ESA, IGDA: Threats, Personal Attacks Have No Place in Games

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
ESA, IGDA: Threats, Personal Attacks Have No Place in Games

The Entertainment Software Association and International Game Developers Association speak out in the New York Times and the Washington Post against GamerGate and harassment.

Spokespersons from the International Game Developers Association [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/tag/view/entertainment%20software%20association] have both condemned the threats of violence and harassment sent to women in game development, journalism, and criticism. Speaking to the New York Times and the Washington Post, the ESA and IGDA agree this has no place in games.

The ongoing threats, including a Wu [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/138046-School-Shooting-Threat-Sent-to-USU-about-Anita-Sarkeesian] have alleged GamerGate was involved in the threats.

"Threats of violence and harassment are wrong," a spokesperson from the ESA, the E3 organizer and trade group, told the New York Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/technology/gamergate-women-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html] today in a front-page article of the newspaper. "They have to stop. There is no place in the video game community - or our society - for personal attacks and threats."

Kate Edwards, executive director of the IGDA, told the New York Times game companies have made some progress in the depiction of women in games. She cited the rebooted Tomb Raider's Lara Croft as an example of an emotionally complex character with more realistic proportions.

In the Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/10/15/the-game-industrys-top-trade-group-just-spoke-out-against-gamergate/] Edwards spoke out against GamerGate and criticized the industry for catering to a demographic that is not supportive of women. "This group is out of touch. The whole community, the world around them has changed, but they think that's not the case," she said.

"The irony of this movement is that they want journalistic integrity, but are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs," she continued. "The logic is completely lacking."

Edwards told the Washington Post many women have approached her with their concerns of the industry, as they have considered leaving or discouraging other women from working in the game industry.

The IGDA began meeting with the FBI in June [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/137521-FBI-Investigates-Death-Threats-of-Sarkeesian], before GamerGate began, to work together to prevent harassment of developers. Edwards had not talked directly to Sarkeesian but was using her situation to educate developers. The IGDA provides resources to developers with help from the FBI. The FBI was aware of other threats Sarkeesian has experienced and is investigating.

"One nice effect of this sad event is that it's tied developers together," Edwards said. "We need to be better at supporting each other not just during events like this, but all the time."

Source: Washington Post [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/technology/gamergate-women-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html]


Permalink
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
And yet, nobody on the more contentious side of the GamerGate fiasco seems particularly worried. I've seen academic papers related to game theory that had the misfortune of being penned by female writers, and who were almost successfully contaminated by an influx of idiots filling the online questionnaire's fields with witty banter along the lines of "Suck my dick" or "Get back in the kitchen, ho!"

And why? Because the GamerGaters have allowed morons like 4Chan's b-tards to pollute the debate. Dig around and you'll see that a few of them like to engineer situations in which they act as both perpetrator and would-be savior. One hand doxxes and actively threatens, the other creates iconography for the Feminist arm of the movement.

As much as I'm a fan of unregulated spaces open to discussion, that approach needs to be punished. Nobody should get to act as both abuser and rescuer, as that's not only illogical but also puerile.

At some point, the so-called lulz have to stop, and consequences have to be made tangible. I can't wait for the round of prosecutions to start scorching minors or immature adults who thought that horsing around on an imageboard was without consequences whatsoever.
 

Sanunes

New member
Mar 18, 2011
626
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
And yet, nobody on the more contentious side of the GamerGate fiasco seems particularly worried. I've seen academic papers related to game theory that had the misfortune of being penned by female writers, and who were almost successfully contaminated by an influx of idiots filling the online questionnaire's fields with witty banter along the lines of "Suck my dick" or "Get back in the kitchen, ho!"

And why? Because the GamerGaters have allowed morons like 4Chan's b-tards to pollute the debate. Dig around and you'll see that a few of them like to engineer situations in which they act as both perpetrator and would-be savior. One hand doxxes and actively threatens, the other creates iconography for the Feminist arm of the movement.

As much as I'm a fan of unregulated spaces open to discussion, that approach needs to be punished. Nobody should get to act as both abuser and rescuer, as that's not only illogical but also puerile.

At some point, the so-called lulz have to stop, and consequences have to be made tangible. I can't wait for the round of prosecutions to start scorching minors or immature adults who thought that horsing around on an imageboard was without consequences whatsoever.
I do agree, I am hoping that if they are able to find out the people that are making these threats it might stop the negativity from both sides and maybe we can discuss the matter that people saying the issue to be about. Now what I am finding troubling beyond this GamerGate fiasco, is the amount of recklessness towards other people the "gamer" culture is starting to present itself as. We have had terrorist threats against airplanes, bomb threats, mass shooting threats, and SWATing. I wish the consequences of those actions became as public as the acts themselves and maybe it wouldn't become so frequent.
 

SilverHunter

New member
Sep 22, 2014
47
0
0
It's downright pathetic to see these people try to take the moral high ground. Instead of saying "deaths threat and the like are a terrible thing and we don't condone it for either side", they are taking the childish route of "They said it! Not me!". And yet the media clings to theirs because, of the two, the "anti" GamerGate group has more publicly seen and known group. As one journalist said on Twitter, it's a terrible thing to send death threats to Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian, but why should we care if a ten year old gets has his personal information thrown out on the Internet and threatened with physical violence towards his family and friends.

That right there IS disgusting, no matter what side that you are on. Yet again it doesn't seem to matter because one group has a public face and the other doesn't. Not that it matters that if, say, a female speaks up on and says she agrees with GamerGate she's immediately labeled a "house n-word", or the fact that in even the Escapist's female Devs speak out article, a couple actually spoke out against a lot of the nonsense that plagued both sides. You would never see them do that publicly however because this same sort of harassment and abuse exists on both sides, but it's easier to demonize a faceless mass - just ask everyone in charge of making war propaganda.

And that is what this is. You have insane people on both sides screwing everything up for everyone else. And while both sides have had others demonising the other group, this particular half is the one that gets the media. This side is the one who commits the sin of casting a wide net to catch a few fish, and don't care about if anything else gets caught up in it as well. I'll say it again, but it's disgusting. I also find it funny they talk about Lara Crofts rebooted character shown as a strong female lead like what people want to see, yet earlier in the year you had women decrying the need of her seeing a psychologist with the cry of "men don't do it, why should she!". Nevermind the more realistic tone the female writer behind a lot of the game was obviously going for a much more realistic tone overall compared to the general "I'll acknowledge but ignore it" that most videogame characters tend to apply with horrifying ordeals.
 

circularlogic88

Knower of Nothing
Oct 9, 2010
292
0
0
Lara Croft is an emotionally complex character now? lol okay.

OT: Why has it taken the ESA and IGDA this long to publicly respond to the hate and threats? This has been occurring throughout the last few years especially with Anita Sarkeesian long before the hashtag of gamergate. People should not have to be driven from their homes and have attendees' lives threatened at a speech to have them take this long to issue a public response.
 

ASnogarD

New member
Jul 2, 2009
525
0
0
circularlogic88 said:
OT: Why has it taken the ESA and IGDA this long to publicly respond to the hate and threats?
These groups, but especially IGDA will only choose a stance if they are forced to to remain relevant, IGDA took a hell of a long time to remove Tim Langell from his post at IGDA, and that was Langdell stepping down than any real action by IGDA... its a toothless organisation, all suits but no action.
Tim Langdell was a rather voracious IP Troll that claimed the word EDGE, and woe betide ANY small fry that dared to include that word... in the end he got funny with EA over Mirrors Edge and that was him undone, other snippets of his past included running from UK debts and failing to pay contracted artists and coders for his older titles.
He was also on the board of IGDA.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Sanunes said:
We have had terrorist threats against airplanes, bomb threats, mass shooting threats, and SWATing. I wish the consequences of those actions became as public as the acts themselves and maybe it wouldn't become so frequent.
One issue I do have with some arms of the gamer culture and, honestly, with the Internet in general, is that it tends to enable the kids as much as the adults. If you're a petulant kid or an adult still prone to bouts of really petulant spite, you'll find everything you'll need to carry out your ridiculously impulsive and utterly misinformed attacks or data-mining attempts.

It's not so much a question of whether or not we need to ban the young 'uns from using Pastebin, Pastie and the like or of figuring out how one goes about crafting a phone call that's dramatic enough to send a SWAT team to someone else's door; and more an issue of education. Manners, honestly, is what's lacking.

I mean, go figure. "Don't be a dick" is a basic axiom anyone would claim to follow in real life, but as soon as the keyboard enters the picture? Ooooh shit, all bets are off. The culture does have a serious issue with how to word things, seeing how I've sometimes been told to go die in a fire by people who should've just told me they don't agree with me. I think it's starting to seep into other areas, otherwise we wouldn't have 4Chan types considering that doxxing is a fairly basic procedure. It really shouldn't be.

Personally, the closest thing I've ever done that gets even remotely close to doxxing involves looking through the Yellow Pages to find a professor's phone number... That's kind of miles and leagues away from collating worrying files on people.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
And yet, nobody on the more contentious side of the GamerGate fiasco seems particularly worried. I've seen academic papers related to game theory that had the misfortune of being penned by female writers, and who were almost successfully contaminated by an influx of idiots filling the online questionnaire's fields with witty banter along the lines of "Suck my dick" or "Get back in the kitchen, ho!"

And why? Because the GamerGaters have allowed morons like 4Chan's b-tards to pollute the debate. Dig around and you'll see that a few of them like to engineer situations in which they act as both perpetrator and would-be savior. One hand doxxes and actively threatens, the other creates iconography for the Feminist arm of the movement.

As much as I'm a fan of unregulated spaces open to discussion, that approach needs to be punished. Nobody should get to act as both abuser and rescuer, as that's not only illogical but also puerile.

At some point, the so-called lulz have to stop, and consequences have to be made tangible. I can't wait for the round of prosecutions to start scorching minors or immature adults who thought that horsing around on an imageboard was without consequences whatsoever.
Your comment fascinates me.

I'm legitimately curious how anyone would be able to stop people from 4chan from arbitrarily hopping onto twitter with any given account, plopping a hashtag into their post, and messing with people to get the results they want.

You claim people "allowed" this to happen, but that gives the implication there is any ability to stop it whatsoever. So if you've got a solution, I'm sure everyone on the internet, not just people in this GamerGate business would love to hear about it.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Areloch said:
Your comment fascinates me.

I'm legitimately curious how anyone would be able to stop people from 4chan from arbitrarily hopping onto twitter with any given account, plopping a hashtag into their post, and messing with people to get the results they want.

You claim people "allowed" this to happen, but that gives the implication there is any ability to stop it whatsoever. So if you've got a solution, I'm sure everyone on the internet, not just people in this GamerGate business would love to hear about it.
My point is that I don't know. I'm no expert, I'm just a guy who's getting a little peeved by this fiasco, and who thinks that some amount of legislation needs to take place. You're right, stopping anyone from hopping on Twitter is virtually impossible, but once certain actions start to garner toxic results, some sort of comeuppance should come into play.

I mean, I have to admit that differentiating grassroots investigations from orchestrated slander attempts is pretty hard at the onset - but SOMEHOW, there needs to be repercussions to what 4Chan and its allies are orchestrating. There just needs to be. I feel like we're just stuck looking at mild sociopaths having a field day online, or idiots who haven't realized just how noxious their little charades are turning out to be - and that infuriates me.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
It's very disappointing to see the awful view that people like this.



Don't exist and only people "Supporting Gamergate" are the ones saying awful things.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
Areloch said:
Your comment fascinates me.

I'm legitimately curious how anyone would be able to stop people from 4chan from arbitrarily hopping onto twitter with any given account, plopping a hashtag into their post, and messing with people to get the results they want.

You claim people "allowed" this to happen, but that gives the implication there is any ability to stop it whatsoever. So if you've got a solution, I'm sure everyone on the internet, not just people in this GamerGate business would love to hear about it.
My point is that I don't know. I'm no expert, I'm just a guy who's getting a little peeved by this fiasco, and who thinks that some amount of legislation needs to take place. You're right, stopping anyone from hopping on Twitter is virtually impossible, but once certain actions start to garner toxic results, some sort of comeuppance should come into play.

