#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gorger said:
So what actions led to them losing their feminist status?
Click to expand...

Well, Jennie made a pretty ridiculous YouTube video: "Why you shouldn't worry about gender in video games". It can essentially be summarized with:

You shouldn't worry about gender in video games because:
-Gender inequality/representation is unavoidable in all mediums, so video games shouldn't be attacked alone
-1990s uproar over violent video games (Mortal Kombat) may be the root of gender inequality uproar
-Video games should be lauded for letting you play as men OR women (she incorrectly refers to this as "all genders")
-Men and women both play video games (she claims this puts all genders "on the same playing field", often together, so gender differences "hardly matter now"

Here is a rough transcript of some of her arguments:

"Now, when non-gamers think of video games, they think of the violent and sexual aspects first. However, in a study conducted, it was found that gamers and non-gamers held the same male and female stereotypes and gender-role associations. Therefore, gender roles in video games were insignificant."
Click to expand...

"Most gamers feel the need to defend gender roles in video games, not because they think its right, but because those who accuse video games as negative mediums are more likely to go against video games as a whole. Therefore, gamers feel a need to defend video games."
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't understand how anyone can take issue with Anita's arguments/videos and yet also support Jennie's shallow stance.

As for the others--I'll just go with Jemma/Gemma, as she was the other very vocal one who identified as a feminist. She feels it is wrong to tag GG as a movement rife with misogyny, and also believes that game reviews should be "objective", free of influence from the reviewer's own worldview/ideology.

As the host points out, that's not how reviews work. Reviews are inherently subjective and prone to influence from the reviewer's own set of beliefs. That's just how it is, and that's why you should find reviewers whom you like and identify with, and rely on them--not some aggregate score based on a bunch of reviews. I just find it hard to fathom that a feminist would not want misogyny/sexism/bigotry/etc. in games to be left alone and not discussed. Doesn't compute.

I mean, #GamerGate was coined by Adam Baldwin, a misogynist douchebag who hates feminists. Anyone who associates with GG without acknowledging that, and claiming that GG has nothing against feminism, is suspect, IMO.

Also, holy shit, I didn't think anyone used "Social Justice Warriors" as an actual title for "the enemy" but then that HuffPo interview happened.
 
Damn, that reddit thread is an interesting read.
And I don't mean that as a "Oh look at all those idiots being idiots while I'm smart over here". It's just legitimately an interesting read.
At no point did Jeff or Brad "attack gamers", not even Alex or Patrick did that but nevertheless I read the "now they are attacking their own audience" argument a bunch of times.
 
yibR7zn.png


http://chainsawsuit.com/comic/2014/10/15/the-perfect-crime/
 
Gorger said:
Them personally identifying themselves as feminists?
Click to expand...

The discussion over whether any given any individual satisfies whatever criteria you want to present to adopt the label of "feminist" is kind of besides the point. "Feminist" is not a party affiliation or registered organization; there is no official arbiter as to whether a person is allowed to adopt the label or not. So the question is a moot point. What the discussion should rather be focused on is whether, given the self-stated views and documented actions of the individuals in question, there is reason to believe that they are acting in concert with the generally recognized goals of feminism and advancing the cause of female equality in the realms they choose to focus on, whether it be pay equity or media representation or, in this case, professional involvement in the games industry. Especially because there is a known phenomenon of professional concern trolls who adopt the label of "feminist" only in order to publicly proclaim that feminism isn't actually necessary and all the feminists should just shut up and focus on other stuff.

I haven't looked too deeply at these particular individuals in question, but given the evidence of their views and statements presented so far, I have doubts that their adoption of the label is entirely sincere.
 
Does anyone know where that "#gamergate political spectrum" thing they trot out now and again comes from? Every time someone calls them right wing they show a picture with a bunch of dots to the left and say "you don't even know what you're talking about!".
 
gaboumafou said:
Yup. I can say I'm president of the United States, doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...

People can say they are feminists since feminism has LOTS of sub sections.

BUT not everything they say can be said as feminist because it does not represent the main views of the feminist moviment.

For example these ladys,femists (female supremacy), SCUMM Manifesto (kill all the men) and TERFs (transphobic).
All subcategories of feminism that has ridiculously diferent views from the main part of the movement.
 
