Support NeoGAF

[Nanashrew]

Nobody does this.

They base their entire lives around video games that it is their identity and have gone on rants about gamer oppression and going as far as placing the term gamer up there as a kind of race. So yes, this does happen. See GamerGate.

 

[RipperGrim]

Gamergate was easily one of the most dumbest things I have seen come out of gaming and also the most immature, I was so disappointed by the amount of people willing to support such hate as I kept hoping a big backlash would happen against the idiots but while there were definitely people calling them out on their bullshit there was no actual movement against it and if there was Gamegate was clearly bigger, essentially Gamergate stopped because people got bored of it more than anything else. It's not even stopped for some people who still go on about this shit, I literally saw someone's comment on another site talking about Zoe Quinn even though I don't know how many times those claims have been disproved. This whole thing made me very disappointed with the gaming community. Neogaf was literally a shining beacon of light in this regard lol.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

How many people are ruled by a TV show they watch etc? The claim is absurd.

Not many, but that's a particularity of the universality and homogeneity of TV as a medium. But plenty of people view the sort of music they listen to as being an integral part of their identity. Or the sort of food they eat.

 

[dark_inferno]

Fish was an asshole, you're equating all women's opinions to that of an asshole.

Also, while I think he an asshole, he certainly doesn't deserve to get death threats.

Fish was right with most of the things. Fish just came of like a Troll. But apparently everyone who is a Troll doesnt like Trolls who are famous.

Also he was for more women in gaming (As Devs or Protagonists). Just like i am. But those Gamersgate stuff is just fuel for journalism/Haters. And everything goes deeper and deeper and deeper.

How is that an acceptable stance though? Keeping your head down for fear of threats and harassment is a horrible place to be.

You think that the Game industry are the only ones with death threats? The whole internet is full of it. Its normal (But it shouldnt be).

 

[Condom]

Um, way to insult my creative path in life, dude. Not only mine, but thousands of others. It's called perspective.

I know that writing a play is a little different from marching on Selma.

How is saying fair enough insulting you? I am agreeing with you having a different perspective.

 

[Freshmaker]

They totally do. Goobergate had a hissy fit at the mere suggestion that people outside the typical 'gamer' might enjoy or have opinions about the direction of games. You here 'not a true gamer' from them all the time, all that is directly linked to their identity being threatened. When hobbies become attachments people can form their identity around anything

That doesn't address the underlying causes however.

"They're attached to violent games."

Well not really. They're attached to maintaining the status quo. Standard operating procedure for the MRA movement. Gaming is a convenient vehicle for them since women are rare already in the industry and harassing them causes them to leave rather than keep their voice in the discussion.

This is a power trip for them. The hobby is really not a formative issue here. The conducive climate is.

 

[leehom]

That is a dreadfully naive and ignorant statement. There is massive difference between having a few enemies around who hate you, and having 1000 people sending you death threats and harassment 24/7. The former leads to the occasional awkward moment in your workplace. The later can destroy someone's life. Most people (thankfully) don't have to deal with people sending them highly detailed threats in the mail on a regular basis.

You're telling me people who are actors, singers, athletes, any public figure should quit their jobs because they get death threats and email harassment's? If she can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

How many people are ruled by a TV show they watch etc? The claim is absurd.


Like the post everyone seems content to completely ignore stated, I think you're letting the tail wag the dog and calling that proof.

GamerGate got as popular as it did simply because a group of people decided to yell "women want to change your games".

The very core tactic of Gamergate is to exploit the identity of "gamer".

Why do you think the "Gamers are Dead" article is still, or ever was, a thing?

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

No. It's about self-deluded miserable people who feel the world's against them and they have control over their lives. So they do nasty stuff like this because they actually get results and have a voice for seemingly a change.

But yeah, blame violent games.

Check that reading comprehension

 

[shacklesmcgee]

Fish was right with most of the things. Fish just came of like a Troll. But apparently everyone who is a Troll doesnt like Trolls who are famous.

Also he was for more women in gaming (As Devs or Protagonists). Just like i am. But those Gamersgate stuff is just fuel for journalism/Haters. And everything goes deeper and deeper and deeper.

What does this mean? Gamergate stuff is fuel for journalism and haters?

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

That doesn't address the underlying causes however.

"They're attached to violent games."