I mean, I have to admit that differentiating grassroots investigations from orchestrated slander attempts is pretty hard at the onset - but SOMEHOW, there needs to be repercussions to what 4Chan and its allies are orchestrating. There just needs to be. I feel like we're just stuck looking at mild sociopaths having a field day online, or idiots who haven't realized just how noxious their little charades are turning out to be - and that infuriates me.
I understand that and agree.

However, it's unfair to everyone involved to imply culpability in the actions of those toxic people merely because they have no power to stop them.

The best I've seen is publicly calling them out, and reporting them. But that doesn't deal with the source. They will just make a new account, and continue as they do.

So to harangue the people being "contaminated" by that stupidity is nearly as unjust as the people being targeted by said stupidity having to deal with it at all.

All I ask is to not blame people who are just as impotent as yourself in solving the problem simply because they cannot solve it. Absolutely call out poor behavior, but don't blame people that aren't doing it.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Areloch said:
All I ask is to not blame people who are just as impotent as yourself in solving the problem simply because they cannot solve it. Absolutely call out poor behavior, but don't blame people that aren't doing it.
I would agree, it's not fair of me to point fingers at anyone. However, I haven't seen that many indications of 4Chan's own members trying to take a stand by distancing themselves from the more toxic members in their group. 4Chan's internal policy's been one of general laissez-faire for years.

Blame my poor choice of words, then. Those that are specifically responsible need to be brought to justice, somehow. As to those B-tards that aren't doing anything more reprehensible than the board's usual counterculture stuff, that's fine. I have zero ill will towards people who basically just want to have fun on that platform while STILL remaining responsible and mature human beings.
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
The Lunatic said:
It's very disappointing to see the awful view that people like this.



Don't exist and only people "Supporting Gamergate" are the ones saying awful things.
Probably because GamerGate appears more organized than it really is and it doesn't have any actual organized opposition what so ever. Just random individuals and groups who disagrees with what it claims to stand for or aren't part of the conflict at all.
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).

Fuck, this is almost enough to make me support GG again. Almost.

Apologies if I'm seeming a bit hostile, btw. Absolutes and putting words or ideas into people's mouths are just pet peeves of mine is all.
 

Nimcha

New member
Dec 6, 2010
2,383
0
0
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
 

AceCalhoon

New member
Aug 8, 2008
21
0
0
I feel that this video is pretty much required watching for GamerGate-related discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtzrUsi6Y1s
 

Chinchama

New member
Mar 1, 2009
225
0
0
Too many B.S. shenanigans over something that is just a game.

List of how to avoid stuff like this:

1) Treat other's equally and fairly
2) Be honest
3) Earn your praise through hard work and effort
4) Learn how to form your own opinions instead of taking in one person's bias (however, if everyone went by #2 this wouldn't be needed)

This is all just people being shitty to each other for what they feel may be for their own self benefit, on either side. And at no point everrrrrrrrrrrr should someone threaten to kill someone over a freaking game....that's just so mind blowing and subhuman to take something to such an extreme over a game. It's not like the people making threats have anything riding on the well being of the game other than it didn't meet their entertainment expectations or whatever. No one has the right to be that pissed because when they screamed entertain me, they didn't get what they want...lrn2doforyourself
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
I identify as a gamer in the same way I identify as a carpenter. I enjoy the work, I do it for fun, I study it. It to me is a hobby. I do not really understand gamergate, but I do not think threatening is ever right. Neither is ddosing people or posting there info.

I really dont like the suggestion thay considering myself a gamer somehow makes me a misogynistic hater.
 

Nimcha

New member
Dec 6, 2010
2,383
0
0
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
No, it's not. There's no cause and there's no way to determine if people actually believe the same as what you believe.

It's like Occupy all over again.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
circularlogic88 said:
Lara Croft is an emotionally complex character now? lol okay.
Why, yes, she is. Times changed, and she changed with it. I'm VERY happy with the result.

On topic, when both the IGDA and the ESA condemn your "movement", the movement has lost the altruistic edge. It's too toxic and poisonous now. The tide has turned. It's doing FAR more harm now then good.

V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).

Fuck, this is almost enough to make me support GG again. Almost.

Apologies if I'm seeming a bit hostile, btw. Absolutes and putting words or ideas into people's mouths are just pet peeves of mine is all.
This is the biggest organization of gaming on the planet. These are gaming industry leaders and developers and organizers and promoters. And this is what they feel GamerGate is. That's the public AND the industry's opinion and interpretation of events. GamerGate is toxic, no matter what good you or others intended. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, after all.

For anyone who legitimately feels "journalistic integrity" is what GamerGate is about, I would encourage you to keep up that fight... but not under a label, a hashtag, and a "movement". I've been fighting for journalistic integrity LONG before GamerGate was a thing, and I'll push for it long after GamerGate dies out. I don't need a catchy hashtag tainted by voracious idiots and misogynists to do what I've always done before.

Let's start pushing for something more important now: Inclusivity. Something to stand by our women in games, to be that vocal voice going "we're with you. Don't let the morons get you down." A movement to say "thank you" to those talented women out there that helped create those games you loved, like Portal, Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Mirror's Edge, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and so many others that had female developers and writers and producers heavily involved in bringing them to life.

Can we work on that, please?
 

an874

New member
Jul 17, 2009
357
0
0
Thanks #Gamergate! Because of you, the vile SOPA pushing lobbyists of the ESA are now the heroes in this story, but what could we really expect from the gaming community's Tea Party?: http://www.motivationals.org/demotivational-posters/demotivational-poster-15177.jpg
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
This was your best chance to include the on-going and previous harassments of countless of people on the pro-gamergate side. I thought you had changed for the better, Escapist? What happened? Of course the harassment of those people is extremely bad, but there's so many more people that are getting harassed, abused and whatnot. This paints it like only anti-gamergaters are getting harassed, which is most certainly not true. If anything, the majority of people getting harassed is on Gamergate's side. ALL OF IT NEEDS TO STOP.
 

Aramis Night

New member
Mar 31, 2013
535
0
0
I find it really amusing that people are siding with the individuals who have been identified as corrupt by their own verifiable actions, in favor of attacking a nebulous group for behavior that no one can even confirm was done by them. That's pretty brave. Never mind that people within GamerGate have been making it a point to police and condemn their own troublemakers(with the little ability they have to do so given the anonymous nature of its membership) while the journalists and developers themselves are out there making the same kinds of threats and insults with no internal pushback. The hypocrisy is staggering.

It's really an excellent case study in how much power we give to presentation vs. substance in our society. A classic illustration of the power of narrative vs. facts. It's actually rather depressing to see it play out like this and doesn't leave me with much hope for our species.
 

Bat Vader

New member
Mar 11, 2009
4,996
0
0
I agree. Threats and attacks have no place in the gaming community. The people that do use threats and personal attacks just serve to undermine the gaming community and make outside observers seem as we are immature and childish.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
0
0
Bentusi16 said:
I really dont like the suggestion thay considering myself a gamer somehow makes me a misogynistic hater.
I actually got called a misogynist by some feminists on my capmus a few days ago just because I identified myself as a gamer. Told those people to piss off after that, but it's really sad when both sides are on such big extremes that any person with a moderate view suddenly gets labelled things they aren't. If people want me to be a part of their movement, being a passive-aggressive jerk will not only not want me to be a part of your group, it makes me want your group to fail just to be vindictive. Which is sad because I do want some more inclusion for women in games. If people want change, then vote with your wallets, as those are the most powerful weapons any person has.

And no, threats and personal attacks don't have a place in video games. So kindly tell both sides this as that is what they keep doing while point fingers that the other one started it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to play some video games while everyone else fights among each other.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Aramis Night said:
I find it really amusing that people are siding with the individuals who have been identified as corrupt by their own verifiable actions, in favor of attacking a nebulous group for behavior that no one can even confirm was done by them. That's pretty brave. Never mind that people within GamerGate have been making it a point to police and condemn their own troublemakers(with the little ability they have to do so given the anonymous nature of its membership) while the journalists and developers themselves are out there making the same kinds of threats and insults with no internal pushback. The hypocrisy is staggering.

It's really an excellent case study in how much power we give to presentation vs. substance in our society. A classic illustration of the power of narrative vs. facts. It's actually rather depressing to see it play out like this and doesn't leave me with much hope for our species.
Sure, there are genocidal wars being waged at this very moment, millions living in poverty and disease, children starving to death across the ocean, rape victims, murders, lynchings, terrorism, homophobia, and natural disasters aplenty...

... But video game journalism and the loss of respect for a silly hashtag are enough to make you "lose hope for our species".

If that causes you to lose faith in the human species, your priorities were vastly misplaced.

All of this reminds me so heavily of people in Southern states clinging to the Confederate flag, yelling loudly that "it's not about slavery! It's about Southern pride!" when the rest of the world sighs and tries to either tell them it lost that meaning long ago, or they ignore that group entirely as clueless and outdated.

Besides, even if GamerGate stood for "journalistic integrity", the targeted women in this case don't even fit that profile: one of them isn't a journalist at all, another was funded by fans and accepted NO industry money to cover games, another simply retweeted some image macros. Beyond that, there are FAR more egregious problems in the industry other than (disproven) accusations of a female developer sleeping with a journalist for flattering coverage.

It's so childish to stand behind a hashtag, needing a name for a movement that lost its way, instead of abandoning the name or, more tellingly, standing up for these harassed women and victims but not doing so because "they're on the wrong side" of your chosen petty feud.

If anything, all these women should be held up as heroes for representing exactly what so-called champions of GamerGate claim to represent: bastions of clean journalism and indie development in a sea of corrupt, unafraid to speak their minds and open the door to dialogue and discourse.
 

Zaydin

New member
Mar 2, 2009
373
0
0
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Zaydin said:
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
That's the baffling thing to me.

There are SO many bigger, worse, demonstrably proven problems in the industry. Where were they then? Why aren't they speaking up against these and many OTHER issues? Why is it just the female devs and journalists getting the brunt of these attacks and criticism?

Even the whole trigger for this movement, a jilted ex posting slanderous things about his ex-girlfriend, was found to be without merit, and yet it's STILL being brought up as a sign of corruption... and yet, oddly enough, you don't hear about the male journalist much, or the fact that, if it WAS true, that they'd be using their leverage of journalistic power to solicit sex from a struggling dev to promote her (FREE) game... but none of these really seems to get addressed.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
I agree those things don't have any place in the video game community and our society. Journalists from gaming websites should really stop sending death threats.

I wonder if ESA and IGDA would include calling people Misogynists and/or bigots in that for not sharing your point of view in that condemnation.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Ukomba said:
I agree those things don't have any place in the video game community and our society. Journalists from gaming websites should really stop sending death threats.

I wonder if ESA and IGDA would include calling people Misogynists and/or bigots in that for not sharing your point of view in that condemnation.
I believe ESA and IGDA are calling the misogynists and the bigots "misogynists and bigots". If you don't fall under that umbrella, they aren't talking to you.

But the GamerGate "movement" is now irreversibly associated with "misogynists and bigots". At this point, standing behind a hashtag so rigidly instead of stepping back and seeing the bigger picture (even within their war against "industry corruption". There's a LOT more problems in the industry going on than a jilted, spiteful ex throwing accusations at his former flame. Where was this movement then?)
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
Trishbot said:
Ukomba said:
I agree those things don't have any place in the video game community and our society. Journalists from gaming websites should really stop sending death threats.

I wonder if ESA and IGDA would include calling people Misogynists and/or bigots in that for not sharing your point of view in that condemnation.
I believe ESA and IGDA are calling the misogynists and the bigots "misogynists and bigots". If you don't fall under that umbrella, they aren't talking to you.

But the GamerGate "movement" is now irreversibly associated with "misogynists and bigots". At this point, standing behind a hashtag so rigidly instead of stepping back and seeing the bigger picture (even within their war against "industry corruption". There's a LOT more problems in the industry going on than a jilted, spiteful ex throwing accusations at his former flame. Where was this movement then?)
Right, the personal attacks are ok if you're doing it. Got you. I mean, making a slanderous statement like they "are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs" that's fine. but pointing out actual issues with the reporting is bigoted. That's fine, I can see where your bias is.
 

