Or the Revolution 60 steam forums. It's was a fucking shit show last time I checked it.
Semi-related, what's with gamergators calling Wu "Brian"? I keep seeing it wherever ggers mention her.
"I have...letters from dozens of women who've abandoned their dream" (Brianna Wu)
- Thread starter The Technomancer
- Start date
- Status
Semi-related, what's with gamergators calling Wu "Brian"? I keep seeing it wherever ggers mention her.
Michanical
Member
They are accusing her of being transgender. Some believe it, others are doing it to attack her.
No, it really did not.
The entire conspiracy theory was based on a hypothetical conflict of interest in fictional articles about a free game. It was a fabricated excuse to attack the game dev, nothing more.
Not to mention the supposed relationship was based on a blog post from an ex who got a restraining order put on him and lost his job because he was so obsessed.
Liana K has faced genuine harassment, but that article is mostly pure garbage and full of weird victim blaming of Anita and an unironic use of "beta males"
But these posts (along with various other posts in the same thread), deconstruct it in detail:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GirlGamers...eminist_frequency_almost_made_me_quit/cohe838
https://www.reddit.com/r/GirlGamers...eminist_frequency_almost_made_me_quit/cohe7u5
There was a rumour that Brianna is trans, yet, as far as I know, the only source of that is Encyclopaedia Dramatica (which tells you everything about it's validity), of course Gators jumped on that because they're colossal transphobes. Even if was true it would be no-one's business unless she chose reveal it herself.
yeehamuffins
Member
Because GG is transphobic as fuck, and therefore the worst possible insult they can come up with is to call out someone, truthfully or not, as transgender.
Huh? I'm not understanding what you are asking.
You're still not getting it: just because someone mentions Zoe Quinn doesn't mean that you have to reply. Furthermore it doesn't mean that you have to ask questions about alleged infidelity. Nor does someone mentioning Zoe Quinn mean that you have to state that you dislike cheaters. It is utterly irrelevant.
What will you actually gain from knowing that Zoe Quinn, a woman you'll probably never meet, cheated?
I'm not saying that you're necessarily obsessed, I'm saying that you should back off with regards to her personal life which is none of your business. My choice of words was due to the fact that despite several people explaining to you that you aren't entitled to that information you insist on your crusade. Also I can't help but notice that you haven't posted in the Tiger Woods thread about how awful a person he is since he cheated, why is that?
It's your own words that are painting you in a negative light, not my minor (and let me stress that it was minor) effort. If you would consider putting in any form of effort in your posting you might not end up having to defend what you've written.
I actually wouldn't mind doing that, but I doubt she'd want to considering how talking with the enthusiast press has gone thus far.
I guess that was the obvious explanation. Fucksakes
Dismissing her claims as "pure garbage." Stay classy
lol at those reddit posts to back up YOUR claim.
Just when you thought you heard it all, right?
Thank you for posting that response ... I was too exhausted to type up how ridiculous that editorial was, and the reddit post covers most the points.
Emperor_Uriel
Member
At the very least, there are more and more people talking about the issues at hand. We may not see more women working in the industry, which is the ideal end result, but at least we can continue to push male developers to be more progressive.
As young men become more used to seeing female characters who look and behave in ways that they would consider atypical, I'm confident they'll grow up to be less reprehensible than this glorified lynch mob.
Dismissing her claims as "pure garbage." Stay classy
Maybe try reading the rest?
LoveCake
Member
Yes it was a conspiracy theory about a conflict of interest, it should have been nipped in the bud, all it would have taken is for Kotaku to ask Grayson if there was any truth in the theory & that would have been the end of it, i'm not saying there should have been a public trial, just one of the people in charge, a editor perhaps to ask Grayson as soon as the theory about a conflict of interest was raised, a site that exists to report news & review things must have it's integrity intact at all times & any question raised about it's integrity should be investigated.
I think that if it had been handled quicker in the first instance then this whole sorry state of affairs would never of happened.
