Jimquisition: Fake Nerd Girls

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

You can either have have well dressed female video game characters or skimpily dressed cosplayers.

They are only dressing in costumes that already exist after all. ;-)


I think this whole argument is pointless. They aren't doing anything to harm people even if they are big fat fakers. Let them be.

Wow, look at this cosplayer designing his cosplay around pulling the ladies. What a smug bastard. Clearly our entire geek culture is going to cave in because of his existence. Shun the non believer SHUUUUUUUN-NA /sarcasm.

So they are cosplaying for attention...simple solution don't personally give them attention. There you can sleep at night now.

 

[Chives on top of me]

Wow 22 pages of this nonsense.




Clearly some people in this thread do not have a lot of life experience. Marketers/advertisers "lie", they are trying to sell. A product, a service, an idea, a lifestyle...If they can get you to think about what they are selling or discuss it that is a win for them. There is nothing new or unique to the "gaming culture" about this.

As for regular people...both men and women "pretend an interest" in the others activities for attention this is not new either. Although there does seem to be a need to point out that not all women who are not HARDCORE gamers are seeking attention from any random "geeks".

Geek checks...wow if this is a thing then those of you who subject others to this are elitist little shits who desperately need a life.

 

[Matthewmagic]

1. Except it is a thing: Its a thing full of fakes. You made the statement that there was no such thing as a fake gamer girl, yet in your own words, the website i directed you too is full of people being fake, pretending to be gamers. So by definition there is such a thing as fake gamer girls.


2. I wish i lived in a universe where i could play in televised tournaments on a whim.


3. Except for two major points
1. The given site was not a porn site, it was a site where you could supposedly game with female gamers, but weren't really
2. It sdoesn't matter if it was a porn site, the only qualifier here is if the said women are passing themselves off as geeks while not being geeks. I mean how is this any different then the girl who goes to a con wearing a bikini & pretending to be a character she knows nothing about?

Theo nly qualifier for being a fake gamer girl, or geek is if you are pretending to be either a gamer or a geek, while being female & not being either a gamer or a geek... Or in some cases even a girl.



4.See also previous statements about slutty cosplayers who call themselves geeks. I'm sorry mate, but you've just been forked: Mortons Fork that is. By your own words, either slutty cosplay girls who show up specifically to be a sexual commodity are not geeks at all, in which case we are right to geek check them, or they should not be geek checked because we should take them at face value, as we should the fake gamer girls on the previously mentioned site.

5. The undeniable fact is however that fakes exist & they exist in plenty at the moment, because male geeks over the age of about 23 have a readily disposable income. Frankly, its very similiar to the idea of a subset of women going to college to pick up a MRS degree.


The second video wasn't trying to show that anybody was fake, it was showing that the predominate trend in people calling out that kind of "look at my boobs, because i'm a girl playing COD in my panties" style players, are other women. Yet the pretense is always that its mean old men picking on poor little girls, who just want to belong.

6. no actually it doesn't. Geek is not a synonym for "aware of [insert name of subject]." I'm wearing pants, that doesn't make me a fashion industry geek though, does it.

1. It is a porn site you tool. If you can't tell the difference between people trying too trick you and people trying to get you too pay them money (by consomption of one thing or another) then you are either twelve, or grew up in Omish Country.

2. Yeah the more you tell me about this the less I believe you. First off since when are fighting games televised. Secondly since when do television executives not screen their contestants. Third, since when is anything that happens on television not scripted. Even reality TV has been shown to be extensively cut to convey a certain narrative.

3. Yes, it is porn. and yes it does matter. No one there is trying too trick you, you should know better. There should be no issue of "exposing" anyone. they aren't faking it to trick you, they are faking it for the sake of "Performance art." How is it you can't tell the difference between these two things.

4. Buddy I have bad news. This is where you get sexist. I was going to try avoiding using that word but you went there and now I'm calling you on it.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltau5f2fAK1r51bw9o1_500.jpg SO is he a fake gamer because he combined sex appeal and cosplay. How do you know these people even exist have you spoken too someone who doesn't know their characters? Are you sure they where not hired? Or dragged along by their friends becuase they needed a pink power ranger?