Well not really. They're attached to maintaining the status quo. Standard operating procedure for the MRA movement. Gaming is a convenient vehicle for them since women are rare already in the industry and harassing them causes them to leave rather than keep their voice in the discussion.

This is a power trip for them. The hobby is really not a formative issue here. The conducive climate is.

That's a cool set of assertions I guess. Would you mind fleshing out the connections you see between Gamergate and the MRA movement? Is it your assertion that most Gamergaters were members of the MRA movement before this whole thing exploded? Is it your belief that Gamergaters will move on to agitate against women in other fields as soon as the climate in gaming becomes less conducive to this sort of behavior?

 

[SkyOdin]

You're telling me people who are actors, singers, athletes, any public figure should quit their jobs because they get death threats and email harassment's? If she can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

No, I'm saying that people should stop harassing. We should change our culture so we stop all this harassment. We shouldn't just accept that it will happen. We can change things so it stops. Death threats are not an unavoidable natural law, they are the product of society. So we should stop placing blame on the victims of harassment and stop giving a pass to the harassers.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

That's a cool set of assertions I guess. Would you mind fleshing out the connections you see between Gamergate and the MRA movement? Is it your assertion that most Gamergaters were members of the MRA movement before this whole thing exploded? Is it your belief that Gamergaters will move on to agitate against women in other fields as soon as the climate in gaming becomes less conducive to this sort of behavior?

Yes on all accounts (and they already have, and stated their motives to move on).

We're not just talking about regular average joe gamers here.

GG got its start and is perpetuated by He-Man Woman Haters.

 

[HGH]

"Sacrifice" is pulling all-nighters to meet deadlines, missing get-togethers and birthdays to get work done, or giving up extra-curricular activities to make room in your schedule. It is not having your home address released to public eyes, receiving death threats by email or phone every day, or being attacked by an internet hate-movement.

The former is a decision you make for yourself. The latter are things happening to you outside of your control.

Y'know what the latter reminds me of? Stuff that probably happens to a ton of politicians, bloggers, and human rights activists every day I bet. Would you say some of them haven't had to make sacrifices to air out their views to the public?
Of course, the main difference here is that the latter are trying to enact real social change while the former are working in a juvenile form of media catering primarily to teenagers and young adults.

 

[Dryk]

Something a little bit tangential, and I know I post this a lot but it's something that I always take away from shit like this:

Okay so one of GamerGate's (supposed) criticisms of Anita Sarkessian is that she's a sub-par commentator with methodological problems and an axe to grind right? The thing is, that she's shown that she's never going to give up, she just digs her heels in and more people take notice because she's being attacked. Shit like this? Shit like this makes it less likely that other people are going to appear compete in her space. They're actually making it worse for themselves by fighting.

I will admit that I have a libertarian perspective on gamergate, but I will once again state what I have stated before. The games industry is a business, and people should vote for the content they wish to enjoy with their wallets-- by purchasing or not purchasing a game. Politics should not be involved in deciding what content is available. If you disagree with the content in a game, don't buy it. If that is too difficult, intentionally purchase the game used. Whatever your stance is, be sure you are voting appropriately with your wallet and allow the market to decide what content is in your videogames

Two problems I can see with this

a) Everything in society is inherently political. Even trying to make something apolitical is political.
b) Gamergate even at the best of times is fighting against the sentiments you're expressing by trying to suppress criticism

It's a shame they're giving up on their dreams because of idiots.

Sometimes I read some of the anti-science vitriol that crops up online and wonder why I'm even bothering working to advance those people's lives.

 

[Booshka]

This shit keeps going the way it is, there will be binders full of women that have stepped away from the game dev industry.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

It's worth nothing that Adam Baldwin, who coined the Gamergate term and hashtag, was well-known within the MRA movement for his paranoia about how feminism is ruining the world. That's why he grabbed onto this so hard. He doesn't actually play video games - neither does Milo Yiannopoulos, the other Gamergate Head-of-State. Prior to Gamergate, Milo wrote articles about how juvenile and trashy Grand Theft Auto is and also, more importantly, about how radical feminists are driving men out of society.

Gamergate absolutely has its roots in the MRA circles.

 

[Freshmaker]

GamerGate got as popular as it did simply because a group of people decided to yell "women want to change your games".

No, it didn't. It got popular because there are tons of disenfranchised unpopular molemen who wanted to gain some measure of control over their lives no matter who it hurt or how superficial the perceived control actually is.