This is getting way off topic now, so i'm going to stop.
We can only hope...
Actually yeah. I figured gg would have hit maximum shit when I heard about the swattings, but ugh.
Nymphae
Banned
I would think these women might want their stories shared, she could ask for permission to post them anonymously, and it wouldn't be difficult to post them and omit anything that would identify the people. Thread title speaks about dozens of letters, and I don't see any. It's pretty easy to just say I have a drawer full of letters on a subject. I'm not saying she's lying, but just stating you have dozens of letters doesn't really prove anything. Of course many GG's would likely say they were faked if she did post them, but I'd rather see what she's talking about than just take her word for it.
you misunderstand how made up it was, and they did that anyway.
edit:
kinda the point is that it always was a completely nonsensical fabrication, and people still "just askin" about it all the time, all the time, every thread, months later, all the time, just askin about that made up story. it was nipped in the bud, gg didn't care. its kinda the smoking gun demonstrating that it always was a hate campaign.
Yes, it was simplified to the degree that it painted a totally false picture of the situation.
I think that you reduced the women in your photos to objects for men's attraction, but hey, we can disagree on that.
You did the same with the anti"-side", there was nothing the comment about "bone a dude" added to your argument. It just made it seem like the second woman was the anti-side's pornographic fantasies (which added to my interpretation of her being objectified).
No, it's more like, they wrote those to her in confidence. Even if they were depersonalized, there's something strangely malicious about reading someone's personal absolution of their hopes and dreams that shouldn't be shared.
Unless they agree to share them, and then sure. But yeah...just putting them up there...it would be kinda sleazy. Though, I would like to read them as well.
charlequin
Banned
Yeah, there are two distinct issues around Liana K. The first one is that she's worked very hard during this whole situation to defend GG as a group and to create false equivalencies around the abuse that men and women receive; on those areas only I think it is reasoanble to dismiss her positions, for the same reason that we would dismiss the same positions from men involved in GG.
The second is that she has in fact received her own share of abuse, out of proportion to that received by male or purely pseudonymous members of GG. This has to do with the unfortunate fact that there is an unfortunately large number of men for whom their gender outweighs their nominal politics -- there isn't an organized group of people targeting others for abuse like there is within the GG sphere, but there are still plenty of individual men who will disproportionately harass a woman for stating anti-feminist positions. That isn't proof that "anti-GG is just as bad or worse" as she might claim, but it does speak to the fact that the problem of online abuse is deeper than just a black-and-white political division.
Prax
Member
Yeah.. I just skipped to a random point in the video because I can't be bothered to sit through a 3-parter which seemed to go into a "BUT WHAT ABOUT MEN!!!?!!??!!?" slant.
Like uhm..
I think the point of Anita's went went over her head or she overidentifies with gaming culture or really wants to be seen as "with it" and.. anyway. She's articulate, and seems intelligent, but she has used it to perform mental gymnastics and be really disingenuous.
That she has received abuse too is really unfortunate. Women just happen to become huge targets in these kind of debates regardless of what side they stand on and I think it's because in our culture, we're conditioned to try to put them "in their place", whatever that place one thinks they should be.
yeah, I'm pretty sure either kotaku or rock paper shotgun posted a clarification and gg's response was "he must be lying becase she's a slooot. top kek" or something along those lines.
Nymphae
Banned
I edited my post, I was going off the assumption that in posting them, she would ask for permission first.
The rest? It was one guys post and a handful like 6 or 7 others agreeing. The sub thread the video was in was tiny I'm not sure why or how you got so much out of that but reading one post and taking it as gospel is not my thing. Apparently I didn't find his arguments as convincing as you did.
Netherscourge
Banned
YIKES
How the hell is THIS guy not in jail?
How the hell is THIS guy not in jail?
It's complicated.