SilverHunter

New member
Sep 22, 2014
47
0
0
Zaydin said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
I'm assuming you must be ignorant to gaming media prior to 2009? Try googling "Gerstmann gate" and come back and tell me people were silent about it. Several websites had dozens of articles, created tags even specifically for this, and you want to try and say people were silent?


People on both sides of the fence for the "GamerGate" have said before that part of the reason this has blown up into the beast it is was because websites were actively stifling conversation. It added fuel to the fires of conspiracy talk, and when outside political forces started jumping in on the bandwagon, it got out of control. Or did you forget who originally came up with the name "GamerGate"?
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Ukomba said:
Right, the personal attacks are ok if you're doing it. Got you. I mean, making a slanderous statement like they "are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs" that's fine. but pointing out actual issues with the reporting is bigoted. That's fine, I can see where your bias is.
I think you're getting a tad too emotionally wrapped up in this, because these statements were not directed at you. They were directed at the "misogynists and bigots" who, yes, do want to "squash the voices of women at all costs". That's factual, and if you aren't with them, don't stand alongside them.

Critique away. I never called you bigoted. But the IGDA and ESA responded to terrorist and death threats, not to criticism of game journalism.

Your own bias seems to be skewing your perspective on this topic and making generalized comments about bad individuals a personal affront. You should have nothing to be defensive about unless you're one of those that agree the harassment and death threats weren't an issue or that you condone the actions. If you don't, then they were not talking to you, at all, and you shouldn't care.

SilverHunter said:
People on both sides of the fence for the "GamerGate" have said before that part of the reason this has blown up into the beast it is was because websites were actively stifling conversation. It added fuel to the fires of conspiracy talk, and when outside political forces started jumping in on the bandwagon, it got out of control. Or did you forget who originally came up with the name "GamerGate"?
It blew up in the beast it did because a bitter, jealous, angry ex went to a group of trolls, made up a bunch of stories about her (many outright disproven), and said trolls went on the warpath, organizing and going after people so barely even related to the concept of "journalistic integrity" that it's almost laughable.

Adam Baldwin started the name, but even he didn't have all the info at the time, and even his criticism of the industry are almost barely related to the harassment and vitriolic environment stemming from the movement now.

Even if it DID start out as something positive, it's no longer that way. Or do you also believe the swastika is still a Buddhist good luck symbol? When a good cause is corrupted and perverted beyond repair, it's a better use of time and energy to abandon a silly, pointless hashtag or title and just, well, be a decent human being without a mascot to stand behind.

I've been promoting reform in the game industry long before Adam Baldwin said something catchy. I'll do it long after the "movement" fades from recent memory. I don't need a hashtag to be a decent human being. I won't was my time and defend a hashtag from haters, or to spend more time defending a hashtag from criticism than actually talking about the issues I care about, or to use a hashtag to stand up for the oppressed and victimized, or glean my sense of pride as a gamer from something a someone somewhere wrote in generalities. I've been doing this stuff for years without it. Why do I need it now?
 

Aramis Night

New member
Mar 31, 2013
535
0
0
Trishbot said:
Aramis Night said:
I find it really amusing that people are siding with the individuals who have been identified as corrupt by their own verifiable actions, in favor of attacking a nebulous group for behavior that no one can even confirm was done by them. That's pretty brave. Never mind that people within GamerGate have been making it a point to police and condemn their own troublemakers(with the little ability they have to do so given the anonymous nature of its membership) while the journalists and developers themselves are out there making the same kinds of threats and insults with no internal pushback. The hypocrisy is staggering.

It's really an excellent case study in how much power we give to presentation vs. substance in our society. A classic illustration of the power of narrative vs. facts. It's actually rather depressing to see it play out like this and doesn't leave me with much hope for our species.
Sure, there are genocidal wars being waged at this very moment, millions living in poverty and disease, children starving to death across the ocean, rape victims, murders, lynchings, terrorism, homophobia, and natural disasters aplenty...

... But video game journalism and the loss of respect for a silly hashtag are enough to make you "lose hope for our species".
Thank you for illustrating my point about framing while ignoring context. Good job.
If that causes you to lose faith in the human species, your priorities were vastly misplaced.

All of this reminds me so heavily of people in Southern states clinging to the Confederate flag, yelling loudly that "it's not about slavery! It's about Southern pride!" when the rest of the world sighs and tries to either tell them it lost that meaning long ago, or they ignore that group entirely as clueless and outdated.
We'll seeing as how the union included 4 slaveholding states during the civil war(exempt from the emancipation proclamation btw), they might have a point. But again, let's continue to not address facts and instead support a narrative instead. Wow another great example that you have illustrated of my point.
Besides, even if GamerGate stood for "journalistic integrity", the targeted women in this case don't even fit that profile: one of them isn't a journalist at all, another was funded by fans and accepted NO industry money to cover games, another simply retweeted some image macros. Beyond that, there are FAR more egregious problems in the industry other than (disproven) accusations of a female developer sleeping with a journalist for flattering coverage.
The issue is one of collusion between journalists and developers at the expense of other developers who are not being given a fair chance at representation in the media because of personal and financial ties that indicate corruption and blatant favoritism. This goes far beyond who slept with who and has been the case ever since the GamerGate tag was created. What your referring to is the 5 guys burgers and fries/quinnspiracy. That was back when people were being criticized and dismissed simply because they were asking the question of whether there was any truth to the Zoe post put up by her ex and what it might mean if the contents of it had any truth to it regarding the accusations of Zoe sleeping with other industry people. GamerGate didn't start until the attacks against gamers as a group started as well as the censorship and shaming simply for asking questions that people hoped the journalists themselves would investigate. No one believed this was anything more than an isolated incident with a few bad actors being unprofessional until all the journalists turned on anyone who was asking for this to be looked into. That is what lead to GamerGate.
It's so childish to stand behind a hashtag, needing a name for a movement that lost its way, instead of abandoning the name or, more tellingly, standing up for these harassed women and victims but not doing so because "they're on the wrong side" of your chosen petty feud.

If anything, all these women should be held up as heroes for representing exactly what so-called champions of GamerGate claim to represent: bastions of clean journalism and indie development in a sea of corrupt, unafraid to speak their minds and open the door to dialogue and discourse.
So how many more name changes do we have to go through before we are allowed to have our grievances heard then? So far changing the name or hashtag hasn't made a difference in terms of how we are perceived, because the journalists who are clearly opposed to us control the narrative. One you have clearly uncritically bought into. So where is this discourse that your praising these women for? So far all I see is the promotion of echo chambers.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Trishbot said:
circularlogic88 said:
Lara Croft is an emotionally complex character now? lol okay.
Why, yes, she is. Times changed, and she changed with it. I'm VERY happy with the result.

On topic, when both the IGDA and the ESA condemn your "movement", the movement has lost the altruistic edge. It's too toxic and poisonous now. The tide has turned. It's doing FAR more harm now then good.

V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).

Fuck, this is almost enough to make me support GG again. Almost.

Apologies if I'm seeming a bit hostile, btw. Absolutes and putting words or ideas into people's mouths are just pet peeves of mine is all.
This is the biggest organization of gaming on the planet. These are gaming industry leaders and developers and organizers and promoters. And this is what they feel GamerGate is. That's the public AND the industry's opinion and interpretation of events. GamerGate is toxic, no matter what good you or others intended. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, after all.

For anyone who legitimately feels "journalistic integrity" is what GamerGate is about, I would encourage you to keep up that fight... but not under a label, a hashtag, and a "movement". I've been fighting for journalistic integrity LONG before GamerGate was a thing, and I'll push for it long after GamerGate dies out. I don't need a catchy hashtag tainted by voracious idiots and misogynists to do what I've always done before.

Let's start pushing for something more important now: Inclusivity. Something to stand by our women in games, to be that vocal voice going "we're with you. Don't let the morons get you down." A movement to say "thank you" to those talented women out there that helped create those games you loved, like Portal, Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Mirror's Edge, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and so many others that had female developers and writers and producers heavily involved in bringing them to life.

Can we work on that, please?
I don't care much about Gamergate or their opposition, and believe that both sides of the conversation have been too poisoned by idiots with loud voices to go anywhere positive. One thing though? You probably shouldn't use the organization that supported SOPA (until the collective internet made them back down) as proof that the public is behind you. They do not care about you. They do not care about this issue. PR is PR. If they had cared, they wouldn't have waited until other news outlets started weighing in on things to have their say.

As for inclusivity, I'm all for it, and I've seen many GGers claim that they are too. Granted, my reasons for inclusivity have nothing to do with equality. I don't think equality should be a requirement of art after all. It would be more accurate to say that I support diversity. Van Gough was a fine artist, but it would be boring if every painting looked like Starry Night. Similarly, I don't have to be female, homosexual, chinese, etc to be bored to tears with the grizzled brown haired white male protagonist who sees the same basic story arc mirrored across entire genres.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
I don't care much about Gamergate or their opposition, and believe that both sides of the conversation have been too poisoned by idiots with loud voices to go anywhere positive. One thing though? You probably shouldn't use the organization that supported SOPA (until the collective internet made them back down) as proof that the public is behind you. They do not care about you. They do not care about this issue. PR is PR. If they had cared, they wouldn't have waited until other news outlets started weighing in on things to have their say.
Who? The ESA or IGDA? Because the ESA DID support SOPA, but IGDA did NOT. If anything, having two sides that stood apart come together and agree concisely that THIS is something they stand together on proves a lot to me. This is an issue they aren't split on.

And, yes, PR is PR, but it's UNIVERSAL at this point. EVERY big organization in the industry has criticized the GamerGate movement for what it represents NOW (not what it's "intentions" were), and it's spilled over into mainstream, with everything from Yahoo, Business Insider, Forbes, NY Times, MSN, and other major outlets weighing in. When the tide is OVERWHELMINGLY against your platform and associate it with the worst types of internet miscreants, do you REALLY think you can turn public's tide back in its favor and have a legit conversation on "journalistic integrity"?
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
No, it's not. There's no cause and there's no way to determine if people actually believe the same as what you believe.

It's like Occupy all over again.
A) I'm not a part of GG anymore, and haven't been for quite a while.

B) All the people over in that dreadful monster thread and all over Twitter would greatly disagree with you about them not having a cause, especially when most of them keep repeating what that cause is over and over again. Just asking any individual there or even merely reading their posts is all that's needed to confirm whether they believe it or not.
 

Alleged_Alec

New member
Sep 2, 2008
796
0
0
A: "YOU GUYS ARE RACIST CHILD-MURDERERS AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED"
B: "B-but I didn't do anything. It was those guys over there."
A: "You're standing next to them! You should move to a different continent if you don't want to be associated with them."

Nice argument. Not that GG is much better these days though...


So, maybe, please, can we just go back to playing games and moaning from time to time about slightly dodgy journalism? I think I preferred that situation to this.
 

marioandsonic

New member
Nov 28, 2009
657
0
0
The ongoing threats, including a shooting threat at USU which led feminist critic Anita Sarkeesian to cancel her speech, as well as threats that have led to independent game developer Brianna Wu leaving her home, have occurred during the movement GamerGate. Both Sarkeesian and Wu have alleged GamerGate was involved in the threats.
I haven't been following news about GamerGate (mainly because if I did, my brain would start to hurt), but were either of these threats proven to have come from GamerGate, or people associated with it?
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Zaydin said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
First off, citation needed. Iirc, that whole ordeal created a pretty big shitstorm that many gamers were pissed off about. Can you actually prove that even most people in GG, let alone all, both knew about that incident when it happened and didn't say a word about it?

Second, even if someone committed a wrong in the past or are even full-on evil, that doesn't mean that they can't be right about something. In other words, whether or not they stood up for Gerstmann all those years ago doesn't actually prove them wrong about journalism being fucked now.

Third, the past cannot be changed. People who just now are understanding the issues with the game's industry cannot retroactively go back and fix the fuck-ups of the past. They can only fix the present, which is what many of them are trying to do.
 

SilverHunter

New member
Sep 22, 2014
47
0
0
Trishbot said:
SilverHunter said:
People on both sides of the fence for the "GamerGate" have said before that part of the reason this has blown up into the beast it is was because websites were actively stifling conversation. It added fuel to the fires of conspiracy talk, and when outside political forces started jumping in on the bandwagon, it got out of control. Or did you forget who originally came up with the name "GamerGate"?
It blew up in the beast it did because a bitter, jealous, angry ex went to a group of trolls, made up a bunch of stories about her (many outright disproven), and said trolls went on the warpath, organizing and going after people so barely even related to the concept of "journalistic integrity" that it's almost laughable.