I think we're arguing over the focal point here rather than really disagreeing that the movement is foul. What I'm saying is that if you look at the demographic makeup of GamerGate, you'll probably find a bunch of sour losers who have little relevance to the world at large aside from this movement they glommed onto.

Accepting their surface claims gives them more power they they deserve.

I think without addressing the core underlying motivations of the people behind the movement we're just going to run around in circles shouting "You're either with or against us! AGEREEE!!! Grrr!" Which isn't especially useful.

That's a cool set of assertions I guess. Would you mind fleshing out the connections you see between Gamergate and the MRA movement? Is it your assertion that most Gamergaters were members of the MRA movement before this whole thing exploded? Is it your belief that Gamergaters will move on to agitate against women in other fields as soon as the climate in gaming becomes less conducive to this sort of behavior?

Shocking Alberto 's note about Baldwin and Milo Yiannopoulos makes that like fairly clear. Also the tactics tend to be the same regardless of the particular discourse community they opt to invade with their rhetoric.

I would point out that they are actively acting out in the same way on a variety of fronts already. (Check any YouTube comment secion in a video featuring a man and a woman arguing, or having even the vaugest conflict possible. There will be posts claiming that the man is being victimized in the video etc.) Gamergate happened to gain media attention, but their stink is everywhere. This is a fling poo at a wall and see what sticks kind of movement.

I'd suggest it's a movement by and large fueled by the crappy economy, the decline of the middle class, and social pressures unsuccessful young males face. (Perpetually living at home, poor paying job/no job, no prospects for social growth or improvement etc.) That doesn't excuse them, but I think that in general these people are doing this because they think they have no other outlet to vent their feelings of helplessness.

 

[Bananastand]

It's worth nothing that Adam Baldwin, who coined the Gamergate term and hashtag, was well-known within the MRA movement for his paranoia about how feminism is ruining the world. That's why he grabbed onto this so hard. He doesn't actually play video games - neither does Milo Yiannopoulos, the other Gamergate Head-of-State. Prior to Gamergate, Milo wrote articles about how juvenile and trashy Grand Theft Auto is and also, more importantly, about how radical feminists are driving men out of society.

Gamergate absolutely has its roots in the MRA circles.

'But-but Anita doesn't even play games, so how can she comment on them!?!?!'

Gotta love GamerGate logic.

 

[Dynomutt]

Breaks my damn heart just thinking about it. GamerGate didn't just set the public perception of gaming back a decade, but game development as well.

I support all women in the industry and young girls who aspire to being in the field one day. It should never have gotten this far. However, your last sentence although a opinion is kind of offensive.

Not everyone is a part of the small yet vocal minority that stirs Gamergate. So to say development has been setback is a bit widespread and overreaching.

DLC, Online Check-In, Broken Releases, Bad Netcode, and greedy Publishers were setting development back a long time ago.

 

[Nanashrew]

That's a cool set of assertions I guess. Would you mind fleshing out the connections you see between Gamergate and the MRA movement? Is it your assertion that most Gamergaters were members of the MRA movement before this whole thing exploded? Is it your belief that Gamergaters will move on to agitate against women in other fields as soon as the climate in gaming becomes less conducive to this sort of behavior?

Well, those assertions aren't exactly off-base. MRA in particular is pretty accurate. It was started by a conspiracy theory about a woman's sex life and spread by MRA people and a conservative B-grade actor. Some in the movement may have not known they themselves were exhibiting similar behaviors but attracted them all nonetheless and now are among their ranks. A few have actually gone on to work for MRA sites now because of their time spent in GamerGate, some even moved to conservative tea party sites like Brietbart. I've seen kids to college students to 30 year olds and above get behind GamerGate and are now being taught about men's right activism which is breeding more kinds of hate.


EDIT: Also all of what Shocking Alberto said!

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

I don't want to get involved in any discussion on this particular topic again, so this will be short and sweet.

The vitriolic bile being spewed by internet trolls has been inexcusable; however, it is also inexcusable to allow this to drown out an otherwise legitimate concern about wanting to keep politics and videogames separate.

I will admit that I have a libertarian perspective on gamergate, but I will once again state what I have stated before. The games industry is a business, and people should vote for the content they wish to enjoy with their wallets-- by purchasing or not purchasing a game. Politics should not be involved in deciding what content is available. If you disagree with the content in a game, don't buy it. If that is too difficult, intentionally purchase the game used. Whatever your stance is, be sure you are voting appropriately with your wallet and allow the market to decide what content is in your videogames.