I still don't believe this happens, if a girl shows up in cosplay just to be sexy and stand by a booth or something, I get that. That is what we adults call jobs. But there are better places to seek sexual atention than cons, and frankly it is egocentric of you too think that just because a girl is dressed in "slutty" cosplay (hint: most female cosplay is slutty, after all it was designed by men) she wants your attention. She most likely couldn't give two shits about you or the high horse you rode in on.

No one is trying too trick you. You are not such a sexual target for anyone that they care for your attention. The only time they try to ellicit it is when they are trying too sell you something.

5. No at about age 23 you can recognize this shit for what it is.

6. it is against the law to go naked. No one forces you to play games.

I feel you miss the bigger point. Sex symbols will always exist but that doesn't give you the right to rape them. Many females in geek culture are designed to be sex symbols. Frankly it doesn't take the high degree of intelligence most geeks like to pretend it does to be a geek. and maybe if you didn't dismiss attractive women before they dismissed you, you would find you had a lot in common. hey, what do I know.

 

[Rheinmetall]

I believe that fake nerd girls exist only in the context of games advertisment and games marketing in general. I don't think I have ever met an ordinary female gamer in real life, not even a faker I would say.

Meh, even that rings hollow, I mean if they truly did not care about video games why would they be doing this as a job. I don't see how putting up with mealy-mouthed jack-offs that constantly treat them with open belligerence could be born from anything other than a labor of love.

I'm sure there are female gamers, but not as many as they want us to believe. And from the few cases of female gamers I have known and talked to via the internet, they are nowhere near the male gamer standard, in terms of skills, devotion, knowledge and taste about games.

 

[Gunjester]

If we're going to tackle problems between Nerds and Non-Nerds, this isn't a priority.
One of the biggest problems with the nerd community is how hostile it can be to new-joining outsiders, especially online, which leads to the creation of 'Nerds in Denial'.

My girlfriend is one such person, as she went through high-school with preppy party-animals, she kept her interest in fantasy, sci-fi and anime under-wraps for fear of ridicule. It wasn't until she graduated and started dating me she realized how nerdy me and her friends really were(I guess they showed their true colours after grad too), and that it's totally normal to be, especially with Hollywood's new fascination with Nerd Culture. My dad is also one, he's from South America and was a punk-rocker, but also a Star Wars, LOTR, and Trek fan. However he rejects nerd culture and even me and my brothers' interests because they're "weird" or "pointless" in his mind.

Maybe Fake Nerd Girls are girls who want to join the Nerd community and just don't know how? Maybe they're sick and tired of being seen as an object or just a trophy and they came to us in search of smart men who can take them seriously. Now if that is true, even for a fraction of them, that means all these people angry at them for not having vast knowledge are letting them down on that front. We shouldn't focus on shaming Fake Nerd Girls and outsiders for not being nerdy enough, we should focus on drawing them in and bolstering our ranks, so by creating bigger fan-bases for what we love, we can see better-funded, more frequent instalments in the future.

 

[raven47172]

I have never had a problem with fake nerd girls nor do I see why people do. If they are willing to wear skimpy clothing to get attention I am okay with that. It does not detract from the enjoyment I get from playing games or going to cons.

 

[Loethlin]

I don't know about you, but I feel these whole conversations that took place in this thread are going in circles, and are just as annoying, as shown here:


Now, I don't doubt that there are some attention seekers, of both sexes, but I think that what would really sort the issue out for us is approaching it with some relaxed attitude, humor and common sense.
Being a geek, nerd, a gamer, what have you, is not some elite club you must pass tests to join. Demanding people meet your arbitrary standards is like taking revenge on all the jocks that made fun of you in high school, effectively turning you into a bully yourself.
On the other hand, there are some people who clearly are annoying phonies. So you really can use that common sense and just remove yourself from their vicinity.
Look, it's not that hard, being reasonable.
And honestly... "sexy ladies are harshing my juju!" ..? Don't you have bigger problems, especially on cons? Like.... which panel to attend, for example?

 

[Orekoya]

I believe that fake nerd girls exist only in the context of games advertisment and games marketing in general. I don't think I have ever met an ordinary female gamer in real life, not even a faker I would say.

