue who she is.
2) The reason sites weren't covering the Five Guys story isn't because it was wrong (edit: I mean, not solely because it could be defamation), but because it was the type of gossip only covered by tabloid journalists. Is tabloid journalism really what we want gaming journalism to be?
More_Badass
Member
I had never heard of either woman before this started, and I read GAF every day, and tend to stay on top of the indie game scene through numerous sites and forums.
It feels like I'm watching Hollywood news all right. Most of the people of GG are denying, dismissing or defending those who harass...which is a major part of the problem. :\ Likewise I have seen people in here and on twitter defend and deny harassment from "anti-GG." The bad faith and self-delusion is bad and we should try to work around that. It's hard to do that, which is why we need to be open to calling each other out.
The only person who seriously seems to almost address this is MundaneMatt. It's not enough to say you don't condone harassment. You should also acknowledge that it is prevalent and has caused lasting ramifications and pain for several individuals. It has also silenced the crap out of most women in the industry...including professors and friends that I know. That sucks.
If the FBI has to get involved, then I think it's more than a small problem.
Also...I really really need to know what GG wants. Does it want every hipster and sjw out of the industry? Does it want "objective" reviews? No more social commentary? No gender research or epistemology research relating to games? No more journalists talking to other journalists? Is it just not wanting people sleeping with developers? I need to know what the issue is for it to be supported by more people. From all the videos and tweets I've read...it is all about wanting feminism out. It is all about never wanting harassment to ever be addressed again. That's what the desire seems to be from my perspective...and I'm not crazy about those goals.
The next step should be to earn back trust...but it really has to go both ways and has to start with open humility.
ahem...
"Haven't you begun to understand?
The kingdom being ruined and us
left in this state...
Isn't it petty, little battles like
this that have caused it?
Believing in your friends and
embracing that belief by forgiving
failure...
These feelings have vanished from
our hearts."
Oh Igos, you always know what to say...
Yes she is. I had no idea who the hell she was before any of this. Her and her ex were both nobodies. She was accused of sleeping with a writer for good reviews, Kotaku looked at it, it wasn't true, and nothing else happened. The fact that people are still on it as some sort of scandal is what's ridiculous.
I actually still don't understand what it stands for outside a ton of people who think video games should not be subject to any sort of critical study and a call for an end to corruption without an understanding of what that corruption is or even how the world works let alone how the games industry works.
Considering I keep seeing people on the side of GamerGate as painting the "other side" as "SJWs", I'm going to disagree and say the majority want to maintain the status quo, not move towards equality. You cannot say that opponents of your cause are terrible because they're fighting for equality and maintain the farce that you believe in equality.
Good thing there aren't, really, except maybe that one Milo wrote a couple months ago.
And again, the "Sides" narrative, is ridiculous.
One "Side" is a self-organising "consumer revolt" if you want to accept their narrative or "ignorant mob" if you want to look more than 15 minutes at any facts. They're explicitly banding under a hastag, shared beliefs, shared public figures.
The other "Side" is really just...anyone who is not inside that first bubble? It makes no sense to categorise things this way.
Unless you want to start paring down what you consider that "Side" it's a pointless assertion. And if you do, at what point do you have to go to to actually construct a second "Side" Is it only people actively disagreeing with Gamergate? Are they all on a "side"? Is it only people who've written articles? That's now a tiny number of people, and still not a connected "Side".
If you're going to organise under a banner (No matter how vague and stupid and misguided it may be) you have to be aware of, and prepared for the consequences of who you share that banner with, and indeed who sewed that banner together, and who else is being drawn to it.
Explicitly anti-feminist youtube bloggers, racists, mysoginists, open transphobes, hordes of ignorant children, literal nazis. All of these have been widely (not totally) held up as representative of the movement. The nicest thing I can say about any public figure Gamergate has propped up this whole time is that they are merely extremely uninformed.
No, we people who are here, discussing what is wrong with Gamergate do not have any responsibility to try and control or distance ourselves from the actions of a foolish, angry 17-year-old on tumblr who also happens to disagree with Gamergate. We're all aware of them. We think they're arseholes. But they are not connected to us in anywhere close to the way supposedly mild-mannered Gamergaters are to the movement's explicitly hateful and ignorant origins and continued actions.
No, you inferred that no-one had made those claims, where as a quick Google search give you ample examples of that very thing happening. And for it to auto-suggest shows that its a common, trending search term.
There is now the common trope that gamers are bigots. In the same way, there used to be the idea that gamers were losers, and then that gamers where gun wielding psychopaths. A component of Gamergate was/is the push back against this.
Which in my opinion has undoubtedly been a a failure, as the moment you side against progressives, you'll get the likes of genuine misogynists, fringe right wing commentators and actual Nazis and the like jump on board. Which seems to just prove the erroneous point that gamers are evil.
The GG movement is a disgrace, but I certainly understand some of the motivations behind it. Which had nothing to do with hatred of women, just the attack against people who love videogames. Until the anti-GG commentators understand and address this, there won't ever be any resolution.
Well...
I consider games to be cathartic and great coping devices. They relieve tensions, entertain, de-stress and often give us a sense of control that we might not be getting from real life. Like any other thing used for coping, games attract people who are often troubled and abuse gaming as their primary coping device. These people have strong attachments or addictions to certain games. And some of these people might be using games to mask out whatever root problems they have. That's not the games' fault, it's just how how we behave. I think a lot of us relate to the idea of turning to games for comfort.
Games are great! But they attract negative energy for a reason. They are quite literally there to soak up socially unacceptable or negative energy. We use games to escape. Hikikomori comes to mind. Gamers have a collective conscious and it'd be interesting to know more of the psychology behind us.
When this calms down a bit, I'd like to see what findings they make from this.
The primordial form of GG existed for two weeks before there were any perceived "Attacks on Gamers", and the tag itself was even created before the articles. It had everything to do with a hatred of specific women, the feminist stances they hold, and those who support them.
And those google results mean virtually nothing. It's a nonsense argument. Your own posts, and those like them, claiming people are saying "all gamers are misogynists" are going to show up in those results and I would bet make up a huge, huge proportion of them.
None of the goddamn articles people think are attacks say what they think they do.
And no, there won't be an immediate resolution. But this incarnation of the movement is dying. They're losing numbers on the tag during every slump between big "gets" on their part. The sites they so fervently hate have been doing better than ever. More and more people are becoming more and more aware of what it is and what it represents. The inhabitants of the deepest part of this "uninformed and stubborn sinkhole" as Lime so eloquently put it will stay down there, occasionally making people's lives hell, but otherwise losing a little bit of influence every day because the good parts of this industry, medium, and community, are growing everyday. We will bury them in their holes.
I don' believe there's any evidence that People Who Play Videogames are any different from everyone else. I don't believe that gamers, or playing games, makes people hostile and negative, or specifically attracts those who are.
If you look at other hobbies or collectives, you can find the same issues. Sports fans, religious groups and so on. It's not like with Gamers, feminists have encountered a group for the first time that are hostile to them. They've faced vocal opposition since the dawn of the movement. Some valid, most not.
The "primordial form" has been around much longer than that. Very present since the first Tropes Vs video, and whenever a gender hot topic appears, like AC Unity at E3.
If you look at other hobbies or collectives, you can find the same issues. Sports fans, religious groups and so on. It's not like with Gamers, feminists have encountered a group for the first time that are hostile to them. They've faced vocal opposition since the dawn of the movement. Some valid, most not.
The "primordial form" has been around much longer than that. Very present since the first Tropes Vs video, and whenever a gender hot topic appears, like AC Unity at E3.
A lot of people have examined the demographics of early gaming and how this has influenced it, and still being young, there are still sticky vestiges of those influences.
I don't think Games' effects on people are particularly different from the rest of media, but it does have probably more issues per capita with representation in the media and in the creation of it than other mediums.
And if the primordial form was around long before "Attacks on Gamers" then surely my point about it clearly not being about those perceived attacks is proven?
How do you work that one out? The idea that gamers are misogynistic or hostile to women (or that parts of the games media pushes this as an editorial stance) is not one that first appeared a few weeks ago. Likewise, the push back against that sentiment has been there for the same duration.
Gamergate just cemented it into a movement and a point of escalation in hostility and rhetoric.
Tropes Vs Women doesn't say any of that stuff. Neither did the articles critical towards AC:U's stance on female playable characters. It's a pushback against an imagined opponent. But they have to have something solid to push against, so they're attacking people and institutions that don't even hold any of the views Gamergate opposes.
And Gamergate was cemented as what it is the moment it was created. It was founded in and around the disgusting digging around in Zoe Quinn's personal life for dirt to discredit "SJWs". That is it's literal, factual, provable beginning as a tag.
That doesn't necessarily define it totally, but ignoring its origins is dishonest and denial, plain and simple. Gamergate isn't entirely misogynistic. I'm more of the opinion that it's defined now by its monumental, incomprehensible, terrifying stupidity.
Edit:
I feel like your main problem is conflating the attitude "Games have a sexism problem" with "All Gamers are sexists"
These two aren't, and never have been linked by that by anyone writing seriously about anything.
Messofanego
Banned
It's kind of beautiful how much 4chan/8chan is freaking out that they don't want a Neo Nazi supporting their #gamergate cause
http://www.donotlink.com/framed?559135
http://www.donotlink.com/framed?559135
deathkiller
Member
Well both problems have been discussed mostly separate but sometimes together, sexism in game content and sexism in the attitude of who play online games (making women to want to hide their gender). Anita pointed in one of the videos that sometimes the people who are more in denial over media being an influence in their beliefs/biases are the most influenced.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...d_videogames_124244.html#.VDdmCcdiHYM.twitter
A good article that is pretty critical of the anti-GG folks, while not whitewashing some of the crap that has happened on the other side.
A good article that is pretty critical of the anti-GG folks, while not whitewashing some of the crap that has happened on the other side.
Neoriceisgood
Member
I understand this, "hate being told what to do" can translate to outright discriminatory extremes though. Despite the supposed problem these guys have with "social criticism of games" & "being told what to do" I've seen TONS of GG-ers or sympathisers happily suggest that Zoe Quinn shouldn't have made depression quest/was misrepresenting depression/ etc.
This weird cognitive dissonance of screeching like howler monkeys about any sort of social/progressive criticism combined with the insidious and relentless criticism of anything outside of the status quo is about as toxic as it can get.
A big reason this stuff bothers me especially is cause it's not just tied to creative criticism, the backlash against such basic things as including trigger warnings or people trying to explain such things as social anxiety can lead into a "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO"-backlash.
I haven't really seen many articles about how awful voice chat is in a while but fair cop.
But yeah "Influenced by Media" doesn't really imply "Sexist" or really anything else specifically.
It's so weird to me that people lose their minds over the sentiment of "Maybe occasionally consider the impact the media you consume has on you and/or others."
Misrepresents the perspective of those critical of Gamergate.
"The Consumer Revolt has legitimate issues" but no examples given (surprise surprise)
"authoritarian, far-left brand of gender politics that views everything through the lens of patriarchal oppression and tolerates no dissent." Ridiculous invented Strawman.
Overlong and ridiculous explanation of the SJW nonsense term, comparing random tumblr kids to Mao's Red Guards.
Know Your Meme as a source for any information whatsoever instead of the many, many high quality breakdowns done elsewhere.
Misrepresenting all the "Gamers are Over" articles once again. Fuck I'm getting so tired of this shit.
"The “Quinnspiracy” was not just—and not even primarily—about attacking Zoe Quinn as a woman." This is a bolded section heading in this article. This is a bolded section heading in this article.
Fuck we're in for a wild ride here folks.
Their justification? "Oh her horrible abuse was ALSO used as an attempt to undermine progressive efforts in games, so you know, not all bad, right?"
"There have been no hate campaigns against far more prominent women in the field such as Ubisoft executive Jade Raymond" Haaaaaaaa, fuck you buddy.
Weird needless criticism of Depression Quest by someone who hasn't played it and says they don't play games.
Characterises Phil Fish as "receiving undeserved acclaim" and goes on to use his experience to assert that Men's abuse exists, because that needed to be proven?
Repetition of Gamergate talking points about how terrible Quinn was to TFYC, clearly not having done any digging for the easily accessible information that makes them look super shitty and super shady.
"Oh but this is in no way condoning harassment! I just think all the excuses people have been using to make her life hell are totally on point and legit!"
Circumstantial evidence at best and complete misrepresentation of events as proof that "The media ethics issues raised by GamerGate are valid"
"Gamergaters have been threatened too! This indicates... something???" PSA: It indicates it has made a lot of people angry, rightfully so, and a very small number of them are taking that entirely reasonable anger out in very bad ways. That is all it indicates. Stay in School Kids and say no to Drugs.
"A lot of Gamergaters are women, and THEY don't think it's a misogynist movement" Despite the fact that many, maybe even most of their public figures, openly held attitudes, and concerted efforts have under/overtones of anti-feminism and misogyny. This excuse is literally using these women as a Shield. It's one of the biggest reasons I still 5% hold the belief that this whole goddamn thing is some huge, orchestrated post-modernist joke. That hashtag is the pinnacle of a lack of self-awareness.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this besides "It was good" because to my mind it's a blatant, ignorant, pandering repetition of questionable or outright debunked talking points almost completely glossing over the ridiculous amounts of harm, and in fact, almost every action the movement has been a part of.
Basically I think it's garbage but given it's from the propagator of such ideas as "False Rape Reports are a Serious Problem", "Ferguson wasn't a Race Issue" and "Women Against Feminism is Right" I can't say I'm very surprised.
There are examples of people flipping out over that basic sentiment, but it's also the fact that it comes with the baggage of years of feminist rhetoric which goes beyond this.
I've been working in the tech industry for nearly 2 decades. Discourse around it being hostile to women have been around for as long as I can recall. That has led into the games industry being hostile to women in more recent years. And also games themselves, both due to online abuse and a lack of representation.
If you are honestly of the belief that all the discourse around the above had focused only industry practises and games, rather than male IT professionals and male gamers themselves, you are sadly mistaken. I've have read countless times how I, as a man working in IT, and as a gamer, are hostile to women. You don't have to dig far into feminist Twitter/Tumblr/Reddit to find these sentiments.
I agree entirely that GG is horrible and has been responsible for some despicable acts. My comments have been around the fact that it didn't all start in a vacuum. Zoe Quinn was a catalyst for it.
It's kind of beautiful how much 4chan/8chan is freaking out that they don't want a Neo Nazi supporting their #gamergate cause
I like how the first person apparently doesn't care too much about Weev being a literal Neo-Nazi in itself, but that the fact it'll make them look bad to "SJW's"
If they can say this unironically then this tells me pretty much all I need to know about that article's knowledge level; we're talking about a Woman who literally had a sex comic made about her because she was the figurehead of a divisive game.
You don't have to dig far into anything to find something that looks stupid, but that's not really the point.
Industries are composed of people, so yes, if certain fields are generally more hostile to women than others, the people in those fields are going to be more likely to hold attitudes encouraged by that environment. That doesn't make them terrible people, it just makes them products and agents in their environment, and they can be nice people but still forces for the status quo in less obvious ways.
That's the kind of thing you're going to hear if you read actual literature, as in the stuff that actually defines greater feminist theory, rather than some twitter/tumblr rando.
If you're going to read into that as a gross generalisation along the simplistic "Gamers are misogynists" line I guess I can't help that. And it is a subtle difference between that and a frank examination of trends, so I can understand that sentiment, somewhat. "STEM fields have a systemic sexism problem" or "Games culture has a systemic sexism problem" don't have to be read as condemnations, because they're not, generally anyway. That would imply they're being written off. They're calls to action "This is a problem, let's all fix it, together!"