Stop gamergate. This whole controversy has been an embarrassment for the gaming industry, and it's all because of a small, but vocal minority of trolls.

You can't 'vote with your wallet' here though. If I have a problem with part of the game, or would like to see stuff changed in the future, I may still like the other 95% of the game and want to support it.

There is nothing wrong with criticism something, and saying 'you shouldn't be political' is meaningless trite. It's basically saying 'You are not allowed to comment on certain things, or use certain ideology or themes in a product'. It's basically censorship on ideological grounds.

Furthermore, content is largely decided not based on who plays games, but on some marketing stereotypes the guys with the money tell you to target. A lot of what Ms Alexander's original 'gamers are over' article was about was highlighting just how absurd that stereotype was when you actually look at who plays and buys games, and appealing to devs to instead target actual players.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I support all women in the industry and young girls who aspire to being in the field one day. It should never have gotten this far. However, your last sentence although a opinion is kind of offensive.

Not everyone is a part of the small yet vocal minority that stirs Gamergate. So to say development has been setback is a bit widespread and overreaching.

DLC, Online Check-In, Broken Releases, Bad Netcode, and greedy Publishers were setting development back a long time ago.

Yeah, because other people choosing to pay for something is exactly the same thing and is on the same level as women in the industry being forced into silence.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

a) Everything in society is inherently political. Even trying to make something apolitical is political.

I'm not sure how useful this is as a framework. There's a strain of argumentation that opposes diversity in gaming, and there's a strain of argumentation that opposes the means by which some people attempt to promote diversity in gaming, and it's important to distinguish between these two strains when arguing with someone. Opposing attempts to publicly pressure artists into conforming to a particular notion of political correctness is a political stance, but it's not necessarily the same stance as opposing more representative works of art.

 

[QaaQer]

It's worth nothing that Adam Baldwin, who coined the Gamergate term and hashtag, was well-known within the MRA movement for his paranoia about how feminism is ruining the world. That's why he grabbed onto this so hard. He doesn't actually play video games - neither does Milo Yiannopoulos, the other Gamergate Head-of-State. Prior to Gamergate, Milo wrote articles about how juvenile and trashy Grand Theft Auto is and also, more importantly, about how radical feminists are driving men out of society.

Gamergate absolutely has its roots in the MRA circles.

Others may have used this thing for their own purposes, but from what Ive seen, the majority of people in those forums play games and care deeply about them.

 

[KoolAidPitcher]

Two problems I can see with this

a) Everything in society is inherently political. Even trying to make something apolitical is political.
b) Gamergate even at the best of times is fighting against the sentiments you're expressing by trying to suppress criticism

I won't disagree with either of these points. I do however, believe there is a vocal minority on both sides of this issue who are both wrong. Just because the gamergate supporters are obviously wrong, it does not mean the other side is obviously right.

Often times, extreme political movements will try and pit one side against another with a 'you're either with us or against us' mentality. I reject that position.

 

[IISANDERII]

The hobby of gaming is becoming a huge turn-off for me. So much shit to get upset at and now these awful social issues are coming about which i'm certain have always been there.

I've often wondered how so many games could be so bad and these issues shed a light on the systemic poison which are often hidden. There's a huge talent gap in this industry, caused by favouritism, unfair practices and hatred. I hope people understand that this issue negatively effects each and every single gamer.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Others may have used this thing for their own purposes, but from what Ive seen, the majority of people in those forums play games and care deeply about them.

I remain unconvinced that the MRA contingent and the hardcore gamer contingent are mutually exclusive.

People have been getting mad about women touching their video games since the Feminist Frequency kickstarter.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

I'm not sure how useful this is as a framework. There's a strain of argumentation that opposes diversity in gaming, and there's a strain of argumentation that opposes the means by which some people attempt to promote diversity in gaming, and it's important to distinguish between these two strains when arguing with someone. Opposing attempts to publicly pressure artists into conforming to a particular notion of political correctness is a political stance, but it's not necessarily the same stance as opposing more representative works of art.

So? You can't tell people they can't petition or suggest media conform to what they would like to see. Be it positive or negative, it's their right to say it.