Meh, even that rings hollow, I mean if they truly did not care about video games why would they be doing this as a job. I don't see how putting up with mealy-mouthed jack-offs that constantly treat them with open belligerence could be born from anything other than a labor of love.

I'm sure there are female gamers, but not as many as they want us to believe. And from the few cases of female gamers I have known and talked to via the internet, they are nowhere near the male gamer standard, in terms of skills, devotion, knowledge and taste about games.

What sort of horrible conspiracy theory is this? 'they want us to believe.' This just sounds so contrived. What possible advantage is there behind this thought process? I mean what is the motive behind them wanting us to believe they are game nerds because I gotta say speaking from personal experience with this style of treatment, I don't see the benefit of choosing to be ostracized and berated when the alternatives seem so much easier.

Also what are the standards? What even sets these standards? Because I have never been asked to meet them to prove I was one in all my years of being a male nerd and nobody has ever had any problem accepting my submission of being one.

 

[jdogtwodolla]

Nobody likes a known faker unless it's specifically for their faking and quite a lot of people in today's world dislike liars. In essence, that's kind of what these people are.

But this is really not a big issue or an issue at all.

 

[Matthewmagic]

1. It is a porn site you tool. If you can't tell the difference between people trying too trick you and people trying to get you too pay them money

1. Sop exactly like some fake gamers then.

2. Yeah the more you tell me about this the less I believe you. First off since when are fighting games televised.

2. Since 2010 in the united states, a lot earlier in Korea & China. The fact that you didn't know this makes me really wonder about your other so called geek credentials. I know this & i'm neither American, nor have any interest in fighting games.

Secondly since when do television executives not screen their contestants.

3.When they are live... Or when its a contest.

Third, since when is anything that happens on television not scripted.

4.When there is some sort of sports event, or competition like a televised game tournament.

3. Yes, it is porn. and yes it does matter.

5.No it really doesn't. The existance of fake gamers has been demonstrably showcased now. You can no longer deny they exist. Further statements to the contrary are the equiviliant of a creationist making arguments for the grand canyon being created in 12 seconds during noahs flood.

4. Buddy I have bad news. This is where you get sexist. I was going to try avoiding using that word but you went there and now I'm calling you on it.

6. An that would be an appeal to motive. When all else fails & you run out of arguments, call the other person a sexist/racist so they'll stop arguing. Sorry mate, doesn't work with me. There was nothing sexist in that statement.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltau5f2fAK1r51bw9o1_500.jpg SO is he a fake gamer because he combined sex appeal and cosplay.

7. /facepalm. You really keep on missing that one important statement i keep on making: There is nothing wrong with being attractive, its only when one becomes a sexual commodity over being a consumer does it become an issue.

How do you know these people even exist have you spoken too someone who doesn't know their characters? Are you sure they where not hired? Or dragged along by their friends becuase they needed a pink power ranger?

8. Because as i've stated a half dozen times now, if someone is at a con in a costume & they don't know who they are cosplaying as because they've been dragged along, no one gets bent out of shape because they've been geek checked. Because the genuinely ignorant say "i have no idea." An at that point geeks generally stop caring. Its the people who pretend to have a knowledge set beyond what they actually have that piss people off.

I still don't believe this happens, if a girl shows up in cosplay just to be sexy and stand by a booth or something, I get that. That is what we adults call jobs.

9. No its what adults call a waste of resources.

But there are better places to seek sexual atention than cons,

10. Actually no. A con is a great hunting ground: Little in the way of competition until recently, full of cashed up beta-males (so rejection chances are lower & the ability to control any grabby males by proxy is astronomical); the false economy of the appearance of everyone wanting said trendies as a sexual commodity, increases the worth of possessing such a person both sexually & emotionally.

Essentially its a huge pay off, for very little in the way of expenditure. Also adding in the anonymous nature of hotel rooms for international conventions & it beats out the bar scene hands down.

and frankly it is egocentric of you too think that just because a girl is dressed in "slutty" cosplay (hint: most female cosplay is slutty, after all it was designed by men) she wants your attention.

Two things.

First, all cosplay is about attention. I've said this a couple of times now, but it really is true. Cosplayers do not to the gardening, washing up, or shopping while wearing those costumes, because there is no one around to appreciate them, to give them attention. Thats not a bad thing, but it becomes a bad thing when one moves from consumer themselves, to sexual commodity.