Adam Baldwin started the name, but even he didn't have all the info at the time, and even his criticism of the industry are almost barely related to the harassment and vitriolic environment stemming from the movement now.

Even if it DID start out as something positive, it's no longer that way. Or do you also believe the swastika is still a Buddhist good luck symbol? When a good cause is corrupted and perverted beyond repair, it's a better use of time and energy to abandon a silly, pointless hashtag or title and just, well, be a decent human being without a mascot to stand behind.

I've been promoting reform in the game industry long before Adam Baldwin said something catchy. I'll do it long after the "movement" fades from recent memory. I don't need a hashtag to be a decent human being. I won't was my time and defend a hashtag from haters, or to spend more time defending a hashtag from criticism than actually talking about the issues I care about, or to use a hashtag to stand up for the oppressed and victimized, or glean my sense of pride as a gamer from something a someone somewhere wrote in generalities. I've been doing this stuff for years without it. Why do I need it now?
First off, before you start rambling and copy-pasting entire paragraphs from your other posts try and read a little more than your own narrow-minded view. I was speaking specifically to Zaydin's comment and his comment alone, I've already said my piece on this general mess above. Both sides have disgusting individuals participating in death threats and wholly uncivil behavior, and while you claim you won't waste time trying to defend one group, you seem more than eager to defend the other. That by its very definition is 'bigotry'.

I'm not making any claim on what some ex said, nor did I ever state Adam Baldwin knew anything about this other than seeing an easy way to espouse his own political views into something that did not need it.

I'm also not so naive or idiotic to try and make an argument about what the German Swastikah means as compared to the cultures it originally came from. It's horribly pathetic, on your part, to try for such a weak argument. But if you want to go that route, would you call a practitioner of either system of belief a Jew-hating white supremacist for having the it painted on their door? Any decent human being certainly wouldn't I hope.
 

Megalodon

New member
May 14, 2010
781
0
0
marioandsonic said:
The ongoing threats, including a shooting threat at USU which led feminist critic Anita Sarkeesian to cancel her speech, as well as threats that have led to independent game developer Brianna Wu leaving her home, have occurred during the movement GamerGate. Both Sarkeesian and Wu have alleged GamerGate was involved in the threats.
I haven't been following news about GamerGate (mainly because if I did, my brain would start to hurt), but were either of these threats proven to have come from GamerGate, or people associated with it?
Don't know about Wu. But the Sarkeesian threat sent to USU, which they made public, contained no references to gamergate. Of course, I've already seen this used to show that gamergate had to be involved, as they 'have a policy to not mention gamergate in official correspondence', because that totally isn't a fallacious piece of circular thinking.

The only association to gamergate with regards to the latest round of Sarkeesian drama is an unsupported tweet from Sarkeesian herself, and is therefore hardly a bastion of impartial reporting.
 

PoolCleaningRobot

New member
Mar 18, 2012
1,237
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
I would agree, it's not fair of me to point fingers at anyone. However, I haven't seen that many indications of 4Chan's own members trying to take a stand by distancing themselves from the more toxic members in their group

8chan (because people aren't using 4chan anymore) bans people who post this kind of stuff.


And their community doesn't like it either.

Also after seeing how Brianna Wu magically "found" someone doxxing her about 5 minutes after it happened, she's got to be the worst person involved in this whole mess. I agree that people were being idiots when they accused Sarkeesain of making up the threats against her, but now Wu is actually validating them
 

Garlador

New member
Mar 7, 2007
15
0
0
SilverHunter said:
First off, before you start rambling and copy-pasting entire paragraphs from your other posts try and read a little more than your own narrow-minded view.
Wow. I'm just skimming this and this caught my eye. I can just tell already this response is going to be totally sensible, fair, unbiased, and based in pure rationale and not impassioned zealotry. Let's see if my prediction holds true...


I was speaking specifically to Zaydin's comment and his comment alone, I've already said my piece on this general mess above. Both sides have disgusting individuals participating in death threats and wholly uncivil behavior, and while you claim you won't waste time trying to defend one group, you seem more than eager to defend the other. That by its very definition is 'bigotry'.
Er, I hate to be a Grammar Nazi (now THERE were some right proper bigots), but "defending a group from harassment" didn't constitute bigotry. Here, here, I can help out.

bigot (n) -a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

I'm not seeing this from the former comments. Defending a platform is not bigotry, as the individual you have utterly dismissed and accused of "rambling" and being "narrow-minded" (that's a rather bigoted statement, now that I think about it) seems to be saying they stand fully behind the morals of so-called Gaters, but simply believes the hashtag they rally behind isn't worth defending. Makes sense to me, like saying "oh yeah, I totally agree with that Republican on this matter... but I'm not going to call myself a Republican because we agree on that one topic." That actually seems very fair and open-minded.

I'm not making any claim on what some ex said, nor did I ever state Adam Baldwin knew anything about this other than seeing an easy way to espouse his own political views into something that did not need it.
But the claims that some ex said are largely involved in the current state of affairs. It's not sensible to dismiss that element of the equation when that very thing kickstarted a large portion of this wonderfully wacky debate. And I don't see anyone, anywhere, saying you stated Adam Baldwin knew what he was talking about. But both of these are elements to a larger picture, and that picture is incomplete if you toss them out. They're certainly worth commenting on.

I'm also not so naive or idiotic to try and make an argument about what the German Swastikah means as compared to the cultures it originally came from. It's horribly pathetic, on your part, to try for such a weak argument. But if you want to go that route, would you call a practitioner of either system of belief a Jew-hating white supremacist for having the it painted on their door? Any decent human being certainly wouldn't I hope.
Godwin's Law notwithstanding, it's not "pathetic" because you aren't giving a counter-argument other than dismissal. But, sure, I'll bite on this. If you were in America and saw someone with a swastika proudly painted on their door, YES, the associated feelings, culture, and history of that symbol is deeply, irrecoverably rooted in bigotry, hatred, oppression, intolerance, persecution, and antisemitism. I mean, holy God, man, the symbol is OUTLAWED in the nation of Germany for a very, VERY good reason, so, no, you can't just paint one on your door and expect all that negative history to go away. Any "decent" human being would be understanding that using that symbol in this culture is highly insensitive and offensive and would, hopefully, opt not to parade it around. The symbol is a stigma to billions of people; nobody can claim ignorance of that.

And that, I think, is where I agree with posts earlier in the thread: GamerGate has become stigmatized. Is that fair? Hardly. But an intelligent, decent human being who genuinely does care about the industry would abandon associating with it as it grows more and more synonymous with hatred and intolerance day by day. Why is that name, GamerGate, so important that people would rather go down with the ship after it was sabotaged from within than sensibly jump into a lifeboat and move on (maybe to a better ship)? This ship has so many holes, you can't plug them all fast enough before more spring up. I mean, by all means, stand by your hashtags. Nobody can stop you. I just think it's tragically humorous to see so many care more about what their movement is called instead of doing anything about what their movement represents. Talk is so much cheaper than action.

Yes, boo hoo, the other side has been oppressed and persecuted too. That's not what this conversation is about. The conversation is about whether the GamerGate movement is too toxic to do any good at all, no matter how victimized people are on both sides. Is it too toxic? Let's have that discussion. If you think not, why do you believe that? How do you intend to change public perception of the hashtag group? What are you actively doing to promote its original goals? Who is your leadership? Who is demanding accountability? Who is going to the press? What plan does anyone have in place? Why is that a good plan? What is being done to root out the bad members? Is there even a way to police the members? Why isn't the group going after the hundreds of other more urgent problems in the game industry, such as Youtube buyouts, pervasive game DRM, mistreatment of video game developers and unacceptable crunch periods, console exclusivity backroom deals, unoptimized PC ports, broken game launches, game industry advertisements (hey, I notice Alien: Isolation is paying for the Escapist's web banners currently. How can we trust their review to be objective?), broken metacritic scaling ties to developer bonuses, and, YES, female developer and journalist harassment as a constant, unsolved problem?

The fact that THIS is what's getting people so worked up boggles my mind. I've been following game journalism since the 70s, and, trust me, it is SO MUCH BETTER than it ever was back then. As fondly as Nintendo Power is remembered, it was a Nintendo-published magazine that served as a mouthpiece to promote Nintendo-branded video games on Nintendo systems. We have more nonbiased, non-industry critics and reviewers now than we ever have in the history of the medium, and yet "journalistic integrity" has become this butchered rallying call over so many other damning industry practices.

If even half the energy spent here was directed at things like on-disc DLC, online passes, misleading E3 trailers and demos, broken game releases, game homogenization and distillation, microtransactions, F2P feature creep, forced and unwanted social elements, paywalls for story content, pre-order retail exclusives, console parity, annual game serialization, minority protagonist suppression, game piracy, region-locking, or graphics over gameplay, the whole industry would be a much better place.

But we get impassioned en masse over some of the most trivial, pointless things instead. Boggling.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
This is an open letter to GG -

I have a proposition for every good GG supporter:

You should form an organization that does not have a policy that anyone can claim to be a member. Have a public roster (without aliases) and a mission statement.

In the end, the fact that any Tom, Dick and Harry can say they are affiliated with GG hurts the very core of your movement. The other thing that hurts it is the fact that some of the people who blindly stand against you are illiterate jackasses on a witch hunt and are intent on making sure that every single bad thing that happens in the industry is blamed on you. Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, and all of their "Journalist" cohorts are working in a concerted effort to turn the industry away from you. And why not. The corrupt journalists of sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Gamasutra, and RPS have made sure that they have used their sway to make sure you are completely demonized because you stand for truth in the industry when they only want to editorialize every piece of information. They want to control public opinion about products that are coming and make sure they fully endorse a crony system. The people who claim affiliation are your biggest problem though. They would have very little evidence if people out there didn't claim affiliation in the same breath they have threatened or bullied someone.

Also, anonymity has it's place, but it only hurts you in this situation. They aren't standing against a group of people who have represented themselves and their grievances. They are standing against a faceless,nameless mass of people who let a minority of people who claim affiliation decide how the public perceives you.

Just think on and consider it. Fully public roster of real people with a mission statement that can't be appended by everyone who walks through the door. Full accountability for all of it's members. One thing about the people standing against you is they all have faces and names, which gives them legitimacy. You want your grievances heard, you'll consider my words.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
No, it's not. There's no cause and there's no way to determine if people actually believe the same as what you believe.

It's like Occupy all over again.
I have to intervene on this idea. There certainly is a cause. The Anti-GG crowd always makes these accusations and they are wrong. They are very public about their cause, but people choose to selectively ignore it because their cause is not convenient or not the conversation you want to have.

Though you can argue that people seem to want to make it about other things, and rightly so. But if you look at the core of GG on any message board, you see a clear cause.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Zaydin said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Nimcha said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
Great. Just great. Yet another large organization going "the entirety of GamerGate are harassing, sexist assholes who just want to silence women". No acknowledgement of harassment towards GGers or anything, nor even a slight acknowledgement that not everyone in GG is like that (seriously, "the whole community"?).
Point is it doesn't matter. It's not a movement but it pretends to be one. That's why you get stuff like that.
It's thousands of people standing for a cause that they strongly believe in. That makes it a movement.
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
Ummm, that happened long before "Gater's" were a thing. Hardly relevant now, is it.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Trishbot said:
When the tide is OVERWHELMINGLY against your platform and associate it with the worst types of internet miscreants, do you REALLY think you can turn public's tide back in its favor and have a legit conversation on "journalistic integrity"?
Ayup.
And thus, the smear campaign completes itself, just as I thought it might a month ago.
Nobody really won with GamersGate...except the trolls. Because the trolls were the only ones with nothing to lose.

Everyone is too pissed off to engage each other, and those that are trying are just being drowned out by the droves stupid reactionary gobshite.

Maybe, just maybe, this fiasco will serve as an example of what happens when you try to engage the trolls on their own terms, at their own game (that goes for all assholes involved; the more obscene GamersGaters, SJWs and those journalists that declared war on the gamer identity; I damn them all).

Or maybe not; I'm thinking that it will take some higher powers wielding bigger sticks stepping in to change that attitude, and when those kinds of people get involved I guarantee that NOBODY will be happy with the results.
 

circularlogic88

Knower of Nothing
Oct 9, 2010
292
0
0
Trishbot said:
circularlogic88 said:
Lara Croft is an emotionally complex character now? lol okay.
Why, yes, she is. Times changed, and she changed with it. I'm VERY happy with the result.
Some people are really easily satisfied with hack writing I guess. Its the same reason Twilight and 50 Shades of Greg are New York Times bestsellers, no account for taste.
 

CpT_x_Killsteal

New member
Jun 21, 2012
1,519
0
0
One day the comment section will be a fun place again, where people don't ignore points they can't respond to, and aren't going ballistic at opposing viewpoints. One day.

OT: I'll say what I've said for most of this fiasco: Threatening and Harassment is bad, so is being a lying conniving wanker. Honest discussion and criticism is good, so is transparent and honest journalism. I think 90% of the people in this forum, hopefully higher, can agree with these two statements.

There are very few people dipping their fingers in this and NOT taking a side.
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
Baresark said:
You should form an organization that does not have a policy that anyone can claim to be a member. Have a public roster (without aliases) and a mission statement.
Given what has happened to many of the people who have their real names known for supporting the movement, that will never even be considered. It would be doing most of the work the doxxers who are against GG for them. We allow all to be a part of the movement (though we do try to police out own if we catch someone harassing someone else) because we want as many people on our side as possible. This isn't just a debate, this is a consumer revolt, and as it stands it's working, so why do a radical change which would massively cut down our numbers in a means which leaves the few how remain open to the unopposed harassment that has been rampant by those opposed to GG?

It's a terrible idea is what I'm saying.
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
an874 said:
Thanks #Gamergate! Because of you, the vile SOPA pushing lobbyists of the ESA are now the heroes in this story, but what could we really expect from the gaming community's Tea Party?: http://www.motivationals.org/demotivational-posters/demotivational-poster-15177.jpg
Oh for fuck sake, there's harassment coming from both sides in this, the only difference is that unlike those opposed to GG, WE actually police our own and try to pot a stop to it when we see it instead of saying shit like "those subhumans deserve it" and other statements taken right out of the fascist handbook. If anyone is the tea party of the gaming community in all this, it's those against GG, of that there is no debate or question.
 

Thoughtful_Salt

New member
Mar 29, 2012
333
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
And yet, nobody on the more contentious side of the GamerGate fiasco seems particularly worried. I've seen academic papers related to game theory that had the misfortune of being penned by female writers, and who were almost successfully contaminated by an influx of idiots filling the online questionnaire's fields with witty banter along the lines of "Suck my dick" or "Get back in the kitchen, ho!"

And why? Because the GamerGaters have allowed morons like 4Chan's b-tards to pollute the debate. Dig around and you'll see that a few of them like to engineer situations in which they act as both perpetrator and would-be savior. One hand doxxes and actively threatens, the other creates iconography for the Feminist arm of the movement.

As much as I'm a fan of unregulated spaces open to discussion, that approach needs to be punished. Nobody should get to act as both abuser and rescuer, as that's not only illogical but also puerile.

At some point, the so-called lulz have to stop, and consequences have to be made tangible. I can't wait for the round of prosecutions to start scorching minors or immature adults who thought that horsing around on an imageboard was without consequences whatsoever.
I respectfully ask how on earth do you propose we stop those toxic elements when they can post from anywhere, with easily made accounts and spew whatever they want? From what I've seen the movement has actually been pretty good (and getting better) at moderating and helping to remove those comments and toxic people :https://www.facebook.com/groups/479630672174115/530500160420499/?comment_id=530507480419767&notif_t=like

Holding back people like that is like trying to hold back a flood with your bare hands, all you can do is reduce the damage and slowly repair it.

And no I will not accept "Well the whole movement is tainted and should abandon itself". When the movement finally appears to have a solid base of support and clear, reachable goals, it makes about as much sense as the Republican party renaming itself because of the Tea Party (which You'll note is a fringe element of the GOP). A good cause is worth fighting for.
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
And here we see more game developers to scared to say what they really think because of the SJWs and just preaching the gospel that gets dictated cause they fear for their jobs.

Miss Sarkesian so far has not shown anything that suggests that the person that threatened to shoot up the university is actually a spokesperson for gamergate. And even if he claimed he was from gamgergate, the fact that gamergate constantly calls out to not harass the other side, to stop these childish attempts at fanning the flames gets completly ignored in favour of a "big bad wolf" narrative that makes corrupt websites like kotaku look like knights in shining armor.


These people will aparantly happily bent over and have their work get called mysoginistic, sexist and rape culture supporting, because they are to afraid to defend their own work because of a bunch of twitter crybabies and the gaming media that is actually loosing meaning every day and even today only survives because of certain content creators that really arent games journalists and more like TGWTG crewalikes bringing people to their sites.

Also they completly forget to mention the very real and actually well documented harassment that GG advocates have to face every day. Harassment that has lead to people loosing their jobs.

Meanwhile miss Sarkesian after suposedly receiving those threat emails herselfe is bitching about that no one had informed her about these threats from university sides... and cancelled her speach because the police wouldnt establish air port security like measures to protect HER sorry ass.

Who does she think she is? Some high profile politician? The president of the US of A?

No one announces an amok run days and weeks in advance, if there is an announcement its going online right before the actual deed is done... this whole scenario is disgusting and shows how far enrooted this SJW problem really is in games development and how far apart game devs really have become from their actual audience.

Because listening to the people who are actually involved in shady businesses and backroom deals with the very people they are supposed to report on is more important then the people that actually play your games and make sure that you have a job to go to the next day.


Incidantly this is exactly why i was against that hashtag from the very beginning. Before the hashtag came up it was "gamers"

Now its "gamergaters" and since not everyone identifies with that stupid hashtag they can divide and conquer. While people where rightously pissed off about that barrage of "gamers are dead" articles... now they themselves can claim they dont belong to "that group" cause hey.. its gamergaters right? Its not gamers anymore... all the evil in gaming culture was condensed in GG so since im not part of it i dont belong to the badguys right?

Stupid hashtag activism...
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Zontar said:
Baresark said:
You should form an organization that does not have a policy that anyone can claim to be a member. Have a public roster (without aliases) and a mission statement.
Given what has happened to many of the people who have their real names known for supporting the movement, that will never even be considered. It would be doing most of the work the doxxers who are against GG for them. We allow all to be a part of the movement (though we do try to police out own if we catch someone harassing someone else) because we want as many people on our side as possible. This isn't just a debate, this is a consumer revolt, and as it stands it's working, so why do a radical change which would massively cut down our numbers in a means which leaves the few how remain open to the unopposed harassment that has been rampant by those opposed to GG?

It's a terrible idea is what I'm saying.
Then at very least you should probably have a website with an unofficial roster of aliases and a mission statement so the BS about it not being about anything can be stopped. You can also use it to officially condone things that are not agreed to such as harassment. I mean, the main thing is that all the people who get attacked in the name of GG have real names and are publicly known, so it looks like a nameless faceless group is attacking them wholesale. And at least with an unofficial roster of aliases, people can look and see if a person is affiliated. And if a person who is affiliated threatens someone, the group as a whole can disavow their actions as not part of the group.

My point is that you let the media control your public image by just not having a few things that have iron meaning.
 

Kameburger

Turtle king
Apr 7, 2012
574
0
0
Does anyone not see how stupid this whole thing is? My god, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. GamerGate what ever it is, is clearly not some organized group of people, it's a sentiment that means different things to different people. Trying to stick them all into one box simply empowers them by making a whole group of people guilty by association and than angry. I've heard plenty of GamerGate people insist that they are firmly against threats and violence, hell they practically have to write it before every sentence they speak.

Also all this talk about ethics in game journalism really is just lip service BS as well. There is no code of ethics for people who are essentially bloggers that are second to the punch. This isn't exactly investigative reporting, and bias is as much a necessity it seems as the word game or movie when describing most of the sites gamer gate is against. I mean a review of a game is an opinion and it's up to you as an individual to decide who you can and can't trust. I wish I could say we as a community are capable of rising above all this but in reality we probably aren't. It's all downhill from here.

Also I'm well done with giving anyone my sympathies. Getting threatened is awful yes, but the twisting spin that people keep putting on this is, while not equatable, still sickening in itself. I'm truly sick to death of this discussion, god I used to read game news to get away from the republican and democrat BS but now Fox news and MSNBC seem to have more integrity than the full throated shit flingers. Even writing this I can already see the slew of comments directed at me, trying to put me on one side or the other of this argument. But I'm sick of having my sympathies played to, my intelligence insulted, my identity questioned, all from people who at the end of every diatribe, stretch out their hand and ask me for money.

Anita doesn't do what she does for free, and I wonder if she gave that speaking fee back, considering that law enforcement had cleared the threat, and her final reason for leaving was an issue with the venues policy. She maybe a victim and I don't at all blame her for speaking out against those who threaten her, hell I've spoken out against them, you've spoken out against them, We've all spoken out against them.

Also I could care less about GamerGate because well frankly I believe the influence of game journalism only stretches as far as we let it, and YouTube is certainly proving my point there.

The percentage of women in games is a work place issue and should be tacked by employees in that industry. The perception of women as depicted in games themselves has actually changed quite a lot, and in entertainment in general there is a lot more entertainment targeting female audiences of all ages, and certainly much more than we give it credit for. I love how Anita Sarkeesian never once features her talking to any one else about her perceptions, never features any research in her videos aside from hearsay and cherry picked examples. You know everything that has nothing to do with the scientific method. Her videos should be called "Fem Frequency: One woman's perceived male dominated hellscape." Are there sexist depictions of Women in games stemming from way back? Yes. Should we be talking about it? Yes. But like politics, this has turned into a contest of who can talk the furthest down to each other, and I'm so tired of it. This is so exhausting and not helpful.

Every single public figure who enters this debate with seemingly the exception of Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit have done nothing but hurl insults at each other and have done their best to make sure as many by-standards are in the splash zone as possible. It's like watching two factions dressed in KKK outfits dance toward each other like idiots, fighting over which person it's the most morally OK to lynch.

I've unfollowed almost every Games personality on twitter because I could't take the constant stream of hate that flew around at every second of every day. God the debate over the Iraq War felt less contentious that this.

Are we really this petty? Are we really this shallow? Are we really all such giant babies that we can't seem to put two and two together and try to figure out the cause of these problems rather than star lobbing missiles at symptoms?
 

vallorn

Tunnel Open, Communication Open.
Nov 18, 2009
2,307
0
0
I'd just like to leave this article by a self named critic of #GamerGate on the issue of harassment. To both sides who read this, enjoy and keep an open mind: https://storify.com/LadyFuzztail/gamergate-may-be-a-victim-of-a-false-flag-operati
 

Kameburger

Turtle king
Apr 7, 2012
574
0
0
Trishbot said:
It blew up in the beast it did because a bitter, jealous, angry ex went to a group of trolls, made up a bunch of stories about her (many outright disproven), and said trolls went on the warpath, organizing and going after people so barely even related to the concept of "journalistic integrity" that it's almost laughable.
Hey sorry i know you're in the middle of something heated but do you have a link to where these things were disproven? That changes a lot for me. I mean before I realized the entire human race was little more the the feces they excrete in their entirety, I did actually read that blog, and the chat logs seemed pretty convincing and to my knowledge the surrounding Nathan Grayson and the boss she slept with didn't deny it from my understanding. If you had some evidence to the contrary I would be interested to read that too.
 

Kameburger

Turtle king
Apr 7, 2012
574
0
0
vallorn said:
I'd just like to leave this article by a self named critic of #GamerGate on the issue of harassment. To both sides who read this, enjoy and keep an open mind: https://storify.com/LadyFuzztail/gamergate-may-be-a-victim-of-a-false-flag-operati

Bob Chipman @the_moviebob
Follow
@LadyFuzztail Here's something you should know about me: I "believe" that there is (almost) no such thing as a bad tactic - only bad TARGETS
I am done with bob... I followed him on twitter but by far has the most disgusting, vile, and ethically vacant garbage spewed from his brain lately that I... my god I almost want to cancel my pub club subscription over this. I think I'm gonna email the escapist and send a formal complain. This kind of ends justify the means approach to his intolerance can't keep being rewarded.
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
And yet, nobody on the more contentious side of the GamerGate fiasco seems particularly worried. I've seen academic papers related to game theory that had the misfortune of being penned by female writers, and who were almost successfully contaminated by an influx of idiots filling the online questionnaire's fields with witty banter along the lines of "Suck my dick" or "Get back in the kitchen, ho!"

And why? Because the GamerGaters have allowed morons like 4Chan's b-tards to pollute the debate.
What do you mean "allowed". People can't control what other people do.

When it comes to igda, it's one of the 3 organizations that either sold or compromised my email address. Since I give a unique one to each company I can see. It started with spam and now receive daily trojans on it.

They also had copyright troll tim langdell on their board for years. I don't hold igda in high regard. Don't know much about esa though.
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
Kameburger said:
Does anyone not see how stupid this whole thing is? My god, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. GamerGate what ever it is, is clearly not some organized group of people, it's a sentiment that means different things to different people. Trying to stick them all into one box simply empowers them by making a whole group of people guilty by association and than angry. I've heard plenty of GamerGate people insist that they are firmly against threats and violence, hell they practically have to write it before every sentence they speak.

Also all this talk about ethics in game journalism really is just lip service BS as well. There is no code of ethics for people who are essentially bloggers that are second to the punch. This isn't exactly investigative reporting, and bias is as much a necessity it seems as the word game or movie when describing most of the sites gamer gate is against. I mean a review of a game is an opinion and it's up to you as an individual to decide who you can and can't trust. I wish I could say we as a community are capable of rising above all this but in reality we probably aren't. It's all downhill from here.

Also I'm well done with giving anyone my sympathies. Getting threatened is awful yes, but the twisting spin that people keep putting on this is, while not equatable, still sickening in itself. I'm truly sick to death of this discussion, god I used to read game news to get away from the republican and democrat BS but now Fox news and MSNBC seem to have more integrity than the full throated shit flingers. Even writing this I can already see the slew of comments directed at me, trying to put me on one side or the other of this argument. But I'm sick of having my sympathies played to, my intelligence insulted, my identity questioned, all from people who at the end of every diatribe, stretch out their hand and ask me for money.

Anita doesn't do what she does for free, and I wonder if she gave that speaking fee back, considering that law enforcement had cleared the threat, and her final reason for leaving was an issue with the venues policy. She maybe a victim and I don't at all blame her for speaking out against those who threaten her, hell I've spoken out against them, you've spoken out against them, We've all spoken out against them.

Also I could care less about GamerGate because well frankly I believe the influence of game journalism only stretches as far as we let it, and YouTube is certainly proving my point there.

The percentage of women in games is a work place issue and should be tacked by employees in that industry. The perception of women as depicted in games themselves has actually changed quite a lot, and in entertainment in general there is a lot more entertainment targeting female audiences of all ages, and certainly much more than we give it credit for. I love how Anita Sarkeesian never once features her talking to any one else about her perceptions, never features any research in her videos aside from hearsay and cherry picked examples. You know everything that has nothing to do with the scientific method. Her videos should be called "Fem Frequency: One woman's perceived male dominated hellscape." Are there sexist depictions of Women in games stemming from way back? Yes. Should we be talking about it? Yes. But like politics, this has turned into a contest of who can talk the furthest down to each other, and I'm so tired of it. This is so exhausting and not helpful.

Every single public figure who enters this debate with seemingly the exception of Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit have done nothing but hurl insults at each other and have done their best to make sure as many by-standards are in the splash zone as possible. It's like watching two factions dressed in KKK outfits dance toward each other like idiots, fighting over which person it's the most morally OK to lynch.

I've unfollowed almost every Games personality on twitter because I could't take the constant stream of hate that flew around at every second of every day. God the debate over the Iraq War felt less contentious that this.

Are we really this petty? Are we really this shallow? Are we really all such giant babies that we can't seem to put two and two together and try to figure out the cause of these problems rather than star lobbing missiles at symptoms?
I want to give you a hug. Well written.

I'm more optimistic than you maybe. I believe we needed this and it'll make us all stronger and wiser after we figure out that the all out fighting is contraproductive.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Kameburger said:
Trishbot said:
It blew up in the beast it did because a bitter, jealous, angry ex went to a group of trolls, made up a bunch of stories about her (many outright disproven), and said trolls went on the warpath, organizing and going after people so barely even related to the concept of "journalistic integrity" that it's almost laughable.
Hey sorry i know you're in the middle of something heated but do you have a link to where these things were disproven? That changes a lot for me. I mean before I realized the entire human race was little more the the feces they excrete in their entirety, I did actually read that blog, and the chat logs seemed pretty convincing and to my knowledge the surrounding Nathan Grayson and the boss she slept with didn't deny it from my understanding. If you had some evidence to the contrary I would be interested to read that too.
http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-times-about-a-pos-1624707346
KOTAKU refuted much of the accusations. This was affirmed by The New Yorker, The NY Times, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, and others.

The accusation that she traded sexual favors for favorable coverage were systematically investigated and found unsubstantiated. NOBODY she was accused of having a relationship with ever wrote a review for her game or shamelessly promoted it (which is even stranger considering the game is FREE and nobody stood to make any profit from being shady about it). You can see for yourself; try and find a review by any of the parties mentioned. They simply don't exist. Even after it was proven she didn't receive coverage in exchange for sexual favors, the attacks on her persisted or individuals chose not to believe the reports and continued to blindly affirm her guilt and a larger problem stemming from a situation that did not in reality even occur.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
SilverHunter said:
It's downright pathetic to see these people try to take the moral high ground. Instead of saying "deaths threat and the like are a terrible thing and we don't condone it for either side", they are taking the childish route of "They said it! Not me!".
Of course, what you said could apply to GamerGaters as well. And the movement spends time downplaying threats and making accusations of conspiracy, so the rest of the stuff you say applies to them as well. You say it's pathetic, but you are only addressing one side, too.

So here's an idea. If you're sincere in saying this is bad on either side, don't do the exact same thing.

circularlogic88 said:
OT: Why has it taken the ESA and IGDA this long to publicly respond to the hate and threats?
I could swear they had before.


Zaydin said:
Yet for all their claims of wanting to fight corruption in gaming journalism, Gaters (I refuse to call them Gamers) were silent when Gamespot canned Jeff Gerstmann for panning Kane and Lynch.
Well, there was an outrage over it. Can you conclusively prove the specific people in GamerGate were active in gaming AND said nothing at the time?


I would think there would at least be SOME overlap.

Doesn't mean I support the movement, I'm just saying.

Trishbot said:
I believe ESA and IGDA are calling the misogynists and the bigots "misogynists and bigots". If you don't fall under that umbrella, they aren't talking to you.
I think the issue is that they're talking about the overall movement, and people are reacting as though they were talking about each individual or every member. I mean, we could have reasonable responses, or....

Trishbot said:
I think you're getting a tad too emotionally wrapped up in this, because these statements were not directed at you.
I think that's pretty much GamerGate's meat and potatoes. Yeah yeah, notallgamergaters or whatever. However, you look at so much of the outrage that comes out of the resource thread, and it's less based on what is actually said and more on how what someone said has been taken personally. Hell, look at any of the GG threads around here, and it's the same. And to a funnier note on a personal level, the people trying to dissuade me of this are the ones who seem to get the most personally offended over the least personal material.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
V da Mighty Taco said:
In other words, whether or not they stood up for Gerstmann all those years ago doesn't actually prove them wrong about journalism being fucked now.
It would, however, make them massively hypocritical.

Kind of like the mass rallying behind Yiannopoulos and Baldwin.

Or the still limited focus on Eric Johnson, instead going after Brianna Wu.

Or any of a number of other things which are more relevant to the here and now.

Zontar said:
Oh for fuck sake, there's harassment coming from both sides in this, the only difference is that unlike those opposed to GG, WE actually police our own and try to pot a stop to it when we see it instead of saying shit like "those subhumans deserve it" and other statements taken right out of the fascist handbook.
Still yet to see proof the "other side" did nothing to stop "their" own people.

Kameburger said:
I did actually read that blog, and the chat logs seemed pretty convincing and to my knowledge the surrounding Nathan Grayson and the boss she slept with didn't deny it from my understanding. If you had some evidence to the contrary I would be interested to read that too.
I'm sorry, not denying something means what now?

Does someone not denying something constitute proof? That seems horribly dishonest.

(reworded the last point to better reflect what I meant)
 

Alarien

New member
Feb 9, 2010
441
0
0
Kameburger said:
vallorn said:
I'd just like to leave this article by a self named critic of #GamerGate on the issue of harassment. To both sides who read this, enjoy and keep an open mind: https://storify.com/LadyFuzztail/gamergate-may-be-a-victim-of-a-false-flag-operati

Bob Chipman @the_moviebob
Follow
@LadyFuzztail Here's something you should know about me: I "believe" that there is (almost) no such thing as a bad tactic - only bad TARGETS
I am done with bob... I followed him on twitter but by far has the most disgusting, vile, and ethically vacant garbage spewed from his brain lately that I... my god I almost want to cancel my pub club subscription over this. I think I'm gonna email the escapist and send a formal complain. This kind of ends justify the means approach to his intolerance can't keep being rewarded.
It's not just Bob now. I used to follow him but had to drop him from my twitter feed about a month ago. I enjoy some of the content he creates, but his twitter behavior is so vile and unprofessional that I can't even just ignore it as it ticks by. Plus, he spams it.

However, I just unfollowed Jim a few hours ago. For the most part, he has more or less been fairly reasonable over the whole thing, but in the last couple weeks he has become increasingly less stable on twitter. There was a tirade a few days ago and a couple of vitriolic posts, but mostly, for me, it's the constant retweets of Leigh Alexander (what a hateful person she is) and other "anti-Gamergaters" that I am tired of reading.

It's fine tweeting reasonable comments condemning hate, threats, and bullying. It's fine tweeting things that promote gender issues in gaming. Hell, I am fine with him RT'ing Anita Sarkeesian. Even though I dislike her for, I believe, lying about being a gamer and having the only agenda of building her own brand (to do the University lecture circuit as a career) and having no actual interest in improving women's roles/themes/identity in games; I think the overall idea of her message is important and I'd like to see her message picked up by men and women who are actual gamers and game devs and discussed regarding what in gaming does and does not need to change. He can RT Anita all he wants and I just ignore it and hope someone who actually cares picks up the idea and momentum from her. However, Leigh Alexander is a self-important hate machine. I had hoped by not following Bob, I wouldn't get constant RT's from people like her and Devin Faraci. Thankfully, the Faraci RT's went away with unfollowing Bob, but Jim has been RT'ing Leigh again and again, as well as making more and more nasty remarks in the last week.

I'm done with them. I'll let The Escapist's official feed tell me when there's new content that I might be interested in. It's a shame too. Jim had some content on Youtube that interested me as well, but I have no interest in hunting it down or subbing his channel, so Twitter was my only way for my eye to be caught regarding that.
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Still yet to see proof the "other side" did nothing to stop "their" own people.
Yep.. i mean with all the articles comming about that call for people to stop harassing gamers, stop using gaming as a scapegoat for everything bad that happens, and to tell people that no.. youre not a mysoginist or sexist if you dont happen to agree with AS.

But no.. aparantly according to most gaming media sites we are mysoginerds, subhuman, worse then ISIS and generally live in parents basement.

And all these things where said by prominent members of the gaming media that have not apologized for this crap.. the ISIS one especialy should have led to someone loosing their job.

Imagine if a politician had said something along the line of "I respect ISIS more then people who enjoy the hobby of XYZ. Group XYZ is dead to me!" Yeah.. their career would be over.


In the gaming media however everyone is high fiving each other about how badass they all are, how socially progressive and how witty they are in denouncing their own audience that got them their jobs in the first place.

Journalistic ethics? Would be nice to have ala escapist but lets face it.. they arent real journalists.. they are glorified bloggers that get to call themselves "gaming press" every year E3 or Gamescom come around and theres a press only presentation.

What i think should truly happen is that they should represent the hobby in a favourable light, should write about the positive things that happen in gaming more, should actually look deeper from a neutral standpoint if these accusations in gaming are actually true. Should have a healthy dose of sceptisism about people like AS that claim that this or that came supports rape culture.

But they dont... they bit down on the narattive that we are all... and i mean ALL... are subhuman degenerates that salivate like animals at the thought of women in gaming... you know... even the almost 50% of women that enjoy the hobby but never have their games reported about because theres no money in reporting about the latest social games if you can ***** about assasins creed unity not having female or colored protagonists in multyplayer.

But please ubisoft! Dont pull those Assasin creeds adds from out websites! We dont really hate you.. we just want to plaese our SJW overlords and look like we are better then the "vulgar common crowd"

My... its as if gaming media thinks that they are the nobility of gamerdome and thus by nature better then all the dirty plebs...
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
In other words, whether or not they stood up for Gerstmann all those years ago doesn't actually prove them wrong about journalism being fucked now.
It would, however, make them massively hypocritical.

Kind of like the mass rallying behind Yiannopoulos and Baldwin.

Or the still limited focus on Eric Johnson, instead going after Brianna Wu.

Or any of a number of other things which are more relevant to the here and now.
It doesn't prove them wrong though, even if and when it's the case. A terrible person can be right; it's why ad-hominems are a fallacy.

Zontar said:
Oh for fuck sake, there's harassment coming from both sides in this, the only difference is that unlike those opposed to GG, WE actually police our own and try to pot a stop to it when we see it instead of saying shit like "those subhumans deserve it" and other statements taken right out of the fascist handbook.
Still yet to see proof the "other side" did nothing to stop "their" own people.
That's asking for proof of a negative - that something doesn't exist. Even if there really is nobody against GG calling out there own black sheep, it'd be nigh on impossible to prove by it's very nature.

Kameburger said:
I did actually read that blog, and the chat logs seemed pretty convincing and to my knowledge the surrounding Nathan Grayson and the boss she slept with didn't deny it from my understanding. If you had some evidence to the contrary I would be interested to read that too.
I'm sorry, not denying something means what now?

Does someone not denying something constitute proof? That seems horribly dishonest.

(reworded the last point to better reflect what I meant)
At least in Greyson's case, they have actually openly admitted to sleeping with each other. It's the "did it for publicity" part that they've denied and successfully debunked.
 

Alex1508

New member
Sep 20, 2014
52
0
0
Karadalis said:
Journalistic ethics? Would be nice to have ala escapist but lets face it.. they arent real journalists.. they are glorified bloggers that get to call themselves "gaming press" every year E3 or Gamescom come around and theres a press only presentation.
/RANT MODE ON
Ehem.... "Why isn't the group going after the hundreds of other more urgent problems in the game industry, such as Youtube buyouts, pervasive game DRM, mistreatment of video game developers and unacceptable crunch periods, console exclusivity backroom deals, unoptimized PC ports, broken game launches, game industry advertisements (hey, I notice Alien: Isolation is paying for the Escapist's web banners currently. How can we trust their review to be objective?), broken metacritic scaling ties to developer bonuses, and, YES, female developer and journalist harassment as a constant, unsolved problem?"- Garlador on this same page.

In other words, why is the journalistics ethics movement not actually doing anything about the actual problems that affect gaming press, some of these transgressions happening in plain sight while Gamergate is raging on (see Shadows of Mordor or the fact Chris Watters was hosting the Warlords of Draenor cinematic trailer reveal at Blizzcon, as a recent example) but instead focuses on the drivel "supposed" SJWs are writting? And when i say SJWs, i mean basically anyone who doesn't tow in the gamergate narrative.

If the goal of Gamergate is to wipe out corruption in games journalism, if the movement isn't merely a bunch of loosely adhered qualms about feminism and minorities (oh #notyourshield, yours is the most cruel joke out of this entire carnival) well they are doing a shit job of identifying and offering realistic, concrete soultions to the actual, honest-to-god problems in games media. It's not as if those problems are hard to see, we've know about them for years.

Simple, it's not about ethics or journalism, it's a simple extension of the culture wars. It's about politics or more to the point about ppl being critical of videogames from a social/feminist standpoint.

The demands for journalistic integrity coming from Gamergate have nothing at all to do with the systemic corruption of the gaming media. They've centered instead on journalists supposedly pursuing social-justice agendas and on ridiculous claims that the press sees gamers as vectors of social contagion. Some of the complaints, like the idea that outlets ought to reconsider their editorial positions if enough readers disagree with them, this standing in direct opposition to traditional journalistic ethics (all the claims for more "objective" reviewing aka write only about what i want to hear). Just look at the reaction when a reviewer gives a lower score to a highly anticipated game like Jims 8/10 uncharted review or Carolyn Petit GTA5 review where her mere mention of finding some portrayals offensive sparked a pitchfork mob depsite her grading the game outside her distaste and gave it a 9/10. Mere examples to a behaviour that has been running rampart for quite some time now.

As you said yourself, it's more about this "But no.. aparantly according to most gaming media sites we are mysoginerds, subhuman, worse then ISIS and generally live in parents basement." and "What i think should truly happen is that they should represent the hobby in a favourable light, should write about the positive things that happen in gaming more, should actually look deeper from a neutral standpoint if these accusations in gaming are actually true. Should have a healthy dose of sceptisism about people like AS that claim that this or that came supports rape culture." aka they need to write about gamer culture from your viewpoint, and not hear about the problems other segments of the populations encounter in the culture.

*sigh* There is a reason why, in all the Gamergate rhetoric, you hear the echoes of every other social war staged in the last 30 years: overly politically correct, social-justice warriors, the media elite, gamers are not a monolith, etc. There is also a reason why so much of the rhetoric amounts to a vigorous argument that being a gamer doesn't mean you're sexist, racist, and stupid, a claim that only the unhinged are making (or the image that Gamergate propponents are creating for gamers at large). Co-opting the language and posture of grievance is how members of a privileged class express their belief that the way they live shouldn't have to change or in this case that games are perfect just as they are and that the continous homogenazation and dillution of games in the insane race of catering to one demographic specifically at the expense of all others and the utter irresponsability when it comes to the messages games contain as both pieces of entertainment and art, somehow all this must continue unabated, unexplored or criticized. We can enjoy the politics and messages presented in the Witcher series, Bioshock series, Civilization series, etc and beat over our chests of how amazing, deep and mature games are but the moment anyone becomes critical of some rather poor, juvenile or questionably presented segments or downright malicious representations, ppl start screaming about the "feminazis" and the "SJWs", "censorship", how games are just games and ppl should just shut up and play them and, ironically, what thin skins these critics have.

And this barely reaches the middle of my list of grievances when it comes to this movement.

Yeah, i'm not buying the narrative either, and tbh i fear for what's gonna become of the medium if this is the voice of the majority, if this is who will be brought up as a representation of my needs as a consumer and gamer. I would have joined Gamergate if this was truly about creating a better, more respectable gaming media but as it is just a poorly directed witch hunt.

Oh and before someone jumps to tell me i'm missinformed, etc i've been lurking in the Gamergate megathread ever since page 215 up to it's current 796 including watching the youtube debates ,videos, InternetAristocrat, MundaneMatt, etc, etc, etc......etc.

And as a disclaimer: i shall adopt the position of just not caring anymore, sure the devastated wasteland that will remain after all of this is done will affect the types of games and portrayls that i enjoy but it's clear no one side cares about that anyways. I'll just bury myself in cute puppy/kitty pics and funny youtube videos (also Dark Souls.....it'll take a lot of time till i reach any semblence of progress with that game) during these dark times.
/RANT MDOE OFF
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Thoughtful_Salt said:
I respectfully ask how on earth do you propose we stop those toxic elements when they can post from anywhere, with easily made accounts and spew whatever they want?
dunam said:
What do you mean "allowed". People can't control what other people do.
To repeat a previous post of mine, I don't know. I don't have an answer or a solution to offer, because the issue at hand is too complex for me to narrow down to "do X and fix it". The post you've quoted was mostly exasperation on my part and, as I've said before, I don't want to attack those people who are actively trying to mitigate damage. I'm simply infuriated by the ease at which the doxxing and slandering crowd keeps going, and all I can do is wish that it bites them in the ass. I'm well aware that they can't be effectively stopped and that Twitter sock puppet accounts can just be recreated in the wake of the Banhammer falling. Attacks and harrassment are difficult things to stem.

As for me missing a beat and not realizing that 4Chan was no longer a thing, well, yeah. Never been much of a Channer to begin with, so excuse my ignorance.
 

danielcofour

New member
May 6, 2014
28
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
I don't care much about Gamergate or their opposition, and believe that both sides of the conversation have been too poisoned by idiots with loud voices to go anywhere positive. One thing though? You probably shouldn't use the organization that supported SOPA (until the collective internet made them back down) as proof that the public is behind you. They do not care about you. They do not care about this issue. PR is PR. If they had cared, they wouldn't have waited until other news outlets started weighing in on things to have their say.

As for inclusivity, I'm all for it, and I've seen many GGers claim that they are too. Granted, my reasons for inclusivity have nothing to do with equality. I don't think equality should be a requirement of art after all. It would be more accurate to say that I support diversity. Van Gough was a fine artist, but it would be boring if every painting looked like Starry Night. Similarly, I don't have to be female, homosexual, chinese, etc to be bored to tears with the grizzled brown haired white male protagonist who sees the same basic story arc mirrored across entire genres.
What this guy said.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
Trishbot said:
Ukomba said:
Right, the personal attacks are ok if you're doing it. Got you. I mean, making a slanderous statement like they "are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs" that's fine. but pointing out actual issues with the reporting is bigoted. That's fine, I can see where your bias is.
I think you're getting a tad too emotionally wrapped up in this, because these statements were not directed at you. They were directed at the "misogynists and bigots" who, yes, do want to "squash the voices of women at all costs". That's factual, and if you aren't with them, don't stand alongside them.

Critique away. I never called you bigoted. But the IGDA and ESA responded to terrorist and death threats, not to criticism of game journalism.

Your own bias seems to be skewing your perspective on this topic and making generalized comments about bad individuals a personal affront. You should have nothing to be defensive about unless you're one of those that agree the harassment and death threats weren't an issue or that you condone the actions. If you don't, then they were not talking to you, at all, and you shouldn't care.
You did, actually, you and Edwards paint the entire movement with the same broad brush and so are calling anyone associated with it bigots. Not a generalized comment about bad individuals, literately everyone in the movement.
Edwards - "The irony of this movement is that they want journalistic integrity, but are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs,"
Trishbot - "But the GamerGate "movement" irreversibly associated with "misogynists and bigots""

Excuse me but the people associating the moment with misogynists and bigots is your side. Not to mention people like Mateus Prado Sousa who create their own. Shall we say the Feminists movement is irrevocably associated with are Misandrists and bigots because a few are? Shall we take the trolls as a representative in any movement?

In the future, if you don't want to sling mud on everyone, you might want to pick your words more carefully. Shall I fix it to say 'But the GamerGate "Movement" has a small number of "misogynists and bigots" in it'? I'd agree with that, but there are negative elements in everything so I wouldn't find it terribly relevant either.

Or just keep trotting out the Misogynists Straw Man, pointing at Trolls, or making them up when needed to use as ammo against the divers community like each and every one of them agree with the attacks. I, for one, think it's despicable that Edwards to Marginalize people in order to silence people like this. It's sad since the majority of people agree that threats of violence, harassment and personal attacks are wrong. Yet it's said like GG supporters disagree.

Emotions run high when people misrepresent your position and then proceed to attack you based on lies they created.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Karadalis said:
I said there was a lack of proof, and you gave me a rant full of vague generalisations, innuendo, and reference that if I'm following who they're talking about are just plain false.

You haven't offered proof, or anything any reasonable person should follow. I thought GamerGate was supposed to be about better journalism, but all I'm seeing here is a tirade against "THEM." The dreaded "other side."

If you're just going to rant at me, I'd appreciate it if you just didn't bother.

And you're certainly not going to convince me of anything that way.

V da Mighty Taco said:
A terrible person can be right; it's why ad-hominems are a fallacy.
No, an ad hominem is a fallacy when you go after the person on an unrelated matter to attack someone. It is not an ad hominem when it goes to the evaluation of a statement. For example, when someone claims that they are for journalistic integrity and against corruption, pointing out instances where they clearly were not may be an argumentum ad hominem, but it is not an ad hominem fallacy.

Forms of ad hominem are used routinely without being fallacies.

In short, no, this is not why ad hominems are a fallacy, the ad hominem fallacy addresses different points of the ad hominem argument.

But I'm even more puzzled that you then go on to say this:

At least in Greyson's case, they have actually openly admitted to sleeping with each other. It's the "did it for publicity" part that they've denied and successfully debunked.
But this was about the lack of a denial (as though it was damning), the only reason I brought it up here.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Ukomba said:
You did, actually
Actually, no.
Not a generalized comment about bad individuals, literately everyone in the movement.
Only if you're using "literally" in the modern sense of "figuratively," and even then not so much.

Edwards - "The irony of this movement is that they want journalistic integrity, but are looking to squash the voices of women at all costs,"
Speaks to the group in general, neither addressing all members or members individually. "This movement" doesn't mean "everybody involved."

Trishbot - "But the GamerGate "movement" irreversibly associated with "misogynists and bigots""
"Are associated with" does not mean "are." That's why there's two extra words at the end.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Trishbot - "But the GamerGate "movement" is irreversibly associated with "misogynists and bigots""
"Are associated with" does not mean "are." That's why there's two extra words at the end.
Thank you for responding so I didn't have to. I appreciate that. This is precisely why cool heads can see the forest from the trees.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Trishbot said:
Thank you for responding so I didn't have to. I appreciate that. This is precisely why cool heads can see the forest from the trees.
No worries, people being misrepresented is a pet peeve of mine. I'm not sure it did any good, but I tried.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Disappointing but not entirely unsurprising. The ESA and IGDA are apparently going to play the political game as opposed to trying to do the right thing, which just means things are going to get worse as the attitude they are taking is more or less a big part of what set this off to begin with.

Right now the correct action for these groups to take would be to start paying a closer attention to the gaming media, who is saying what, and what is going on around what they are saying, and then start doing whatever they can within their spheres of influence to crack down on trouble makers and corruption within the gaming media.

I'm not that familiar with Wu's body of work but I do know Sarkessian's so that's the position I'll mostly be speaking from since I'm guessing they are similar. Basically Anita is a trouble maker who goes out of her way to rally SJWs to the defense of non-existent issues. Claiming things like how scanty outfits for female characters are exploitive, that there is rampant misogyny in the idea of women being rescued, or being on the receiving end of violence instead of just inflicting it, and all kinds of things. When challenged she, and people like here, either resort to outright suppressing comment, encourage their platforms to ban dissent, and otherwise just ignore anything said in return that they otherwise cannot find a way to censor. On the few occasions where they address points made against them, they do so in very ridiculous terms that make their agenda clear, for example saying that "it doesn't count when men are shown the same way women are because it doubles as male power fantasy that way" such as in reference to the unrealistic proportions of heroic fantasy models. These people also claim to speak for women, while at the same time pretty much ignoring all of the women who create fantasy out there and who have been successful at it, many writing for a female audience. Simply put video games accurately represent the genera most of them are working with as presented by both male an female creators, it's actually a radical fringe that claim to have an issue, and ultimately it's an issue that cannot be made without resorting to some serious misandry via the use of double standards by claiming that say the chainmail bikini is somehow different than the furry barbarian thong male "Conan Types" are given when really they are exactly the same thing and just as ridiculous. Basically in heroic fantasy neither gender gets treated any differently when you get down to it, the general portrayal is one where people of the same gender want to be them, those of the opposite gender want to be with them (so to speak).


That's a brief run down above, I've gone into more detail in other posts pointing out all the problems inherent in it, and of course the fact that the people involved in these crusades do everything they can to shut down criticism and counter-points being made to them. The thing is that what your seeing recently is people getting sick of those doing this, and the SJWs, many entrenched in the gaming media, keeping it going. You see a lot of the threats and anger and such in part because there is literally no way to get these people to shut up, there is no positive or constructive way to shut these people down, and that makes people angry. The attacks aren't because they are women, but because of the attention getting non-issues they represent and the fact that the vacuum chamber they and their supporters have gradually created makes them seem to have valid positions to theoretical outside observers who aren't more familiar with the material in question, potentially leading to changes and damage within gaming against the will of the actual majority, some of which are starting to rise up and become just as vehement as the SJWs that they are confronting.

Basically what these organizations need to be doing is saying that yes, it is wrong for people to be making these threats, but at the same time to also make it clear that the antics of those being attacked and their supporters are not acceptable either. These organizations should be doing everything they can to put pressure on people like Anita Sarkessian, and game journalists with social agendas and such, to stop being trouble makers. The bigger organizations involved in this kind of thing, as far as they are able, need to become the legitimate authorities who will pressure game journalists or political trolls into submission when they go beyond a specific level making it so "vigilante" activity of the sort we're seeing is less necessary. Understand the reason why people get mad enough to threaten Anita is because by definition they can't confront her message, not because she's right, but because she and supporting SJWs in the media pretty much control all the platforms, and they can ban anyone saying anything they don't care for in their own back yard.

See, the big thing here to understand is that nothing someone like Anita says is actually true in any real sense, or hasn't been for a very long time. Both men and women pretty much get their turns being bent over by obnoxious tropes, most of which go back to heroic fantasy. At the end of the day heroic fantasy characters tend to represent some form of physical ideal, and also dress fairly outrageously. Half the point of heroic fantasy being what it is, is that even in a "realistic" situation the hero will be pretty flamboyant simply because he can. Sure it makes no sense for a female character to be running around a modern battlefield wearing a dominatrix outfit, but it also doesn't make much sense for a dude to be doing it wearing nothing but tight leather pants and a little vest either (yes Lobo, I'm talking about you). The fact is within this genera people do it because they can, I mean if bullets bounce off of you, or your so fast that you can't be hit by mere mortals, or you regenerate as fast as your hurt, or have a personal force field active whenever you want one (or even all of the above) we're moving outside of reality, and heck, at that point you can pretty much dress however you want. Even in more realistic types of set ups the costumes might be dumb, but that's where the fantasy part comes in, you know your getting stupid with your arguments when say your picking on female warriors for their clothing choices while not questioning how Frank Frazetta dressed (or rather didn't dress) Conan in similar situations. When women write fantasy stuff, one of my favorite examples is Kim Harrison since I like her work and she's produced lot of it now, you'll notice that if anything they actually dial this stuff up to 11. Of course anyone who has ever read the books they based "True Blood" off of (or heck, even watched the TV show) can probably tell you that as well.

On the rare occasions when someone like Anita represents a counter point, it comes down to pure misandry. Basically the idea that Conan looking like he does is an empowerment fantasy, while say a female warrior doing the same is not. It comes down to pure misandry, as well as a lot of disrespect for female creators who do characters like that as much if not more than the guys do because at the end of the day men and women both feel empowered by being strong, sexy, and unfettered (so to speak). Men and women aren't so different here, and indeed if you follow amateur writing at all you might have heard the term "Mary Sue" which largely exists because of girls who write stuff on fiction forums that dial things up to ridiculous levels in creating perfect power fantasy characters for themselves which oftentimes go well beyond the already high level of perfection possessed by heroic fantasy characters.

At any rate I can see why it's easier for these groups to throw in on the "OMG we must protect the wommin!" SJW bandwagon right now. It's the path of least resistance for them, as it would take a lot more work and make a lot more waves to actually try and deal with the problems, including going toe to toe with a very entrenched media infrastructure. In taking the current approach nothing really changes, but nothing gets better either.

Right now what is preventing this whole mess from getting worse is that we haven't seen Anita and her ilk really change anything majorly yet. After all "Bayonetta" just got her second game, and companies like "Team Ninja" are going strong. We've seen Ubisoft give up ground, but it's Ubisoft. Don't stop them and eventually you are going to see things start to happen, and that might be "great" until you consider that this just means the opposition is likely to ramp things up as well. Right now Anita and her ilk aren't that big a problem, nobody cares enough to do anything about them except make noise back and hope that someone steps in and says "okay yeah, this sucks, we need to start balancing it out". Once you start seeing tangible acts of harassment, or perhaps even real attacks, which probably won't be heralded ahead of time, it's going to be the fault of the groups who right now could be trying to do something but are choosing not to. Basically if someone puts a hole the size of a beer can through Anita's head, everyone will of course be screaming at the psycho who actually did it, and about how she didn't deserve to die for simply riding this platform and being annoying, and they would be correct, but at the end of the day it will all be the fault of the people who could prevent it by reigning her and her side in so as not to antagonize people to that level. Sort of like if a town lets a bunch of kids run around and terrorize people at a half way house for recovering criminally insane and former violent offenders. They go around throw rocks, throw insults, and for months nothing happens, the police do nothing, and nobody cares, then one day some unstable axe murderer reverts and kills a bunch of them. Sure they didn't deserve to die simply for being arseholes, but the authorities also let the situation happen, you could argue the police that didn't reign those kids in and let them inflict one sided torment until someone snapped were just as responsible as the axe murderer that eventually did. Albeit in this case it's a little different, being a situation where the existing free speech laws don't apply to private platforms allowing for unconfrontable platforms of the sort we're seeing here, and the harassment of large groups of people without any valid form of retaliation or actions that can be taken. Neither side here are inherently violent, but by allowing constant one sided antics and control of aspects of the media anger is being built to the point where you might eventually see someone snap... it's a slow potboil that has already been going on for years. Gamersgate is just the first explosion, and truthfully I don't think much will happen in the near future, but keep letting it simmer and it's just going to be worse. Those in a position to exert influence over this need to be acting on both sides, NOT just favoring one while condemning the other, that just adds more pressure.

At any rate while controversial, I'll say now, way ahead of time, I am very sorry to whomever dies because of this. If it continues, I expect someone will die. Most reading this will think me crazy (like usual) but we'll see in a few years if anyone remembers me calling it here. This is arguably one of the big places where steps could have been taken to avert whatever nastiness lies ahead. See, I don't like people like Anita, but I don't want them dead, and to be honest I don't really want them silenced either as I'm a huge believer in free speech, but I do want to see them balanced, and that not happening is a big part of the problem.
 

roseofbattle

News Room Contributor
Apr 18, 2011
2,306
0
0
Oh look, another mainstream news outlet that has no fucking clue what they're talking about. I'm so shocked. :p

If these mainstream news people really cared about the developers being harassed, they'd track down the people who harassed them and bring them to justice, not go after some hashtag people decided was vaguely associated with those people. We could all do without the generalization.
 

nuclearday

New member
Sep 24, 2009
35
0
0
Personally, I just find the hyperbole and extreme rhetoric exhausting. And at this point, that's really all there is to the conversation anymore - extremist rhetoric versus extremist rhetoric and I feel it's now more about rage venting than trying to promote anything constructive on either side of the fence (wherever the hell the fence even is anymore.)

I consider myself a feminist. I come across a lot of "look, this person doesn't understand what a feminist is" articles in my news feed. But I can't avoid the fact that there are a lot of people out there giving feminism a bad name. And not just the normal trolls that will attach them to whatever cause they want to rile people up, or the standard internet slacktivists.

The rhetoric is getting extreme, and even otherwise well-meaning people are adopting this wounded righteous indignation tone when trying to point out sources of sexism in modern culture. And none of that's helping, and that's why people often have a negative view of feminism and why popular culture views us as crazed extremists who just want to jump at any chance to get offended. Because a lot of people out there are doing exactly that, and it's not doing anyone any favors to sit up on a high horse and whine about why no one understands us.

... But there are also a notable amount of (or at least highly vocal and energized) gamers that are giving all gamers a bad wrap. Just because one group has a (major, seriously major) flaw doesn't mean every other group with an agenda is then washed of all their sins. You don't "win" by being the most victimized in this world (though it seems those are the rules the internet plays by.)
 

disgruntledgamer

New member
Mar 6, 2012
905
0
0
I wonder why the IGDA is so against GamerGate. Oh I know why maybe they're in bedded with Gamasutra, UMB an GDC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uGdfOJZoF4