RpgN
Junior Member
You decided to join the discussion with me in an attacking manner, presenting that I have lied about what I have said about her. As in I hardly visited her threads or GG threads. You tried to use my post history against me in an effort to paint me as a liar. While you didn't have to go that far, I already mentioned in this thread the exact things I've done in that one thread in a short summary kinda way.
Here's what you don't get. I have followed many female related threads before and read others mention Zoe Quinn. I didn't ask about her then when it was brought up every time.
And so, to reply to the rest of this.
You don't get to tell me when I'm allowed to talk, what I'm allowed to talk about and why the hell I would do that. This is getting on my nerves. You're not an internet police to tell me what to talk about. Get lost with that tone of yours.
Nothing. Only my curiousity answered and that I have enough information to form an opinion about that person. Not in a way to attack that person, but entirely personal for myself.
Are you serious? Because I don't play golf, care about the sport or care about the guy? Why would I visit threads I don't care about? For your information, I was thinking highly negatively about him when that came up on TV. While I love video games, care deeply about the way girls are portrayed in games, how the media and marketing is handled in a gendered way, how prominent figures are treated and how there is a lack of playable girls you can choose from. Of course I care about these threads and love to visit them.
I always put a lot of effort in my replies and try to be respectful while staying true to myself. I try to be honest and go ahead with saying things I know it might upset people or have them turn against me for it (because I can easily come over as hard and aggressive), but that doesn't stop me from feeling the need to share my thoughts.
This is not a court, I didn't deserve being forced to defend myself in such a way because I said things you don't approve of.
Thank you, at least one person believes me. I'm seriously sad and hurt about this. I was planning on mentioning what Brianna Wu said and how that has affected me (maybe once the dust has settled),
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
In September you were in a Zoe Quinn thread "just asking questions". Now you're playing innocent, claiming once again to "just be asking questions", while still focusing on irrelevant garbage like her alleged cheating, and when called out on it you're playing the hurt victim.
Yeah, I'm not buying it.
Yeah, I'm not buying it.
Imru al-Qays
Banned
I don't know, "seems articulate and intelligent but I can't stand to listen to her because I disagree with her" doesn't seem like the best way to go about engaging with other points of view.
JonathanNemo
Member
Imru al-Qays;151811093 said:
Neither is paraphrasing other folks in ways that miss what they're actually saying.
The complaint you're paraphrasing was about the length of the videos and the nature of the arguments made, not just disagreement. Be nice.
Respectfully, with public figures, especially ones who have taken a strong position on an issue, their personal life choices can be relevant where they intersect with that issue. For instance, Larry Craig, conservative Republican US senator who was against gay marriage, got caught in 2007 trawling for sex in a men's restroom. He was widely mocked, even though the incident occurred in his personal life and not in the course of his direct duties as a senator. Obviously Zoe Quinn isn't a public figure in the same vein as a US Senator, but I'd argue that the internet has blurred the lines between public and private figures. When you self-identify as a feminist, and you have a public presence as a feminist indie game developer, it's reasonable to expect that if it's discovered that you've acted in a way that arguably demeans you as a woman in your private life, that's going to become a part of your public identity as well.
Quinn's boyfriend had every right to share his story online. Defamation is the act of using falsehoods to besmirch another person's reputation. Speaking out the truth against someone, publicly, is not defamation. It wasn't mature what the guy did, and it wasn't healthy, but it was within his rights to do. Now the harassment and threats that members of the online community directed against Quinn, they were wrong, and disproportionate, to boot. That's where I have a problem with GamerGate.
Tiger Woods is a huge scumbag, by the way. He acted holier-than-thou and had this false image of a clean-cut family man. Meanwhile he was a lying, cheating, disgusting man who dynamited his own family with his choices. Even though his numerous affairs happened in his private life, it is absolutely fair that his public image has suffered because of them, in my opinion. Don't pretend to be something that you're not.
Imru al-Qays
Banned
The complaint about the argument being made was that it was an argument in favor of the position that men and women both experience online harassment. Dismissing that argument just because of the sort of argument it is is dismissing that argument because you disagree with it.