Secondly, the majority of costumes are actually hand designed by the women wearing them. So by definition not designed by men. An at this point i am again wondering about your actual gekk credentials, that you don't know this.

5. No at about age 23 you can recognize this shit for what it is.

No actually, most people don't. Age doesn't make you less of a target to confidence tricksters.

6. it is against the law to go naked. No one forces you to play games.

Way to toally miss the point mate. The point is that a passing awareness of a thing does not make geekdom.

1. No those are called "Performers". What would make someone a legitimate "Fake gamer girl" would be someone whom with their friends claims to be a geek. Who when you ask them, says they are a gamer. But never actually partakes in these events. Whining about models, and porn stars doesn't make anyone "fake" it makes them employed. By your definition everyone in the service industry is a "fake" something or other. Hell I faked being a nice guy when I was a server. Hope the "Nice" culture doesn't get wind of it.

2.No, I live in the US. I have skyped too a few members of the Gamers Paradise club at my college about this, and none of us have ever heard of such a thing being broadcast on television. We only have one real gaming channel, G4tv, and we all agree it is shit. It is possible that such a thing appears on spike. Upon checking my channel listings and wikipedia, and can confirm nothing of this nature has been shown on television in the states or canada. So go ahead and geek check me if you like considering that you don't know what you are talking about.

Actually no, what makes you think you have the right too geek check anyone? This concept concerns me a little. Is it a short test covering a wide array of geeky topics, or is it one piece of esoteric knowledge you can hold over someones head. There is no ID card for this sort of thing.

3. Even in our contests and live events people are screened for abilities. They do it with american Idol, survivor, and Major league football. They would be smart enough to do it here. Asuming they where dumb enough to think american gamers wanted to watch other people play games. There is a reason MLG has never taken off here, except with the dick bags that participate. We would rather be playing the game than watching someone else do it.

4. Even here the announcers have a script they stick too when the games are getting dull. Talking about this person sports jargon or that persons recent injury. (to be honest I can't follow it, I only know this too be true because of my journalism class).

5. This is like calling Robert Pattinson a fake vampire. Or calling Hugh Laurie (Or David Tennant if you prefer) a fake doctor. You know there is a difference between performance and the real world, yet are pointing too performance art and calling it a reality.

6. No, you are still wrong for all the same reasons. What makes you sexist is that if a girl dresses like a sexy anime character, you have to geek check her. If a man dresses like a sexy anime character, he probably just works out. You want too geek check people who don't fit into your specific idea of what a geek should be, and you have spent quite a bit telling me that women in cosplay need to pass a "Geek check" do not fit this idea. It would have been pandering too call you a nazi because of you "Papers Please" approach to geek culture. While it doesn't make you a Nazi, I've made my views on the whole "Geek check" thing explored above.

7&8. I'd make a joke about geek checking you here, but it is just too obvious. Okay geek culture does have an array of strong women, they are a minority but let's face it. Laura Croft, Bayonetta, Trish (DMC), Tifa the list goes on. Sex is (and has always been) a commodity in the entertainment industry, and in video games in particular since they could fine a way to represent tits and give you panty shots during the victory music (Selphie...).

As far as your real examples go, these are hired models, used to sell you games. No different then a booth babe. I know a few cosplayers and they seem too fall into two categories. 1. The hyper fan someone who cosplays for themselves. 2. The extrovert, the people that go as the power rangers or something similar most notable for going in a group. I have never met a cosplayer who didn't know anything about their own character, except in the group case where they just needed someone to fill out a team.

9. (Veiw this as an addendum too the above) Sex sells, everyone knows it. You can turn your nose up and say you are better than it, but the person who is selling isn't better than making money, it is kinda what they are there for.

Honestly I'm sick of this. As I said in my original post elitist. You think every cosplayer dressed slutty designed their own costume ignoring the fact that the costumes are based on character designs done by men for men. You do not understand that when payed money women will act a certain way to sell you things, just as a server would. You don't understand that the world doesn't revolve around you. No one goes to a con for you. You don't get too geek check people because you can not possibly be a perfect geek Possessing omniscience over everything ever considered slightly "geeky".