Anton Sugar said:
I just heard about her today, as I was curious if the #GamerGate tag would bring up anything interesting on Twitter today, in light of the threats against Sarkeesian.

There are a ton of pro #GamerGate tweets about Jennie, saying she's a feminist female gamer who supports #GamerGate.

So I look her up, find her Youtube, and her 4 minute video on "Why you shouldn't worry about gender in video games". It can essentially be summarized with:

You shouldn't worry about gender in video games because:
-Gender inequality/representation are unavoidable in all mediums, so video games shouldn't be attacked alone
-1990s uproar over violent video games (Mortal Kombat) may be the root of gender inequality uproar
-Video games should be lauded for letting you play as men OR women (she incorrectly refers to this as "all genders")
-Men and women both play video games (she claims this puts all genders "on the same playing field", often together, so gender differences "hardly matter now"

Here is a rough transcript of some of her arguments:

Honestly, I don't understand how anyone can take issue with Anita's arguments/videos and yet also support Jennie's shallow stance.
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for finding all of that out (and actually making it through her video, something that I probably wouldn't be able to do). Appreciate it.

Gorger said:
I think what she is trying to say... to put in another example... Let's say a reviewer really dislikes homosexuality and purely based on that reason docks several points from games like Mass Effect 3 or Gone Home which portrays homosexuality positively, but then again digs everything else about the games. I also remember a controversy when Spore was out. A creationist butchered the game because it didn't fit with his creationist worldview. He got a lot of negative feedback for that review.
Click to expand...

I think I get that. I'm just of the opinion though that if Gies has an issue with the portrayal of women in a game like Bayonetta, then it's no problem that he writes about it in his review. And if he docks the game a few points because it makes him uncomfortable, then who really cares?

And the same goes for the creationist reviewer or whomever else. They can write whatever they feel free to and should be able to without fear of some sort of harassment campaign afterwards. It doesn't mean I'll agree, but I'll learn to avoid that individual's reviews in the future. Obviously off-topic now, but I just don't understand this obsession with review scores and the need to start a minor revolt every time there is some controversial numerically scored review. It's all so absurd.

Lalalandia said:
Yup in his blog post A Lettter to Some Dude on #GamerGate he makes it clear that the actual problem he was addressing (i.e. the dodginess of the whole GMA setup) was drowned out by a misogynistic hate campaign against a writer who made a stupid call. Seriously the one guy who went to the line for his ethical principles and they're just ignoring what he has to say.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's a great piece. The Rab Florence example really just exemplifies what a disaster gamergate actually is, especially when they harp on about how it's solely about JOURNALISTIC INTEGRITY™.
 
Noviere said:
As embarrassing as #gg is for gamers, this thread makes me feel somewhat better. :)
Click to expand...
It sometimes does for me and other times makes me acutely aware of how little good this does for the greater problem.

Instead of seeing the clear problems this is causing, Gaters just view this as one more monolithic entity they view as an enemy. They're using the truth as one more reason to bunker down.
 
I feel like I don't understand what "corruption" means anymore. I thought it was about being too buddy-buddy with developers or taking money etc. But apparently that's not the case.
So I'm confused now, maybe GG really is about corruption but their definition of "corruption" differs from mine. I don't know anymore.

I honestly feel like there needs to be place where GGs and "not GGs" can talk to each other. Just so it can be avoided that people get pulled too deep into one side of thinking
 
Fantastapotamus said:
I feel like I don't understand what "corruption" means anymore. I thought it was about being too buddy-buddy with developers or taking money etc. But apparently that's not the case.
So I'm confused now, maybe GG really is about corruption but their definition of "corruption" differs from mine. I don't know anymore.
Click to expand...

Considering their definition of nepotism, I'd say that your definition is probably right (I don't know maybe you're talking about a special kind of cheese).
 
Joeki11a said:
Why nobody talks about Zoe injecting microchips in herself and making that seem like its cool?, hovering her hand over the phone to log into twitter.....really?.
Click to expand...

Firstly, it has nothing to do with Gamergate. Secondly, it actually does show her in a good light as somebody who knows her way around wearable computing.

She quite regularly tweets about Flora and other Arduino derivatives. Got a problem with that?
 