RpgN
Junior Member
A lot has happened between September and February, don't you agree? You don't think I would want an update to know what happened since then? Especially since I read she was in court in this thread?
I mentioned her 3 times in 3 different threads (this one included). Exactly matching with everything that I said in this thread.
I'm surprised about you. I thought you would recognize me in female related threads and how my opinions often matched yours. Now you don't buy it in this instance because my opinion is not the same about Zoe.
Nah, it is true. I never denied that though, I mentioned it in here in fact. But people like to ignore the first few replies I had here for some reason.
It is just so frustrating. People coming from different sides, ignoring some of my replies or cherry pick ones to put me in a certain light.
I never said that you lied. What I said was that people have explained to you that her personal life doesn't concern you and that you haven't listened to those people. Then I produced excerpts from your posting history that outlined the the things you've said about her because they were, and still are, awful.
Congratulations on your restraint.
What you write on a discussion board isn't somehow exempt from being criticised.
No, and neither is you, just like I can't tell you what to post, you can't tell me that I'm not allowed to talk about so I'll keep posting with "my tone" thank you very much.
But you are not entitled to know that, you don't have to form an opinion about a woman you won't meet. I'm not sure how to explain this clearer.
It was a bit of snark about how you seem to care very much about alleged infidelity and care very little about confirmed infidelity.
No this is a forum, and as I stated above, what you write here isn't exempt from criticism. Which means I am perfectly entitled to express why I don't approve of what you've written.
Just imagine how Zoe Quinn feels because of people like you. Don't play the victim when you are the bully.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
No, I don't think anyone would want an update about her personal life because it's none of your goddamn business.
I don't actually remember you, no. But yeah, I'm not taking someone's side when they're being dubious just because they happened to agree with me in the past. Shockingly, I judge posts on their own merits and right now I see zero good faith whatsoever.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
The widespread transphobia among gamergate completes the trifecta of prejudice within that vile group. There is absolutely no respectable reason to refer to someone by a name they do not identify as. This goes for both trans- and cis- gender individuals. Gamergate does it only in an attempt to hurt.
kavanf1
Member
Really well said. I practically got my head bitten off in another thread - had to go off and google the various names I was called as I hadn't a fucking clue what they were on about. I've read up a lot on gamergate since and it's safe to say the whole thing is so polarised that it is pretty much impossible to have a logical discussion about it.
RpgN
Junior Member
What the hell do you mean by that? WTF, I'm the bully? Are you being serious?
Imru al-Qays
Banned
We're at some sort of weird cultural moment where everyone feels that every argument is of crucial moral importance and that everyone has the right to anathemize anyone who disagrees with them on a particular issue, even someone they might agree with most of the time. I don't know if it's always been this way, but it certainly seems to have gotten worse recently, in a variety of domains.
It's the elimination of the field of good-faith disagreement. Anyone who disagrees with What Is Right is arguing in bad faith by definition. It's quite frankly awful.
Modest Mauser
Member
Just because he had a legal right doesn't make it okay. It was a deplorable thing to do considering the incendiary atmosphere that already surrounded Quinn online, and especially once he started to actively encourage the harassment.
Imru al-Qays
Banned
He shouldn't need to convince you of that. Presume that he's arguing in good faith until there's compelling evidence that he isn't, of which at this moment there is none.
Yes I am. I think that your behaviour towards Zoe Quinn is that of a bully.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Imru’ al-Qays;151814315 said:
EDIT: Response redacted to figure out how to articulate it better
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Last I heard that guy successfully fled the country. (unconfirmed of course since 8chan is about the worst source imaginable)
The two Reddit posts he/she linked was a pretty exhaustive rebuttal of Liana K's post, it doesn't matter how big the Reddit thread was because what was linked to was those two OPs. I personally think that Redditor does a good job at shooting down most of Liana K's claims about fem freq, but feel free to say what you disagree with.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked