Gamergate, No "Right Side." - We Should Avoid Picking Sides

[Something Amyss]

I did read Alexander's article.
After Gamergaters complained about it so much, so well done, got her one more click. I never would have paid her any mind without them.
I read it since it was described to me as her 'saying all gamers need to be killed' and 'gamers have no right to exist'. Spoilers, it was not that.

That's the funny thing. I wonder how much popularity they've given these folks.

I used to watch Anita's videos, but I avoided the TVW series because they're long and I only find her tolerable in small doses. Then people start claiming she wants to get rid of all games, that sexist tropes mean you yourself are sexist, and that all games must shed these tropes, and I decide to check the claims. So I've watched all of the TVW videos now.

I'm not sure I've ever read Leigh Alexander, but now I've read more than one of her pieces. Same with a couple of the other "gamers are dead" people and Devin Faraci. Like you, I wouldn't have cared except for the histrionics that made me think that gamers were under attack. And I keep reading these articles, and I think, "THIS is what GamerGate is about?"

It just seems so petty to blow up every time someone says something you can't be arsed to read that is even mildly critical.

But when representing the view of "anti-GG" and the media, you represented them both by their extremes. As you say, the extremist minority "fight feminazis" view is not representative due to the majority having a different opinion. Meanwhile you let your idea of what the "majority rule" in the non-GG groups be defined by the extremist minorities "Gamers are scum" and "SJ world dominance" respectively. I am afraid to say that this is not consistent. Sure, their "manifesto" is the average opinion or consensus. But your view of what that is for non-GamerGaters is heavily coloured by incorrect ideas about what the "average majority" is like.

It's confusing overall, because it seems to have some Schrodinger level duality going on, in that until observed, SJW and Anti-GG means both the extremists and the whole "movement." And god, I hate the idea that the larger body is a movement. I just don't buy into the conspiracy theory. It's like truthers saying I side with the New World Order. Honestly, I stand with nobody. Except batboy. #istandwithbatboy.

That's not how the term is largely applied.

Oh? How is it applied, then?

According to Wikipedia, there are 8 diifferent types of Morris Dancing styles.

Imagine a Morris Dancing journalist said; that because of this, the amount of styles, the term Morris dancer was dead. Morris Dancers Are Dead the title would read.

Then the Cotswold Morris Dancers flew in to a rage, they'd never been so insulted. The Cotswold Morris Dancers, created a campaign, some parts of which tried to sensor the author by pressuring their sponsor.

Then the North West Morris Dancers came to the rescue of the author by criticising everything the Cotswold Morris Dancers enjoyed, said or did.

Then each side spoilt the picnic further by escalating into #MorrisGate, death threats, doxing, pedantic criticism etc. While the other six styles of Morris Dancers (Border Morris, Longsword dancing, Rapper, Molly Dancing, Ploughstots and Plough Monday) just wants to dance.

Then the news media outside of Morris dancing start to catch on, and there's headlines like Morris Dancers Death Threat a Woman for Being a Woman, and the words like, "look at those Morris dancing d**k heads," are muttered by the general public, when it was only the Cotswold and the North West Morris Dancers making all the noise.

I feel like such a Molly Dancer.

Now imagine that this was all actually over saying that one specific type of Morris Dancer didn't have to be your audience, and the entire metaphor was largely inaccurate as a result. People took a criticism of the perception of Morris Dancers as being a single type of Morris Dancers and the notion that it didn't have to be, and got offended and outraged at this false notion, and started screaming like children that they weren't like that style of dancers that nobody said they were like.

Imagine other articles reflected an increasing desire for other Morris Dancers not to be labeled Morris Dancers, a sentiment that had previously gone largely unchallenged, but was suddenly contentious because everyone was already incorrectly angry about the "death of Morris Dancers." Imagine Morris Dancers took a statement that you don't have to let the perception of the angry white Morris Dancer dictate who you or your audience was as a statement that Morris Dancers were all angry white males and acted, in response, like angry white males. Imagine, for a moment, that all this happened because nobody bothered to think about the actual commentary before they decided to get offended and angry.

Imagine how ridiculous Morris Dancers look in that world.

Now imagine a world where people read articles and think critically about them. Nobody's noses get bent out of shape because the criticisms about an expanding market and people uncomfortable with an identity aren't turned into raging hate speeches by people who supposedly shouldn't be responding. Now there is no backlash, no "war" between #morrisgate and the people they misrepresented. There's a good chance there isn't even a #morrisgate, as critical thinking would likely have diffused the controversy over a minor Morris Dancer sleeping with Morris Dancer critics for good reviews when it turned out there was no actual meat on the bones.

We'd still be in a place where people were increasingly questioning their identities as Morris Dancers, but there wouldn't be bile or vitriol over commentary on it because nobody would be pretending it was actually the end of Morris Dancing. And maybe, if Morris Dancers conducted themselves like mature, intelligent adults, they could shake their image as angry white males who ostrasise female and minority Morris Dancers by addressing such controversy in a mature fashion.

And everybody could just dance, because nobody decided that a commentary over identity of the market...I mean, dance scene was hate speech against all Morris Dancers.

That was a long way to go for a metaphor, but there.

 

[grassgremlin]

After much research, I can safely declare that everyone is wrong.

But, if you're someone, then you're wrong, so you're wrong about everyone being wrong. So everybody's not wrong! Except then you're not wrong about this....Hmmm..

Since, after all, their entire point was to tell you WHY you should be ashamed to call yourself a gamer, and why specifically there were feminist reasons that you should be ashamed.

Which ones were those again?

I thought it was started by 'a lack of journalist ethics'.

Isn't that the same thing, though? At least, that's the impression I got from all the complaints about girls and feminists and "SJWs" taking over our hobby.

But seriously....

While I wouldn't blame you if you wanted to not read these things, you probably should if you want to engage people on the matter. Alexander's piece, for example, is far from the defamatory attack on gamers that people have made it out to be. I suspect most of the outrage comes from people who didn't actually bother reading the whole thing, but had it "no spin zoned" for them and took it as gospel.

Similarly, people blew up over Anita Sarkeesian "not talking about" male prostitutes in Fallout NV (she does, and even shows onscreen footage of one of them saying he's yours for the right price) or elements of the stripper scene in Hitman (which she does). Literally, all you need to do to debunk a lot of these claims is check the original source (Which should not just be journalism 101, but common sense 101, and that this isn't happening in a movement about "better games journalism" is a flippin' travesty).

It all seems like such manufactured outrage when you look at the content without having it reconstructed for you by the gamergaste community.

I suppose people are going to use this to put me in the #stopgamergate camp again, though I literally didn't know it was a thing until yesterday.

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

 

[grassgremlin]

I still have no idea what "Gamergate" is...

And seeing as it seems to be causing this much fuss and bile, I don't think I want to know.

Avoid it. Play some video games you enjoy. You'll be happier. Don't engage it because it will not go anywhere and is a waste of time for everyone involved.

If it's mentioned on your TV, change the channel or turn it off. You'll save yourself any iota of sanity you have left.

 

[redlemon]

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

And what about the part where they publish blatant lies?
Read the main gg thread here. Do you see any actual misogynists in there?

 

[Something Amyss]

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

Even better if people took the time to understand what those articles meant, as even the discussion would have been largely unnecessary.

 

[Something Amyss]

And what about the part where they publish blatant lies?

Such as?

Read the main gg thread here. Do you see any actual misogynists in there?

Let's just say I didn't. Are you saying that one thread on one site represents the entirety of GamerGate? That they are the only people? Because if not, then that's meaningless.

 

[Silvanus]

Oh? How is it applied, then?

It's applied extremely loosely; it's been applied to gamers themselves who have discussed minority issues, as well as to the games that feature them. It's applied to people who talk about representation in games, whether they be forumites, gamers, or anything else. It's a vaguely-defined pejorative.

 

[redlemon]

Such as?

"Gamergate is a hate movement"
"Gamergate is a bunch of men angry at women"
"Gamergate is a movement to harass people"

Let's just say I didn't. Are you saying that one thread on one site represents the entirety of GamerGate? That they are the only people? Because if not, then that's meaningless.

And yet the media labels the entirety of GamerGate as misogynists due to the actions of only a few. Sometimes due to the actions of people who aren't even affiliated with GamerGate. Hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[Netrigan]

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

And what about the part where they publish blatant lies?
Read the main gg thread here. Do you see any actual misogynists in there?

I don't like to use that word, but there's some seriously creepy discussions going on. Pretty much everything accusing them of False Flags... without one iota of proof. They're constantly spinning pure fantasy tales of lies and deceit centered on these women, where everything is 100% part of their Evil Plan to take video games away from us.

Time... to... back... away... slowly...

And this is the socially acceptable face of this type of anger. It's not exactly a stretch of the imagination to think there are people who are angry enough to make these threats... and even a few who are big enough nut-jobs to carry out those threats. And without blaming GamerGate, some of them likely fly under their flag because they think GG supports this bullshit, but just can't openly say it... because this is the way nut-jobs think.

And ultimately this is the problem of the whole Anti-SJW mindset. Even though I've talked enough with GGs to know that many of them are moderate, you start off in the whole. People immediately think you're Anti-Diversity and you have to explain yourself out of that hole... and not helped by the Anti-Feminists who were, until fairly recently, frequently linked in GG threads (don't know if you guys fell out or GG wised up), so you get lumped in with the MRAs. And your anti-harassment message is immediately undermined with dozens of idiots insisting that said harassment never happened and spewing bile at said person for doing something so underhanded.

Now, I'll go back to something I said early on in this debacle. I think the more articulate of the group probably have a future as game journalists, because they know how to communicate the nuance of the above cluster-fuck. They can talk about these issues without immediately pissing everyone on the other side off, because they want to win converts, not just score points. These guys should have a place in the industry, their opinions and voices deserve to be heard... just as I think the Feminists deserve to be heard.

 

[grassgremlin]

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

And what about the part where they publish blatant lies?
Read the main gg thread here. Do you see any actual misogynists in there?

The short answer. I don't give a shit.
Yes, harsh, but realize that you don't need to give a shit either.
Though I can't control how much shits you give, I can at least tell you you don't have to.

It's that simple, really.
And if we're talking about lies, well the wonderful PixieJennie made this - http://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/gamergates-misconceptions-thus-far/

 

[grassgremlin]

I've read everything. Even the entire Gamer is Dead article too.
My conclusion? I don't want to pick a side, I think this entire issue is dumb and should be treated for how dumb it is.
You know what would have been better? If was all talked to each other like adults instead of overgeneralizing a demograph or whining about the death of a "word".

Even better if people took the time to understand what those articles meant, as even the discussion would have been largely unnecessary.

It's funny you say that, I just read this particular article. http://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/gamergates-misconceptions-thus-far/

You know, it's people like PixieJenni that makes me realize not everyone involved with Gamergate is an overly emotional child.

 

[grassgremlin]

Oh, can I add just one more thing.
Total Biscuit doesn't use the Gamergate hashtag.
Kindly STOP SAYING HE'S APART OF GAMERGATE!

 

[redlemon]

The short answer. I don't give a shit.
Yes, harsh, but realize that you don't need to give a shit either.
Though I can't control how much shits you give, I can at least tell you you don't have to.

Yet you care enough to start this thread?

You don't care about corruption in the media (Hint: Blatantly lying is a sign of corruption. Blatantly lying in an attempt to smear a group, moreso). That's fine. But you know, you don't have to care about whether other people care.

 

[JimB]

Or, to put it in the words of Donald Rumsfeld: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Which, purely semantically, is true.

In the specific case you cite, however, they at least had a person whom they could identify and go interview. It was because they interviewed him and he seemed normal--thus contradicting his online appearance--that they decided it was nothing. That's not apparently the case here, where we don't even have an ID on who made the threats and the police aren't reporting that they interviewed anyone.

So in this instance, there's no "We met the guy and he seems fine so we're not going to bother with getting a search warrant because we have no legal grounds."

No, of course not. The two cases are not very similar, as I said in the paragraph you cut. Nevertheless, Ms. Sarkeesian stated what would be required for her to feel safe--in this case, a reasonable attempt to ensure that no one in the audience had a gun to point at her--and she was told this condition could not be met due to state laws, but they could prevent anyone from bringing in backpacks. When your continued ability to draw breath is dependent on people who are bound against preventing guns from being brought near you and who think a good compromise is keeping backpacks away...well, obviously I wasn't there and I don't know the entire conversation, but yeah, I'm not blaming anyone who feels the police are insufficient to the task of protecting her.

Let me give you a little background on my perspective. I have no faith that anything positive will come from GamerGate. At this point, I am convinced the conversation is no better than two sides screaming obscenities at one another in an attempt to claim the authority to declare themselves right; right primarily in the extraordinarily petty and stupid topic of What This Is About And What You Are Required To Admit It Is About. It's a fight to control the voices and opinions on the other side of the argument to conform, and the truly shameful thing is how much this hateful bickering takes priority over the people who are being hurt, the people whose lives are being threatened and whose personal information is being stolen and published online. Incidentally (and I don't think I should need to say this, but let's be clear now and avoid the outrage I'd otherwise provoke), the attacks are being levied against people on both sides, and it's wrong no matter whom the target is.

I believe the only possible good that can come of this situation is that it can be used to highlight the dangers people in the gaming community face, and give us a reason to become concerned with protecting the real safety of real people rather than arguing endlessly about subjective definitions the opponents' sides are not willing to entertain in the first place. So yeah, when I defend Ms. Sarkeesian's right to declare her own criteria for feeling safe, it's because I think any attempt to shame her or anyone else who's been threatened and to dismiss those threats as not real or someone else's problem is one of the most troubling aspects of this discussion, second only the the actual threats and attacks themselves. I'd like to hope we can all do better than that.

Captcha: dream big. Heh. About time I got one of those ironic captchas everyone else seems to get.

Frankly, at least in my case, it's not that I necessarily trust the police.

It's that I trust all the sympathetic members of the audience who, as is not unusual in the area, are also armed. In addition, they are warned of the potential threat and so can react appropriately and quickly should the need arise.

That is your right, of course, but speaking only for myself, the prospect of my safety being in the hands of a mob of enthusiastic amateurs seems even more dangerous to me than the idea of having to trust ineffectual professionals. I feel at least marginally more confident that the police would be less likely to see a camera flash, mistake it for light reflecting off a gun barrel, and start firing into the crowd with dreams of ten-gallon hats and dusters in their eyes. Yeah, I know, it's a melodramatic fear of mine, but given how many people make bad decisions under the mere stress of driving a car, I am in no hurry to find out the kinds of decisions they make when told to fear for their lives and to shoot anyone threatening them.

Screw Gamergate, let's talk about the fact that [Utah has] laws that allow any asshat to carry a gun to a school campus.

If you'd like to create a new thread on the topic, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate seeing a break from the seven hundred and forty-six threads on fucking GamerGate.

 

[redlemon]

If you'd like to create a new thread on the topic, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate seeing a break from the seven hundred and forty-six threads on fucking GamerGate.

I'm curious actually, why do people keep starting new threads about Gamergate?

 

[JimB]

If you'd like to create a new thread on the topic, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate seeing a break from the seven hundred and forty-six threads on fucking GamerGate.

I'm curious actually, why do people keep starting new threads about GamerGate?

Because people keep thinking they have new things to say.

 

[grassgremlin]

The short answer. I don't give a shit.
Yes, harsh, but realize that you don't need to give a shit either.
Though I can't control how much shits you give, I can at least tell you you don't have to.

Yet you care enough to start this thread?

You don't care about corruption in the media (Hint: Blatantly lying is a sign of corruption. Blatantly lying in an attempt to smear a group, moreso). That's fine. But you know, you don't have to care about whether other people care.

I care enough to make this thread and voice my concerns about this issue and how it effects people.
People not wanting to get into the industry. People being harassed and death threats.
I care about the fact people are bombing the village to get to the "terrorists."

Don't preach to me about corruption when you don't even understand what you're talking about. You're not a video game journalist and I doubt you know what they go through, so don't act as if you know what's best for them.

There is no corruption, just a bunch of conspiracy theorist who can't learn how to have fun and play video games.
If you're such a gamer, shouldn't you be, you know, making gaming better for everyone and not for your own concerns about crap no one in the wider where gives to craps about?

Gaming is suppose to be a past-time everyone can experience, not a bunch of elitist butt-heads who want gaming to be the way they want it to be. That includes the radical feminists condemning people for buying Grand Theft Auto or other games they deem as harmful. Not that I'm not attacking Anita Sarkeesian because as I said to many others, her "influence" on the gaming is not nearly as threatening as you think it is.

Does japan give a crap about Feminine Frequency? I think not. Nintendo will still be nintendo, so what you're protecting exactly? Call of Duty, a franchise that's been milked so much it's gone dry? Hitman Absolution? A game no one else talked about until Anita Sarkeesian did? Grand Theft Auto 5? A franchise that will still exist no matter what anyone says.

Oh, I forgot. Oh no, Borderlands, it's so bad now. Think of the memes. -,- [Sarcasm mode 9000]

Honestly, Gamergate's already won. It has places stating there ethics. We can talk about it on the escapist without being shut down. People have said their piece. Stop Bullying Charities are being funded.

You gonna still call Anita a scammer despite not a single person who's funded her complaining about where the money has gone.

Wanna know what I'M most sick of? Defending Anita Sarkeesian. I don't agree with her at freaking all. I don't give two craps about her opinions or what she tweets. She could have done her vids and faded into obscurity, but some asshats saw it fit to make her infamous.

Don't preach to me about this song and dance, because I'm the SJW scum you are trying to destroy. I want diversity. I want my games as gay as a gay pride parade of drag queens on broadway. I want to play women with varying types of clothing and shapes both under-dressed and overdressed. I like reading opinion pieces about feminism, just so I can read stuff I disagree with to see there points, argue my own in a healthy manner and move the fuck on.

I'll buy Bayonetta even if Polygon gave it a 1-10 just for the sexism alone. I'm just absolutely done caring. Dynasty Warriors still says and I ain't read a 10-10 in any review. Those games are perfect to me. 10-10 might give me a heart attack.

I'm a simple gamer, people.

 

[grassgremlin]

If you'd like to create a new thread on the topic, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate seeing a break from the seven hundred and forty-six threads on fucking GamerGate.

I'm curious actually, why do people keep starting new threads about GamerGate?

Because people keep thinking they have new things to say.

Actually the real reason is people like you like to reply to them to complain about it ensuring
more traffic to these threads.

Edit: I felt my issue is important enough for one thread.
I'd like to avoid talking about it, but it seems people are obsessed with this issue only having two sides.

 

[JimB]

Actually, the real reason is people like you like to reply to them to complain about it, ensuring more traffic to these threads.

I get that I made you mad and I apologize sincerely for the unintentional implied insult of my answer, but are you seriously sitting here telling me people who create these threads have less responsibility for creating these threads than the people who respond to the threads after they were created? Because if so, I have no choice but to call bullshit on that.

 

[grassgremlin]

Actually, the real reason is people like you like to reply to them to complain about it, ensuring more traffic to these threads.

I get that I made you mad and I apologize sincerely for the unintentional implied insult of my answer, but are you seriously sitting here telling me people who create these threads have less responsibility for creating these threads than the people who respond to the threads after they were created? Because if so, I have no choice but to call bullshit on that.

No, but it's annoying that people have made that point several times throughout this thread.
I'm sorry that there is just one to many Gamergate threads for you. If it's such a huge problem, you could try to avoid them.

Think about this. This issue has gone one for 2 months. 2 months, too long. Some of us have opinions we are compelled to express to others. Some of us can't simply "avoid the issue".

I made this thread manly to see if a middle ground exists. Because, I don't see it. The articles tell me there is no middle ground. It's one side who is framed as evil vs the side who is framed as good.

No one wants to simply point out these issues could be solved with education, conversation and research.
That's why I myself can't be silent.

What's the use for me to enter the gaming industry if this is how the gaming industry acts?