Arguing it's 'political' is just a dog whistle for 'they shouldn't be aloud to say it'.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

It's worth nothing that Adam Baldwin, who coined the Gamergate term and hashtag, was well-known within the MRA movement for his paranoia about how feminism is ruining the world. That's why he grabbed onto this so hard. He doesn't actually play video games - neither does Milo Yiannopoulos, the other Gamergate Head-of-State. Prior to Gamergate, Milo wrote articles about how juvenile and trashy Grand Theft Auto is and also, more importantly, about how radical feminists are driving men out of society.

Gamergate absolutely has its roots in the MRA circles.

Certainly there's a lot of intersection between Gamergate, general right-wing culture war politics, and MRA folks specifically. But the Gamergaters themselves, the actual nerds in their basements doxxing people, aren't the same as the publicity hounds like Yiannopoulos or Baldwin who opportunistically glommed on to the issue for a while. And I don't mean to minimize the impact the right-wing political types had: they gave the whole thing its name, after all. But I don't think it's plausible that the rank and file Gamergaters are just transient MRAs passing through on their way to their next culture war struggle. They're not in Gamergate because they're MRAs, in other words - they're MRAs because they're in Gamergate.

 

[Soph]

So how long would it take for our society to evolve into something better, I don't really want to be discussing moronic behavior when I'm old and decrepit.

But alas, even though everyone is trying to fight racism, it's still there. I guess I'll be fighting GG nonsense until I die. What a great world we live in.

 

[KoolAidPitcher]

Furthermore, content is largely decided not based on who plays games, but on some marketing stereotypes the guys with the money tell you to target. A lot of what Ms Alexander's original 'gamers are over' article was about was highlighting just how absurd that stereotype was when you actually look at who plays and buys games, and appealing to devs to instead target actual players.

And if this is the case, then there is a lot of money to be made appealing to a broader gaming demographic and market will naturally adjust without forcing political correctness on the game industry. Both sides of gamergate did not need to exist, and ultimately accomplished nothing but tearing eachother down. Gamergate has been a catastrophe for both sides of this issue. While I truly feel sorry for the people who have been subject to the vitriol and hate of anonymous trolls on the internet, that does not make their opinions any more valid.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

I remain unconvinced that the MRA contingent and the hardcore gamer contingent are mutually exclusive.

People have been getting mad about women touching their video games since the Feminist Frequency kickstarter.

I know a guy on another forum who falls into that. He claims to have nothing against women, but he hates skeletons with a passion, and sides with GG on the grounds they are 'fighting them' so to speak. He fears skeleton influence will ruin his escapism and make things 'too real'.

I basically abandoned the thread about GG at that place because they were fairly hopeless. So long as the 'skeletons' exist, they were not going to change their minds, even going so far as to defend the 8chan kiddy porn stuff.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Certainly there's a lot of intersection between Gamergate, general right-wing culture war politics, and MRA folks specifically. But the Gamergaters themselves, the actual nerds in their basements doxxing people, aren't the same as the publicity hounds like Yiannopoulos or Baldwin who opportunistically glommed on to the issue for a while. And I don't mean to minimize the impact the right-wing political types had: they gave the whole thing its name, after all. But I don't think it's plausible that the rank and file Gamergaters are just transient MRAs passing through on their way to their next culture war struggle. They're not in Gamergate because they're MRAs, in other words - they're MRAs because they're in Gamergate.

Okay, I can accept that.

I believe there is significant overlap, but I think the reason there's not a bunch of well-known MRAs now using the gamergate hashtag isn't because the venn diagram doesn't intersect that much, it's because the MRAs didn't realize they were MRAs and never identified as such.

They were the m'lady-spouting, fedora-tipping, "Why don't girls like nice guys like me?!" fuming balls of frustration that were one good prompting away from full on Men's Rights Activism.

 

[HGH]

Something a little bit tangential, and I know I post this a lot but it's something that I always take away from shit like this:

Okay so one of GamerGate's (supposed) criticisms of Anita Sarkessian is that she's a sub-par commentator with methodological problems and an axe to grind right? The thing is, that she's shown that she's never going to give up, she just digs her heels in and more people take notice because she's being attacked. Shit like this? Shit like this makes it less likely that other people are going to appear compete in her space. They're actually making it worse for themselves by fighting.