Noviere said:
As embarrassing as #gg is for gamers, this thread makes me feel somewhat better. :)
Click to expand...

you know I don't want to say that Leigh Alexander was right because I think her rhetoric was way too vitriolic and that she is guilty of contributing to the same toxicity that plagues much of the online discourse in games, but she was right. The only way to get through this thing is to stop attaching so much value to this identity that's as meaningless as saying you like to watch movies or read books. So many people play games now that it's a pointless distinction.

Anyway, this is a great thread.
 
NoblesseOblige said:
They can call themselves what they want but you will find no accredited feminists supporting them. Instead what you'll find supporting them is a group that has a very recent history of hating and terrorizing women.
Click to expand...

So you need approval from accredited feminists before you can identify yourself as a feminist? Also one of the self pro-claimed feminists did say she was more or less neutral.
 
Gorger said:
So you need approval from accredited feminists before you can identify yourself as a feminist? Also one of the self pro-claimed feminists did say she was more or less neutral.
Click to expand...

Actually I'm pretty sure you need other people to recognize you as such.
In the same way that conservatives are kinda the authority in deciding who is a conservative and who's not, other feminists are more likely to know what they're talking about when they call someone a feminist than say Adam Baldwin.

(biologist are also good starting point to tell you about conservatives...)
 
ShockingAlberto said:
It sometimes does for me and other times makes me acutely aware of how little good this does for the greater problem.

Instead of seeing the clear problems this is causing, Gaters just view this as one more monolithic entity they view as an enemy. They're using the truth as one more reason to bunker down.
Click to expand...

I'd say their running more on truthiness rather than actual truth at thus point. Do they even have anything legitimate to justify their hate at this point?
 
Gorger said:
So you need approval from accredited feminists before you can identify yourself as a feminist? Also one of the self pro-claimed feminists did say she was more or less neutral.
Click to expand...

No, but to speak for feminists you need some sort of accolades or respect from other feminists. You can't just say "I'm a feminist" and that validates everything you say that's directly against the bulk of feminism.
 
Gorger said:
So you need approval from accredited feminists before you can identify yourself as a feminist? Also one of the self pro-claimed feminists did say she was more or less neutral.
Click to expand...
No, but what they did is akin to someone trying to claim they're an accredited scientist who is a climate denier. It's just not possible. Just because you say you are something doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

And enough with this "neutral" crap. There aren't two sides to this, thus there is no middle.
 
antigoon said:
TB continuing to insinuate on Twitter that the root of Gamergate was ethical concerns. Come on.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's just straight up not true. Gross bullshit was always the root and always a central theme. I feel like there was a brief point in time where things were confused and it could've potentially been co-opted in the direction of ethics and writer-reader relations, but that opportunity was squandered and now it's much, much, much incredibly much beyond the point of no return.

Oersted said:
Which accusations?
Click to expand...
If they're from Gamergate, it doesn't matter, they're all false, none worth listening to or applying any amount of credence to.

Kind of related to this, Milo was going to look into the IGF/Silverstring and DiGRA connections Gamergaters were so very concerned about for a while there. Four weeks later, still nothing. Looks like not even that guy could dig up anything whatsoever to spin into a story.

It's slowed down significantly compared to the heyday of those particular nonsensical conspiracy theories, but searching the hashtag shows there's still people who want to believe that's a thing. Whatever the hell that thing is even supposed to be.
 
Fantastapotamus said:
I feel like I don't understand what "corruption" means anymore. I thought it was about being too buddy-buddy with developers or taking money etc. But apparently that's not the case.
So I'm confused now, maybe GG really is about corruption but their definition of "corruption" differs from mine. I don't know anymore.

I honestly feel like there needs to be place where GGs and "not GGs" can talk to each other. Just so it can be avoided that people get pulled too deep into one side of thinking
Click to expand...

GamerGate thinks it's "corruption" that games writers have a mailing list on which they make jokes to each other, ask each other questions about developing stories, and try to independently verify rumors or leaks they may have heard.

GamerGate thinks it's "corruption" when Jenn Frank doesn't disclose a "conflict of interest", even though she actually did, but The Guardian felt like it was such an insignificant detail that it was not deemed relevant to disclose it.

GamerGate thinks it's "corruption" when a site reviews a game and justifies it with opinions instead of being "objective".



It's not you who doesn't understand what corruption means, it's GamerGate.
 
Fantastapotamus said:
I feel like I don't understand what "corruption" means anymore. I thought it was about being too buddy-buddy with developers or taking money etc. But apparently that's not the case.
So I'm confused now, maybe GG really is about corruption but their definition of "corruption" differs from mine. I don't know anymore.

I honestly feel like there needs to be place where GGs and "not GGs" can talk to each other. Just so it can be avoided that people get pulled too deep into one side of thinking
Click to expand...

Agreed. The sentiment is different for each individual. Everyone entered GG for different reasons.

The prominent voices seem to be all about getting rid of feminist bullies though. I understand the sentiment because it came out of no where really strong and caused a huge disconnect with the audience. Buuuut...this is not the right response to distrust. Distrust and lose of respect is the first sign to pent up relentless hatred. We've both actively enjoyed being influenced by those feelings, but I feel as though these discussions only work one to one or face to face. If other people can't pop in to defend GG or SJWs then something clearer can be seen between two simple people.

Having mobs engage in smug/wit/insult wars is really really lame.
 
Joeki11a said:
Why nobody talks about Zoe injecting microchips in herself and making that seem like its cool?, hovering her hand over the phone to log into twitter.....really?.
Click to expand...

Yo but that's super cool and punk as fuck tho.

I've definitely thought about getting magnets in a fingertip or two.
 
Fantastapotamus said:
Damn, that reddit thread is an interesting read.
And I don't mean that as a "Oh look at all those idiots being idiots while I'm smart over here". It's just legitimately an interesting read.
At no point did Jeff or Brad "attack gamers", not even Alex or Patrick did that but nevertheless I read the "now they are attacking their own audience" argument a bunch of times.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was reading it too and their logic just baffles me. The thing I find most telling is that they put a quote from someone saying that the harassment is disgusting and whatnot and then use that as "evidence" that they are corrupt. They do this while saying that GG is about weeding out corruption and not harassing women. This is a trend I see in a lot of the pro-GG stuff I've been reading. Complete cognitive dissonance.
 
Mael said:
Actually I'm pretty sure you need other people to recognize you as such.
In the same way that conservatives are kinda the authority in deciding who is a conservative and who's not, other feminists are more likely to know what they're talking about when they call someone a feminist than say Adam Baldwin.

(biologist are also good starting point to tell you about conservatives...)
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a prominent feminist who weighed in on this topic recently? Christina Hoff Sommers? Would she say that they cannot identify themselves as feminists?
 
Gorger said:
Wasn't there a prominent feminist who weighed in on this topic recently? Christina Hoff Sommers? Would she say that they cannot identify themselves as feminists?
Click to expand...

I'm not up to date on what feminists in the States call themselves but seriously it's like pointing at Herman Cain and claiming the Republicans are civil rights activists.
Even I know that Sommers is full of shit.
 
Gorger said:
Wasn't there a prominent feminist who weighed in on this topic recently? Christina Hoff Sommers? Would she say that they cannot identify themselves as feminists?
Click to expand...

She can call herself whatever she wants, but her actions make it difficult to take her seriously.

Mumei weighed in on this better than I can.

Christina Hoff Sommers is a professional anti-feminist, in the sense that she is hostile to the espoused concerns of feminism, claims that feminists routinely lie, and that information offered by feminism is largely false. While she calls herself a feminist, her brand of feminism, power feminism is notable for its hostility to traditional feminist concerns (e.g. domestic, violence, sexual assault, education, gap in wage earnings, etc.), and is feminist only in the nominal sense that they agree that there should be equal rights. Power feminism is notable for contributing to the denial of research into the prevalence of rape, because power feminists felt that rape was being misused to describe ordinary sexual relations, and set about misrepresenting respected research in the field into order to argue that point. Their opposition to this, as well as research into domestic violence, also stems from the fact that they feel that the problem with women is that they are thinking of themselves as victims; that the only thing holding women back from equality is their failure to grab what is already available to them.

So, no, she's not feminist in the sense that most people use the term, and self-identified feminists would not recognize Christina Hoff Sommers' as their own.
Click to expand...
 
Gorger said:
Wasn't there a prominent feminist who weighed in on this topic recently? Christina Hoff Sommers? Would she say that they cannot identify themselves as feminists?
Click to expand...

From Mumei much earlier in the thread:
Mumei said:
Correct.

Christina Hoff Sommers is a professional anti-feminist, in the sense that she is hostile to the espoused concerns of feminism, claims that feminists routinely lie, and that information offered by feminism is largely false. While she calls herself a feminist, her brand of feminism, power feminism is notable for its hostility to traditional feminist concerns (e.g. domestic, violence, sexual assault, education, gap in wage earnings, etc.), and is feminist only in the nominal sense that they agree that there should be equal rights. Power feminism is notable for contributing to the denial of research into the prevalence of rape, because power feminists felt that rape was being misused to describe ordinary sexual relations, and set about misrepresenting respected research in the field into order to argue that point. Their opposition to this, as well as research into domestic violence, also stems from the fact that they feel that the problem with women is that they are thinking of themselves as victims; that the only thing holding women back from equality is their failure to grab what is already available to them.

So, no, she's not feminist in the sense that most people use the term, and self-identified feminists would not recognize Christina Hoff Sommers' as their own.
Click to expand...

edit: Oh damn you meijiko
 
Jeff at some point did say something about the banner of journalistic ethics being "farcical" I believe, so that might be what got even some of the less ridiculous people up in arms.

JackDT said:
The quote is SO ironic I'd think it was someone trolling them, but it is the top voted comment in the thread. There is such a gap between us that both sides see it as ironic!
Click to expand...

With regards to the "You'd think Gertmann would be pro a movement about journalistic integrity..." comment. It's got that wonderful so-close-yet-so-far feeling to it that reminds me of an example I've seen elsewhere.

It was in the context of someone arguing about Anita Sarkeesian videos and the tweet was something like "If I used Anita's logic I'd start seeing sexism everywhere!" and it was just a beautiful little nugget of poignant ignorance.
 
I think when Total Biscuit reads something like "Prominent people in gamergate, Milo, MundaneMatt, IA, large quantities of people on tweeter, created a firestorm accusing Anita Sarkeesian of lying about her report to the police" he feels personally accused -- that all of gamers are being painted with this brush. While I identify as a gamer I don't feel that at all, instead I'm angry at that kind of thing becoming the face of gaming and gamergate. So we have very different reactions. And when I see gamergate painting sites like RPS into the bastion of corruption... I get kind of angry myself.
 
Mael said:
I'm not up to date on what feminists in the States call themselves but seriously it's like pointing at Herman Cain and claiming the Republicans are civil rights activists.
Even I know that Sommers is full of shit.
Click to expand...

I am not from the States either... I am from Europe. I am just stopping by to learn more about this controversy since it's springing up all over gaming media.
 
tchocky said:
A few days ago Steve Gaynor posted the following lists some GGer had made

Boycott List

Support List
Click to expand...

That support list. I can't.

Other Special Interest Sites:
•Return of Kings

Thank god Gamer Gate isn't about misogyny.

Meanwhile, I recognize exactly two sites on that list (Siliconera, Shack), both of which only made the cut because they haven't covered #gamergate at all. Meanwhile, the boycott list includes The New Yorker. The boycott list also encourages not giving money to Child's Play. What a fucking sham.
 
JackDT said:
I think when Total Biscuit reads something like "Prominent people in gamergate, Milo, MundaneMatt, IA, large quantities of people on tweeter, created a firestorm accusing Anita Sarkeesian of lying about her report to the police" he feels personally accused -- that all of gamers are being painted with this brush. While I identify as a gamer I don't feel that at all, instead I'm angry at that kind of thing becoming the face of gaming and gamergate. So we have very different reactions. And when I see gamergate turn RPS into the bastion of corruption... I do get defensive.
Click to expand...

People who believe gamers are oppressed and 'under attack' are truly the ones suffering from a victim complex. I don't personally know a single person who plays video games that is afraid they'll be persecuted for saying they enjoy playing video games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NeoGAF Digital Key Giveaway Thread - Read Instructions in OP
Staff  3 4 5 6 7
330
3K
Gubaldo replied
The Riftbreaker - Official Update 2.0: Co-op Mode Trailer
Trailer 
9
329
IbizaPocholo replied
Dying Light 2 solely for the co-op experience, worth it now?
18
1K
Jigsaah replied
The developer of critically acclaimed co-op platformer Pico Park says they’ve accidentally made the game permanently free on Steam
News Indie 
17
157
Soodanim replied
Recommendations for Co-op survival games
9
337
Mikado replied
Top Bottom