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Spoiler: Run guys run! Before it's too la...

matthew_lane told us why didn't we listen....WHYYYYYYY *falls to knees*

 

[UltraPic]

space saving

You never came across anyone who started a new hobby and just jumped in head first and wouldn't shut up about it despite a huge lack of knowledge on the subject, if anything it's a great thing to see such enthusiasm so why burn bridges.

 

[Rheinmetall]

I believe that fake nerd girls exist only in the context of games advertisment and games marketing in general. I don't think I have ever met an ordinary female gamer in real life, not even a faker I would say.

Meh, even that rings hollow, I mean if they truly did not care about video games why would they be doing this as a job. I don't see how putting up with mealy-mouthed jack-offs that constantly treat them with open belligerence could be born from anything other than a labor of love.

I'm sure there are female gamers, but not as many as they want us to believe. And from the few cases of female gamers I have known and talked to via the internet, they are nowhere near the male gamer standard, in terms of skills, devotion, knowledge and taste about games.

What sort of horrible conspiracy theory is this? 'they want us to believe.' This just sounds so contrived. What possible advantage is there behind this thought process? I mean what is the motive behind them wanting us to believe they are game nerds because I gotta say speaking from personal experience with this style of treatment, I don't see the benefit of choosing to be ostracized and berated when the alternatives seem so much easier.

Also what are the standards? What even sets these standards? Because I have never been asked to meet them to prove I was one in all my years of being a male nerd and nobody has ever had any problem accepting my submission of being one.

I believe that we have a communication problem, and I'm mostly responsible for this since English is not my first language.

Forget about "they want us to believe", I didn't mean that there is a conspiracy, I was speaking with terms of a general impression that is around, according to which female gamers is supposedly a noticeable group. I simply can't see that. Female gamers are like 3% of the total gamers' number. And don't ask me if I have proof for what I say, they might be 7%, or 11%, is it okay? The point is that based on my experience and perception, I think they are few in number.

Now to the question why one would want to masquerade as a gamer and go through all this, I'm covered by the explanation that Jim Sterling gives, that they seek attention of the male audience. This attention basically means two things: Firstly they enjoy the narcissistic feeling that boys are fantasizing about them, and secondly opportunities for promotion, either it's just views on Youtube, or careers in games industry. Also fake gamers don't "go through" anything. It's all for the show. They don't really play that much, neither they love video games, that's why Jim calls them fake gamers.

About the "standards", I didn't mean that there are any standards set by some global gaming organization. Male gamers' standards as I understand them is that boys-gamers usually play a lot and with passion, and they develop skills in certain games that they love. A few male gamers even become exceptional in what they are doing, with extraordinary records. Girls don't show that devotion. For example, I haven't ever watched a speedrun video on YouTube posted by a female gamer. And speedruns are in my opinion the biggest proof of someone's proficiency in a game. I haven't even read a walkthough guide submitted by a female gamer. Is it just coincidense? Why do you think this is happening, if not because of the different approach in video games between the two genders? I made the mistake to name it "standards", you call it as you think.

 

[Orekoya]

I believe that fake nerd girls exist only in the context of games advertisment and games marketing in general. I don't think I have ever met an ordinary female gamer in real life, not even a faker I would say.

Meh, even that rings hollow, I mean if they truly did not care about video games why would they be doing this as a job. I don't see how putting up with mealy-mouthed jack-offs that constantly treat them with open belligerence could be born from anything other than a labor of love.

I'm sure there are female gamers, but not as many as they want us to believe. And from the few cases of female gamers I have known and talked to via the internet, they are nowhere near the male gamer standard, in terms of skills, devotion, knowledge and taste about games.

What sort of horrible conspiracy theory is this? 'they want us to believe.' This just sounds so contrived. What possible advantage is there behind this thought process? I mean what is the motive behind them wanting us to believe they are game nerds because I gotta say speaking from personal experience with this style of treatment, I don't see the benefit of choosing to be ostracized and berated when the alternatives seem so much easier.

Also what are the standards? What even sets these standards? Because I have never been asked to meet them to prove I was one in all my years of being a male nerd and nobody has ever had any problem accepting my submission of being one.

I believe that we have a communication problem, and I'm mostly responsible for this since English is not my first language.

