Calm down honey.
Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos
- Thread starter papersleeves
- Start date
- Status
Pachterballs
Banned
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
Chairmanchuck
Member
Come on, dude. You cant say this!
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
Is this a so-called "Gaming-Journalist"?
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
That's Justin mcellroy (may have misspelled his name)
works at polygon now.
works at polygon now.
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
THIS was the worst thing about 2012. By a fucking mile.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
2011.
If he had said "Ohhh Geoff, dude" would you be saying the same? Do you seriously think everyone is out there to try and mistreat women for the sake of being women?
I think maybe it's you who has a sexist view on the matter, not him.
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
I never knew the context for this and assumed it was some kind of self-deprecating joke. It wasn't?
The long (and continuing) history of oppression and dominance by men against women mean that changing the gender of the speaker relative to the recipient amends the context!
Ever wonder why it's not acceptable for white people to use the N word? Because the context of 'race' has changed between the two situations.
Not that 'honey' and 'dude' are even equivalents in use, one is often a patriarchal term of intimacy (when said by a man to a woman) and the latter is just a throwaway name-substitute that has none of the former's connotations.
As someone said earlier, just because someone using language doesn't fully appreciate how it will be understood, through ignorance or stupidity, doesn't mean that the meaning to the recipient will be altered.
I read the original remark as intentional condescension in a mildly humorous tone in order to highlight the fact that Lauren seems to have made yet another mistake in this whole silly fiasco by reigniting the discussion. It would have had the same effect if the subject was male, with no word replacement. Condescending, yes. Sexist, no.
As for how the recipient interpreted it, I don't think we know that, do we? Either way, honey is a fairly ambiguous, non-gender-specific term in the first place. Male and female partners use the term for each other, some adults use it as a term of endearment for children of both gender, or perhaps someone simply a generation younger than them. Really don't see the problem here.
Part of the reason it is condescending is that it is sexist and aimed at a woman by a man, if they had said, "Ohhh, human..." or as you suggest it was a man to man interaction it wouldn't have the same power.
We don't know how she interpreted it no, but as at least some people interpreted it in a negative light then the potential for that interpretation is clearly there even if it wasn't intended (which ironically enough is what Rob's article was about in the first place).
I don't know, maybe it's a US/UK cultural thing, but young men walking around here using the term 'honey' with young women they didn't know, especially, as in this case, when the context is patronizing/antagonistic, would have to protect their balls.
Anyway, back on topic, I think she has gone now so I guess we'll never know the truth of the matter.
We don't know how she interpreted it no, but as at least some people interpreted it in a negative light then the potential for that interpretation is clearly there even if it wasn't intended (which ironically enough is what Rob's article was about in the first place).
I don't know, maybe it's a US/UK cultural thing, but young men walking around here using the term 'honey' with young women they didn't know, especially, as in this case, when the context is patronizing/antagonistic, would have to protect their balls.
Anyway, back on topic, I think she has gone now so I guess we'll never know the truth of the matter.
It very much was.
"Continuing history of oppression and dominance by men against women". Sorry, I don't buy it. It may still happen in some cultures, or some stupid fools may think it's fine, but I like to believe this has changed. I hope it did.
I don't think "honey" is exclusively used to refer to women. And he wasn't criticising her for being a woman, he was criticising her for avoiding every question, and telling her it's no use to keep on doing that here.
I think some of you guys are trying to read too much between the lines, into things that were never said. It's funny how the only person to interpret the word as being derogatory to women is the one that would take offense at anything he considers sexist. Don't start a crusade against words, you won't gain anything. In the case of the N word, it was something that was exclusively used by white people as a derogatory term to black people (until they started using it themselves, changing its meaning). "Honey" isn't a derogatory term to women. It CAN be, like "darling" can be, like "sweetheart" can be; hell, like almost any word can be. But then we'll have to ban every word, for risk of it offending someone.
In short, he said "honey" to disregard her lack of answers, not her gender. Please people, stop looking at the world with the offensive glasses on, not everything is said in a misogynist way.
I assume it was. But it also fits with the theme of "Games writers, please stop doing embarrassing things that make you look unprofessional and biased" that this thread was founded on.
The context and the situation are all different, Blood hell guys, can't you just live ittle without getting yourself a little offended?
Anyway, I am sad to see this discussion derailed to this point, Now I hope Lauren doesn't back off just because she thinks she is harrassed :/
Anymore...