I'm all for disagreement, but what I really want is educated disagreement. Based on shared knowledge of what is actually being discussed seriously.
Lalalandia
Member
It was proven fals weeks ago yet here you are raising it again.
Yeah things will get better once we ignore the boiling cauldron of hate and spite and address the vague nonspecific concerns of people who insist on standing with hate mongers. There were multiple attempts to persuade those who actually care to separate themselves from the hateful shits but strangely that wasn't as important as trying to keep a shitty hash tag. This is utterly inane.
Pop On Arrival
Banned
Well since you asked, it would be nice if you didn't compare females that don't agree with your views house niggers.
Wowzers
jim-jam bongs
Member
Lalalandia
Member
What the hell? No one said this and that you reached for 'house n___' first says more about you than anyone else in this thread.
Edit: I was wrong it was in the thread but has been rightly deleted. My apologies to you Pop On Arrival your post makes sense in this context.
nobody needs to address this because nobody was attacking *all* gamers, they just refuse to read past the headline of leigh's article and try to understand it
there's no way we can force an angry immature mob to suddenly understand subtlety and metaphor, and frankly it seems like they don't want to. they like being angry, they like having an enemy, they like being able to claim they are being attacked and made outcast by whatever group they hate today because it lets them keep people out of "their" hobby and hang onto whatever pathetic outsider cred they think they still have.
It was posted in this thread previously but it's past history and no need to be regurgitated. I believe the mods deleted the post anyway.
Lalalandia
Member
Jesus I guess I missed that one, good snipe by the mods
Why would anyone ever go to such a website?
It's weird that you bring this up so much time after and It's also weird to see people waiting in the wings to wait for a moment to seize where they can employ a mistake against you, akin to zeldablue's experience a couple of days earlier. But obviously it was wrong of me to rely on a picture using a character from a film related to a historically sensitive topic, as you and perhaps others misunderstood what was meant. Not once did I use the N-word and I would never do such a thing as a White person myself. Oppressed person colluding with the oppressive powers that be was the intent and I should have just said so instead. I sincerely apologize to anyone who were hurt by the interpreted historical connotations with that picture.
Instead, I should have just said that Sommers is an upper class white woman giving apologia for hegemonic masculinity. So yeah, just because a member of an oppressed group of identities say that he or she isn't exposed to discrimination or marginalization doesn't mean that other members of that same group aren't.
Lalalandia
Member
Oh it was a post in anger being hauled up after an existing apology to be used as a cudgel as in ZeldaBlue's case? Gross.
If people are wondering why folks seem a bit quick to react it's this drive by sniping that provokes most of it. I hope you choose to actually engage Pop On Arrival rather than cruise past shouting slogans.
WOW, I don't even...
I mean, as far as I know, she was the first woman in gaming to have a porn comic circulated of her. I guess the article author's memory doesn't go back much further than a few years.
It's amazing some people can not understand that 99% of the women in the games industry receive abuse. Either they receive comments from men on how they want to kill them or if the men like them how they want to fuck them and how hot they are.
Just this week Alison Rapp of Nintendo posted about a game she was enjoying and got a reply of
tonysidaway
Member
You're blaming the victims. Stop doing that. We _should_ shame these thugs. As for Gamergate's "moderates", they're simply uninformed and there are just two things to do there: point out that they're providing a cover for the thugs, and explain how their preciously nursed grievances are founded on toxic fantasy.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
How the heck you are going to shame somebody that has no shame?
RockTurtle
Member
Thats a.bit.of a condescending post. If people sporting the GG aren't thugs then they are Doing iit out of ignorance and don't have a handle on things? :/
It's all-round almost maliciously unresearched. So ridiculous.
Edit: Nevermind.
That's the most optimistic explanation of why some people would choose to collude with a movement aiming to harass and exclude women out of the industry and culture. That they aren't aware of what they are doing.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
People that champions Breitbart writers that were insulting them weeks ago.
- Status