No joke, I have a friend who's been working on games as a hobby ever since she was a teenager. Majored in Gender Studies, and always tried to get more girls into gaming, participated in indie game jams, the works. Never had a problem with anyone, never got harassed. She was working on her Masters thesis when the whole FemFreq thing started, and she fought tooth and nail against it. She thought it was awfully constructed, misrepresentative, etc... She wrote big essays and always tried to foster positive discussion. Of course, she was dismissed as some "vile misogynist neckbeard", GGer, and other awful insults because she dared disagree with the media's current cash cow(her own words here).

When Anita started getting on TV shows, newspapers, etc due to the increased harassment, she was so depressed she almost dropped out of college. She was convinced that there was no place in life for her views and she was never going to convince anyone, and she might as well just work some random sales job. Luckily she took a few months off and is better now but still... It was really harsh on her.
She also has a major vendetta against hoop earrings now.

Guess what I'm saying here is you kinda have a point.

 

[Freshmaker]

Others may have used this thing for their own purposes, but from what Ive seen, the majority of people in those forums play games and care deeply about them.

Most of the Gamergaters don't even seem to understand anything about the market they apparently value so highly.

There seems to be a binary narrative springing up that it's either games as they have been presented, or something new to replace what's already here.

That isn't how the market works. Some elements may overlap but expanding the market to a new audience doesn't mean the old audience necessarily needs to go, or that the old audience must be kicked out.

If someone claims to live and breathe gaming they could at least try to understand how businesses work. They sell stuff. As long as people give them money for products in that vein, that market will continue to exist.

Adding a new genre doesn't somehow wreck all that. Adding a new audience can help strengthen it in some respects. It's a dumb line in the sand that anyone with sense can understand.

These people are betting on Bayonetta 2 however.

Okay, I can accept that.

I believe there is significant overlap, but I think the reason there's not a bunch of well-known MRAs now using the gamergate hashtag isn't because the venn diagram doesn't intersect that much, it's because the MRAs didn't realize they were MRAs and never identified as such.

They were the m'lady-spouting, fedora-tipping, "Why don't girls like nice guys like me?!" fuming balls of frustration that were one good prompting away from full on Men's Rights Activism.

Exactly. I think of it as more of a "candy coating" covering what is essentially a MRA recruiting drive. People that miss that underlying subtext end up like Boogie.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

And if this is the case, then there is a lot of money to be made appealing to a broader gaming demographic and market will naturally adjust without forcing political correctness on the game industry. Both sides of gamergate did not need to exist, and ultimately accomplished nothing but tearing eachother down.

No one is forcing a damn thing, that's the whole issue. GG is against the very idea that such critics or advocates exist. 'PC" is just another dog whistle for 'stop advocating for what I don't like'.

And well, markets don't adjust like that outside of fantasy land. Too many people with too much control fear change, and aren't willing to change 'what works'. Even after the success of the wii, few seem willing to adjust.

There aren't 'two sides' to gamergate. There is GG's followers/flag wavers, and the entire rest of humanity advocating for who knows how many causes and methods. Someone saying 'i'd like to see more of this or that' is not in any make, shape, or form forcing any artist to do anything, nor is it a threat to the industry.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

So? You can't tell people they can't petition or suggest media conform to what they would like to see. Be it positive or negative, it's their right to say it.

Arguing it's 'political' is just a dog whistle for 'they shouldn't be aloud to say it'.

You absolutely can tell people they shouldn't try to pressure media into conforming what they would like to see. Just as everyone has a right to criticize works of art that don't conform to their political beliefs, everyone has a right to tell people they shouldn't criticize works of art just because they don't conform to their political beliefs.

Arguing "it's political" is no more a dog whistle for "they shouldn't be allowed to say it" than arguing "this game is sexist" is a dog whistle for "this game shouldn't exist." Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't - it's up to us to make that distinction for ourselves from the evidence we have available to us.

 

[KoolAidPitcher]

No one is forcing a damn thing, that's the whole issue. GG is against the very idea that such critics or advocates exist. 'PC" is just another dog whistle for 'stop advocating for what I don't like'.

And well, markets don't adjust like that outside of fantasy land. Too many people with too much control fear change, and aren't willing to change 'what works'. Even after the success of the wii, few seem willing to adjust.

There aren't 'two sides' to gamergate. There is GG's followers/flag wavers, and the entire rest of humanity advocating for who knows how many causes and methods. Someone saying 'i'd like to see more of this or that' is not in any make, shape, or form forcing any artist to do anything, nor is it a threat to the industry.

Look, we've crossed paths before so we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I think the trolling has been absolutely terrible and must stop; however, my opinion on this issue remains the same. Let the market decide.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

You absolutely can tell people they shouldn't try to pressure media into conforming what they would like to see. Just as everyone has a right to criticize works of art that don't conform to their political beliefs, everyone has a right to tell people they shouldn't criticize works of art just because they don't conform to their political beliefs.

Arguing "it's political" is no more a dog whistle for "they shouldn't be allowed to say it" than arguing "this game is sexist" is a dog whistle for "this game shouldn't exist." Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't - it's up to us to make that distinction for ourselves from the evidence we have available to us.

You can tell them, but you cannot censor them or force them to stop. That's the beauty of free speech. GG very much wants to censor these folks and banish them from the industry.

And it is indeed a dog whistle, one commonly used on the right. Don't like what someone is saying? Claim it's 'political' as a way to dismiss or silence them. GG has taken to right wing debate tactics with gusto since it started. It's all doublespeak, and cries of 'PC'; and 'politics!'.

Saying something is sexist is just saying it's problematic for X reason. A lot of it just comes down to pandering or bad writing, really. Often, only a small adjustment is the difference between sexist and normal.

Take Red Sonja for example. It's possible to play her off as a sex object, or a powerful female, depending on how shes presented. Or Xena, or so on.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

Look, we've crossed paths before so we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I think the trolling has been absolutely terrible and must stop; however, my opinion on this issue remains the same. Let the market decide.

You do realize that people can 'decide' with words as well as dollars, right?

And again, it's not reasonable to boycott 100% of a game because you disliked a few aspects of it. It's more reasonable to support the devs, but also let them know what you didn't like about it with the hopes of improvement in the future.

That's how the market works.

 

[dark10x]

This whole GG thing feels like a reflection of the world's current state. Since I've been alive I can't recall a time when the hate between various groups was so tangible. Everyone seems to hate everyone these days. It's very depressing.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

Short version: an outspoken campaign of harassment and threatening behavior directed at prominent female members of the industry (not that non-prominent women haven't also been victims of such harassment)

While this is true it also seems to make out that I can't want ethics in video game journalism without being harassing and threatening to women which isn't true at all.

Some of the pro gamersgate people just want transparency in their media. I'd like bias to be removed to but I don't see that happening.

Regardless the people do this to women are moronic animals that not only destroy a good cause but embarrass the rest of us to outside media.

 

[Freshmaker]

Look, we've crossed paths before so we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I think the trolling has been absolutely terrible and must stop; however, my opinion on this issue remains the same. Let the market decide.

You know stuff like this is how the market actually decides things don't you?

Marketers generally term it "word of mouth".

 

[Auctopus]

Though I understand why GG would've demoralised potential future female game developer, why would you then proceed to email professional female developers/Zoe Quinn explaining how you're giving up in the face of adversity? I don't see the benefit of doing that for anyone. It just demoralises the women in the industry further.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Though I understand why GG would've demoralised potential future female game developer, why would you then proceed to email professional female developers/Zoe Quinn explaining how you're giving up in the face of adversity? I don't see the benefit of doing that for anyone. It just demoralises the women in the industry further.

Because when you see something awful, you want to talk to someone that would understand and commiserate with them.

 

[vesvci]

All this....is surreal. After reading the article..I'm speechless.

When a Silicon Valley founder sends a woman reporter a gift basket with a dildo and K-Y jelly then doesn't understand why it might be offensive, it's because most of the venture capital system and the tech entrepreneurs are men. We don't have a voice. They tell us they're going to do better.

This is just ridiculous. Who the hell would think that this is ok?

 

[Jintor]

I won't disagree with either of these points. I do however, believe there is a vocal minority on both sides of this issue who are both wrong. Just because the gamergate supporters are obviously wrong, it does not mean the other side is obviously right.

Often times, extreme political movements will try and pit one side against another with a 'you're either with us or against us' mentality. I reject that position.

Sure, but neither does that mean the "somewhere in the middle" path is the safest/best path.

 

[aspiegamer]

There are a few lingering things that have always stuck around that I don't think get adequate explanation when it comes to fighting back on these matter. Namely, legal recourse/reporting to law enforcement and a social movement to push back against Gamergate.

I'll start with the later. The reason this structure does not exist is because there is no logical reason as to why it should exist. Those deeply into the conspiracies and ideologies here are as fringe-tier insane as Birthers, Truthers and the Anti-Vax crowd. Who the hell wants to gather people together to fight for the cause of "what the hell is wrong with you? Why are you willingly ignoring reality?", since the answer to that under normal circumstances is "seek help from a mental health professional".

As for law enforcement? The system just isn't built for this. Who's doing the harassing? Even if you could track them down by name and address are they in a usable jurisdiction? State or Federal charges? Do they even live in the US? How are you going to prove it was specifically this one person at the keyboard? Twitter? They don't give a shit. The chan boards? Oh please. 8chan in particular now. If you reach their front page you'd literally 2 clicks from content that could convict you of a felony in the US if you were to save the content to your PC. And good luck explaining ANY of this to a lawyer.

8chan's owner "Hotwheels" is interesting. He's, so dedicated to the ideals of the First Amendment in the United States that he fled to the Philippines where he can't be prosecuted for context on his site even if they violate US law (and copyright violations and child pornography specifically) . Similarly, he keeps the servers out of US jurisdiction. He shills for online donations and has placed in advertising, meaning it's in his interest to moderate as little as humanly possible to keep traffic higher.
He's a fucking coward.

 

[Smash88]

You put yourself in the hole of being associated with them by claiming that a victim is the one causing the problems. It's not hard to figure out why people are grouping you in that manner. It's not about having a differing opinion, it's about being tone deaf to reality. You actually claimed she - an actual game developer - is making it harder for women ... Wow.

She is making it harder for women, there is no denying that. Are you seriously trying to justify, because one side is doing something bad, the other side is excused from it, no matter the level of severity. Like come on. Also I think you need to read my posts, I'm saying she is adding on more bullshit needlessly through her actions; I am not saying the other side is justified in their actions. I do not understand how people are misconstruing my point.

Is this really a difficult thing to comprehend? I mean it's straight forward, one side does fucked up shit, and the other side doesn't help their situation, in fact making it worse, and yet they are saints and should not be critiqued, because how dare they, they were treated worse. I'm sorry shitty behaviour does not justify other shitty behaviour, no matter the severity. You only help in continue that cycle through those actions.

Gamergate timeline for the blissfully ignorant, or for anyone really, there's quite a bit of stuff.
Summary: Gamergate's shit and anyone supporting it is an asshole.

Worth noting that TotalBiscuit is an asshole. Not because he's the worst one, but the biggest.

*badom-tish*

Fun Fact!
In the context of Gamergate, "Both Sides" is usually a punchline that signals the end to the joke of a gater pretending to not be one. It's a phrase commonly used by gaters attempting to argue that "both sides" are equal, the truth is in the middle, or some such bullshit.

I rate this phrase:

Especially after you've just made a petty complaint against a Gamergate target.

Oh how cute, you even have that new eurogamer review method. Both sides is a correct statement when they are both doing really shitty things and not helping their case at all pro-gg people of course with their swatting, death threats, doxxing etc... (even though they would like to believe it's for ethics in journalism - how they even believe they are fighting for that battle is beyond me at this point) and the victim creating scenarios which propagate and reinforce the sentiment against uninformed individuals and those part of it, which only further adds fuel to the fire - needlessly I might add.

Apparently any sort of critiquing is some sort of sentence to being cast as a gamergater. It's honestly tiresome at this point. This will be my last posting concerning anything related to gamergate, it's just not worth the headache and false accusations. Anyone who does anything against the norm is just automatically casted in with a group of morons, this board is about having discussions of topics and not being told to "fuck off", "shove it up your ass", "you are part of gamergate" because of a differing opinion - I would like to believe any opinion can be presented and discussed without throwing it to the side and being automatically put as an outcast for even the most minute of differing views. News flash, not everyone is a gamergater because they like to critically discuss a topic.

Do you really want to stick to the both sides rhetoric knowing full well that GamerGate has a board specifically for doxxing and discussing who they'd like dead?

Yes, one persons behaviour does not absolve the other persons, no matter the severity. You are not going to be off the hook just because the other side is doing fucked up things, it does not justify your actions. It's like telling someone to murder a person who is a known murderer and who just killed someone last night. The end does not justify the means.