How are those not written advertorials? You wrote about Hitman: Absolution and Deus Ex: Human Revolution with pretty glowly praise. How are those not advertorials to you? How can you not see that people can see it that way even if you know it isn't true? How can't you deflect those criticisms with "okay, I can see how you can see that but..." and give an accurate time-line (and not the revised ones, remember we know you deleted your ties to S-ED when this blew up)?
Jackpot said:
Jackpots post(s) are good starting points. Stop "dodging" questions and ANSWER him, please.
Better yet, here's a free lesson: You keep asking "is it wrong to post about my love of Tomb Raider on my twitter?"
No, but: 1) Remove the PR-y background images from your twitter 2) "My tweets are my own and not anything to do with Square-Enidos or any employer" like the DICE/game industry dudes do 3) or set-up private tweets to where your shit isn't "misunderstood" as PR fluff when as Rab points out it could be considered that. Boom, people in the know know you aren't doing it as a paid advertorial. And people that don't won't ever see it. Win-win?
AKA: Lrn2Twitter?
You don't 'buy' that sexism still exists?
It may be more subtle in the first world, but it's still there (and always will be for various biological reasons).Nobody's asking for words to be banned they're asking for words not to be used in a sexist manner. I agree he wasn't criticising her for being a woman, but he was using a term based around her gender to demean and belittle her, that's still sexist even if it's not a direct "get in the kitchen bitch!" insult.
Anyway, I'm not going to drag this off topic again, I'm just odd in that, even though I'm a man, I get pissed off at the truckloads of bullshit I see aimed at women every day. Then again I get pissed off with women for putting up with and often encouraging that shit in the first place so I'll get back in my cupboard and leave you in peace.
Delusibeta
Banned
I think that TheSeks' post demonstrates Laura's problem. Her name is mud, and frankly if she does pop up again on a video games website she'll be mobbed with accusations of being a PR shrill. Video games magazines is dying (on paper, at least: they might survive as iPad and Android apps), and every other video game outlet has comment sections. I think she is going to have to seek a different career.
Certainly, she's done nothing to help herself here.
Certainly, she's done nothing to help herself here.
After reading her answers here, I'm with you. But because she doesn't even seem to have a grasp of what working ethics are, I think she'll always have somewhere to work, unfortunately.
akidnamededdy
Banned
And now someone's equated the word "honey" with the N-word. I was wondering when I'd be able to cross that one off my Unnecessarily PC Bingo card.
Pachterballs
Banned
I think it was very much serious. Then he got lambasted all and pulled the "self-deprecating joke" defence. its just embarassing.
on the honey debacle?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3KOowB4k_k
Bullshit. That is exactly in Justin's style of humor.
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
Yeah, she needs to disappear, unlike all the other paragons of objectivity.
There are some serious levels of insanity going on in this thread. I want to say so much, but who cares about a ranting lunatic in an asylum?
Or perhaps it was an analogy to another more commonly understood situation to show the importance of situational context on interpretation of language by a third party?
Nah, you're right, I'm just a moron and I was saying they were exactly the same...
Except it's not so much self-deprecating or a statement about anything as it is embarrassing. When your style of humor is being clownshoes dancing with your video game to make a point, you shouldn't expect people to focus on the message, but rather you being clownshoes dancing with your video game.
I didn't say it was a good joke or had some deeper meaning. The poster I responded to seemed to be suggesting that it was some genuine and serious expression of emotion. Well I don't doubt that Justin was excited about the game, which I have no problem with, I'm also pretty sure his thinking wasn't "Oh boy Skyrim! The only way I can express my emotions at this moment is to dance with this game and post it on Youtube." It was exaggeration for attempted comedic effect.
If you're going to bash him for something actually unprofessional at least go back to him refusing to review Nier because he could not get past an (admittedly confusing, but not impossible) fishing quest instead of a video posted on his personal Youtube channel which also has a bunch of other silly bullshit on it.
I don't know the guy or his work. I'm not claiming unprofessionalism in the sense of competence or fitness to perform his duties. Rather, I am claiming you shouldn't make a video of yourself dancing with your video game because you will be mocked for it.
The core problem, being requests to avoid even perceived opportunity for corruption, appears to be intractable. It's a combination of apathy towards change and requirement of trust in a corruptible-by-design system.
On the supply side writers are aclimatised to the status quo and genuinely feel innocent of any and all claims of corruption, thus they can only take defensive stances. Individually I'm sure most literally feel none of the issues discussed in this thread apply to them, because they already do their best and thus the issue itself must be overblown.
On the demand side there is no shortage of faux outrage, shock and awe from reveleations of the obvious nature of a job where business and pleasure intersect (it's a lose lose situation if a games writer has no favourite or doesn't like playing games) making both sides wrong enough that both feel justified ignoring the other.
A good solution would be for gamers to admit perfection isn't possible, we're human after all, but still demand writers at least aim for it and are as honest as can be and for writers to grow up and understand accusations of perceived corruption are a workplace health and safety concern now so stay on your toes and do your best while staying professional.
Another free tip for anyone who ends up under fire. Admitting mistakes and apologising while staying defensive of your whole career is a mistake and only makes you appear insincere or worse, incapable of reflection, reconsideration or change. Retelling a given course-of-events over and over won't magically help change peoples mind as the problem is one of perspective. No doubt you would think the events if told truthfully enough prove your complete and utter innocence (Remember, you're not corrupt..it's just how things are done, you're no different from anyone else!) but in the mind of the accuser these very facts (if deemed culturally unacceptable) make you guilty! Just to make things fun what is deemed culturally acceptable changes constantly (Just see the sexism discussion above) so the ability to fluidly improve/change your own perspective/actions (personal growth) is a must. But that applies to both sides.
On the supply side writers are aclimatised to the status quo and genuinely feel innocent of any and all claims of corruption, thus they can only take defensive stances. Individually I'm sure most literally feel none of the issues discussed in this thread apply to them, because they already do their best and thus the issue itself must be overblown.
On the demand side there is no shortage of faux outrage, shock and awe from reveleations of the obvious nature of a job where business and pleasure intersect (it's a lose lose situation if a games writer has no favourite or doesn't like playing games) making both sides wrong enough that both feel justified ignoring the other.
A good solution would be for gamers to admit perfection isn't possible, we're human after all, but still demand writers at least aim for it and are as honest as can be and for writers to grow up and understand accusations of perceived corruption are a workplace health and safety concern now so stay on your toes and do your best while staying professional.
Another free tip for anyone who ends up under fire. Admitting mistakes and apologising while staying defensive of your whole career is a mistake and only makes you appear insincere or worse, incapable of reflection, reconsideration or change. Retelling a given course-of-events over and over won't magically help change peoples mind as the problem is one of perspective. No doubt you would think the events if told truthfully enough prove your complete and utter innocence (Remember, you're not corrupt..it's just how things are done, you're no different from anyone else!) but in the mind of the accuser these very facts (if deemed culturally unacceptable) make you guilty! Just to make things fun what is deemed culturally acceptable changes constantly (Just see the sexism discussion above) so the ability to fluidly improve/change your own perspective/actions (personal growth) is a must. But that applies to both sides.
Brainiac 8
Member
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
He was just being silly, leave him be. I think sometimes we forget that game journalists are gamers too. They are allowed to be silly and have fun with their hobby. It doesn't always have to be all serious all the time.
Yeah, you're right. The industry is so beyond saving we shouldn't even bother trying.
Except we should, and we might as well start with the worst of the worst. Cmon, her actions and the actions of her little clan bring us all down into the shit. Like Andrea Renee. What the hell is she still doing on weekend confirmed? And why are people like you defending these sleazebags?
Just because you live on McDonalds doesn't make it healthy to eat.
Not the only stupid thing to come from him.
If Justin admitted he's a goofball would that make it all ok? Sometimes I wonder if societies remuneration system and lack of safety nets for failure force into existence fictitious, hypocritical, defensive celwebrities where otherwise relaxed, fun-loving legit fallable humans would be allowed to live and let live.
Sometimes we overlook the fact that game "journalists" are not just gamers. They write about games for an audience. Reviewers contribute to setting metacritic scores, on which often hinge developers' bonuses.
If games "journalists" want to clown around and pose as complete tools, it's certainly their prerogative to do so.
Conversely, being their target audience, pointing out that their being complete tools undermines what little credibility they might have left is our prerogative.
You hyper entitled numbskull you.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.
I've found certain forums are great places to have one's assumptions challenged and stimulate thought.
Regardless, it is entirely possible to love the people in one's life while simultaneously seeing humanity as deeply flawed and wishing for better in the future through guided evolution instead of the ad-hoc amoral kind we see in natural selection.
& I supposed one's view of humanity will be informed by what one has experienced at the hands of other people in their lives. I am truly glad you have such a positive view of humanity. I leave it at that.
Brainiac 8
Member
It's no different than RMC making silly videos like him making out with the WiiU. It's just gamers being silly.
The metacritic thing is the publisher's idiotic thing. I think metacritic is one of the worst things to happen to the industry.
Dictator93
Member
Jason Schreiers posts inn here have been really good. Wainwrights make me realize how people can self justify till the cows come home
While I understand why this is (for good reason) criticized, it also confuses me a little. Usually are people who are attacking game journalists saying that all their scores are bought anyway, but then when we see one being a fanboy it's also wrong.
found it.
fucking embarrassing.
So what is it? Are Game Journalists over enthusiastic fanboys or paid frauds?
Neither.
schwabdizzle
Banned
I game up on Game Journalism a long time ago. Sure, I listen to gaming podcasts all the time, but I take people's opions with a grain of salt because they are not mine. I kind of think of myself as Sheldon Cooper in which everyone is wrong except for me until they have an opinion that I can agree with.
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
I didn't (and don't) defend the payola-esque actions that happen in the gaming industry.
However, this industry doesn't need 'saving', in whatever sense you mean it. To think that it does is delusional. I just don't think the continued witchhunt (gender most explicitly implied here) is helping anything.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
What I find peculiar about all this is the emphasis that only positive opinions can be bought. I mean, if someone's advocacy is up for sale why not pay them to be extra critical of a competitor's product?
Surely if reviews are as powerful as all that, why not use them to stifle competition as that achieves the same financially beneficial result?
Lets face it, more people get up in arms over positive reviews than vicious ones, because there are plenty of immature idiots out there who are still in the schoolyard mindset that bitching at something is funny and "cool".
The best part is though that you can achieve this result at an editorial level. Everyone has their own biases so simply by matching a product with a reviewer with a track record of negativity towards a particular genre or platform can be used to shape the result.
How is this any less pernicious than the thought of getting enthusiasts for a particular genre or franchise to review a game?
Surely if reviews are as powerful as all that, why not use them to stifle competition as that achieves the same financially beneficial result?
Lets face it, more people get up in arms over positive reviews than vicious ones, because there are plenty of immature idiots out there who are still in the schoolyard mindset that bitching at something is funny and "cool".
The best part is though that you can achieve this result at an editorial level. Everyone has their own biases so simply by matching a product with a reviewer with a track record of negativity towards a particular genre or platform can be used to shape the result.
How is this any less pernicious than the thought of getting enthusiasts for a particular genre or franchise to review a game?
Slightly tangential, but I'm a little more perturbed by vicious reviews/dismissings of games than super positive ones. This is not a comment on opinions being bought, but a lot of the games press are just bad at being open minded or seem to lack the ability to go beyond their small comfort zone and appreciate games in terms that aren't so binary.
Situation, yes. Context, not overly. I never claimed or suggested I was offended, or even that I thought the use of honey was derogatory. I was explaining how it could very easily be perceived to be that way. This thread is about perceptions, so I would think the NeoGAF posters in it might be more open to how simple words can have unintended negative connotations without screaming "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!!!".
CambriaRising
Member
Well this gif is always taken out of context. It was a long running joke on the Joystiq podcast that all Justin ever played was Oblivion, so when skyrim was released he was very excited to play the sequel to one of his favorite games of all times. Was the video unnecessary? Yes, but its hard to not be excited when the sequel to a game you loved gets released.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
The amazing thing about all this is, we never even saw Lauren's response to this. Just a bunch of dudes outraged for her presumably wounded sensibilities.You don't 'buy' that sexism still exists?
Nobody's asking for words to be banned they're asking for words not to be used in a sexist manner. I agree he wasn't criticising her for being a woman, but he was using a term based around her gender to demean and belittle her, that's still sexist even if it's not a direct "get in the kitchen bitch!" insult.
Anyway, I'm not going to drag this off topic again, I'm just odd in that, even though I'm a man, I get pissed off at the truckloads of bullshit I see aimed at women every day. Then again I get pissed off with women for putting up with and often encouraging that shit in the first place so I'll get back in my cupboard and leave you in peace.
Seems kinda paternalistic.
- Status