Forget about "they want us to believe", I didn't mean that there is a conspiracy, I was speaking with terms of a general impression that is around, according to which female gamers is supposedly a noticeable group. I simply can't see that. Female gamers are like 3% of the total gamers' number. And don't ask me if I have proof for what I say, they might be 7%, or 11%, is it okay? The point is that based on my experience and perception, I think they are few in number.

Now to the question why one would want to masquerade as a gamer and go through all this, I'm covered by the explanation that Jim Sterling gives, that they seek attention of the male audience. This attention basically means two things: Firstly they enjoy the narcissistic feeling that boys are fantasizing about them, and secondly opportunities for promotion, either it's just views on Youtube, or careers in games industry. Also fake gamers don't "go through" anything. It's all for the show. They don't really play that much, neither they love video games, that's why Jim calls them fake gamers.

About the "standards", I didn't mean that there are any standards set by some global gaming organization. Male gamers' standards as I understand them is that boys-gamers usually play a lot and with passion, and they develop skills in certain games that they love. A few male gamers even become exceptional in what they are doing, with extraordinary records. Girls don't show that devotion. For example, I haven't ever watched a speedrun video on YouTube posted by a female gamer. And speedruns are in my opinion the biggest proof of someone's proficiency in a game. I haven't even read a walkthough guide submitted by a female gamer. Is it just coincidense? Why do you think this is happening, if not because of the different approach in video games between the two genders? I made the mistake to name it "standards", you call it as you think.

I would think it and this entire topic as peevish quarreling. I have never made any effort nor have been requested to show that level of devotion. It is also not expected of me to do so in order to be called a male nerd. To hint or request a female nerd to meet such requirements that wouldn't be requested of a male counterpart just to prove equally worthy of being called a nerd is folly. Furthermore obsession does not require any level of proficiency or active engagement such as writing walkthroughs or doing speedruns. I obsess over heavily violin music and manga style artwork: this doesn't require me to know how to play a violin or be able to draw.

I would say it is exactly coincidence. Let's say if you want that there is such a low number of female gamer nerds (there aren't, overall it's a 6:4 ratio) and walkthrough guides being the finite subsistence that they are (there is a finite number of games of which no more than a handful of guides are made for each game at most) then the likelihood of finding such a guide would be low (because I'm willing to bet nobody out there has read every guide ever written much less tracked of the personal stats of everyone who wrote them). Most online guides are published under a moniker, which is to say not much of anything about the person who wrote it is known, and published walkthroughs likely come from publishers that still operate under a boy's club mentality. The only female employee writing guides for Prima Games is Catherine Browne, whose work has incidentally been greeted with hostility from readers. From what I've seen, a lot of the complaints are that they don't like her writing style. I don't buy/read Prima guides; however, so I cannot say how much of it is warranted. Regardless, she isn't welcomed by fans and publishers could be picking up on that as well.

If one notable female gamer that writes walkthroughs for the love of it is something needed in order to accept that female nerds can be just as obsessive then I would supply Andrea Castillo [http://www.gamefaqs.com/users/IceQueenZer0] as an example, who's written over 200 FAQs for a wide variety of systems from the Atari up to the Wii U.

 

[Orekoya]

Most online guides are published under a moniker, which is to say not much of anything about the person who wrote it is known, and published walkthroughs likely come from publishers that still operate under a boy's club mentality.

An what evidence do you have that book publishers operate under a boys club mentality exactly? Orekoya you've just tried an appeal to motive on an entire industry, one that can be & has been proven demonstrably false. The fact is that there is not this huge set of women just chomping at the bit to produce game walk throughs, being kept out by the big bad menz... It just doesn't happen.

The fact is that the trend for game walkthroughs these days is publishing externally to a publishing company, via a service like lulu. An yet women are still in the extreme minority when it comes to writing walk throughs.

I don't agree with Rheinmetall's point, but your rebuttal wasn't just wrong, it was slandering an entire industry on the basis of your personal ignorance.

You're great at quote-sniping! Also, appealing for my evidence, claiming I have none, then following it with "has been proven demonstrably false" with no evidence in a single paragraph: classy. I will gladly call you on it. Demonstrate it.

 

[Orekoya]

You're great at quote-sniping!

I think you may be confusing being concise for quote sniping. If i replaced your quote with the word "Snip" or "snipped" or "snipe" then yes i'm quote-sniping. However removing anything not relevent to the concept i'm refuting is not quote sniping, its just removing irrelevency, so people don't get confused over which point is being addressed.

Quote-sniping is the practice of responding to a single sentence within a larger post, or responding to a post sentence by sentence. There isn't anything inherently wrong with this practice, at most it's frowned upon because it does make conversations on forums slightly harder to follow. However concise you think you were, that was still quote-sniping. Quote-mining is the deceitful tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint or to make them contradict themselves. There is a difference and I think you might be confusing the two definitions or what I was saying. Because of that I'll explain plainly what I was implying with that sarcasm: that you seem to have responded to just one sentence of a longer post from a longer conversation as if you could prove my entire rebuttal of this being peevish quarreling spanning several posts was wrong by refuting that single sentence, one that was part of imagined scenarios for his coincidence issue claim that had nothing to do with my rebuttal. You then used that to claimed that my entire rebuttal was not only wrong but ignorant. I suppose I could've just as easily accused you more sincerely of quote-mining since you took it out of context too.

Also, appealing for my evidence, claiming I have none, then following it with "has been proven demonstrably false" with no evidence in a single paragraph: classy. I will gladly call you on it. Demonstrate it.

Which part would you like me to demonstrate? The existance of lulu, women complaining about the lack of female writers working for a publishing house 10 years ago, the existance of game walk throughs not produced through one of the regular publishing houses, or just the fact that your statement is wrong?

If you are referring to the statement "Orekoya you've just tried an appeal to motive on an entire industry, one that can be & has been proven demonstrably false," i'd say this to you: As i've not made a positive assertion, i am required to supply you with no evidence. The burden of proof is always on the side of the person making a positive assertion & also on the side of someone making an existance claim: ANY existance claim. You've made a postivie assertion ABOUT an existance claim: At this point i can't offer you a refutation until you provide me with evidence for your existance claim.

Until you provide evidence i can't actively refute your data... In fact at the moment, we've reached that point in the conversation where until you make your case to back up your statement we can't go any further... I cant refute your points, because you've yet to make them. Once you make them, they can be objectively, demonstrably refuted, as has happened with everyone else who has ever made this kind of claim before you.

So please supply your evidence for your statement of: "and published walkthroughs likely come from publishers that still operate under a boy's club mentality."

This is rudimentary foundational logic... I really wish they taught this in schools, i'd make life so much easier.

First off if you re-read the entire paragraph my "claim" is part off, it's noticeably all part of supposition guesswork for his coincidence issue with qualifiers that insinuate with no actual claim. This is something I think your conciseness is overlooking. Oh you can fault me all you want for the insinuation, and I can accept that. It may have been a poorly frame guess on his coincidence claim, but I did not say "I know for a fact that the game publishing industry operates this way" therefore there wasn't really a claim on my part. In the sentence you quote is one of the many qualifiers I hedged that entire scenario guessing paragraph with: likely. You can choose to interpret that however you like but that is not a claim. You're the one who ramped up the response with a 'No it doesn't and I can prove it.' which most definitely is a claim. Note that even in my response (or original post for that matter) I did not claim what you quoted to be fact or having evidence either, I simply pointed out how crass the structure of your response was.

Secondly, since you wish to bring up what is or is not a claim: "one that can be & has been proven demonstrably false" IS a positive assertion AND an existence claim. You're asserting you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that entire industry is completely past the boy's club mentality AND claiming that it has been proven before. I mean whether or not I have any data is irrelevant if it's already been proven, which is what you've claimed. That is definitely a positive assertion which does carry burden of proof as you pointed out. Trying to assuage and avoid your burden of proof by pretending I didn't already state in the previous post what I requested to be demonstrated, the "has been proven demonstrably false" part, was cute but I find it abject.

You've made a positive assertion about an existence claim: At this point I can't offer you a refutation until you provide me with evidence for your existence claim. So please supply your evidence for your statement.

 

[Orekoya]

First off if you re-read the entire paragraph my "claim" is part off, it's noticeably all part of supposition guesswork for his coincidence issue with qualifiers that insinuate with no actual claim.

Gibberish to english translation: You made a claim, it was bullshit, you got called on your claim & now are trying to find a way in which you didn't write the thing you clearly wrote. I'm not buying it mate: If you want to come right out & say you were talking shit, then do it. But please don't try to maintain some sort of faux moral high ground... You lost that the second you made an industry wide appeal to motive. An please don't pretend you were talking in hypotheticals, because you were not.

See what you said was

likely come from publishers that STILL operate under a boy's club mentality."

Note the use of the word "STILL." Now had you said

likely come from publishers that operate under a boy's club mentality."

Without the still, you might have been able to pull off the "its a hypothetical" statement. However with the word "STILL" in there, you've moved into making a positive assertion about an industry & that assertion is that the industry was a boys club & unless somethings changed, is still a boys club.

So enough with the red herring statements, either renounce the claim & admit that you were making a sexist apeal to motive, or back up your claim.

Wait, your issue is with the word 'still'? So, what? Does your claim now encompass that the publishing industry has never engaged in any sort of practices in place that resembles boy's club mentality ever too? Maybe next post you would likely to further dissect this post, reply to a single sentence and take issue with the 'operate' from that sentence taken out of context. Here's a suggestion for your next belligerent post: maybe you could distort that sentence to imply I was claiming that it works well under that mentality since operate can mean 'to act effectively'.

But boy you sure are continuing to expand your claim while talking about that faux claim within the hypothetical scenario paragraph of my first post. If you want to misconstrued what I wrote this time as an assertion that 'there was a time that women weren't treated fairly in those workplaces', which again if that's how interpret it now and you said that my 'assertion' has been proven demonstrably false then that means you have data to prove it never happened, then I would probably start off supporting such a claim by pointing out that first video-gaming centric publication started in 1974 and that things have changed since 1974. In 1986 Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, United States Supreme Court recognizes sexual harassment of women as a violation of Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII. In 1992, women were then paid 71 cents for every dollar paid to men with the range from 64 cents for working-class women to 77 cents for professional women with doctorates. Gaming publication does not exist in some intangible glass bubble, it is part of this world too. But really all of that is irrelevant; because I didn't really claim anything, you've just been twisting my words and taking them out of context: I'm sure you'll take one of the little blurbs from this paragraph to respond to that and only that, treating it as my submission of proof for you to tear down and feel better about yourself while you continue to ignore your burden of proof.

In summary: You made a claim, got called on your claim, denied your claim's existence by pretending if the claim is about something being false then it isn't a claim and have been trying to drag me into making a claim with how well you twist my words as if that somehow alleviates you from proving your claim.

So enough with the red herring statements: either renounce the claim and admit that you have no evidence, or back up your claim and produce the data that this has already been proven demonstrably false.

 

[Sindaine]

For me personally this distrust comes from years and years of brutal bullying. Bullies often fake an intesrest in their victims' hobbies and interests, pretending to befriend them only to use what they've learned against them later. As a result I'm loathe to open up to anyone about things I like and now inherently wonder WHY they want to know these things about me--are they going to try and use it to hurt me later?

So while in many cases this may be rooted in sexism, I'd wager that in not a few cases it's rooted in fear.

And for what it's worth, I'm a chick.

 

[Orekoya]

So again i ask: either renounce the claim & admit that you were making a sexist apeal to motive, or back up your claim.

I'm not going to continue debating my hypothetical non-claim statement. Enough with your red herring posts: either renounce the claim and admit that you have no evidence, or back up your claim and produce the data that this has already been proven demonstrably false.

 

[Orekoya]

Orekoya you've just tried an appeal to motive on an entire industry, one that can be & has been proven demonstrably false.

Orekoya, thats not how this works mate. I can't refute the evidence you haven't provided

So what you're saying is that your claim of has been proven demonstrably false requires evidence from the present provided before a previous demonstration of falsehood can exist? The foundations of logic sure are hard for you, I wish you'd have learned it. Possibly I'm being too harsh. For all your nitpicking on the meaning of my words, maybe you just don't know what 'been' means. It's a past particle of be: as in you're claiming that a demonstration of falsehood already exists.

Enough with your red herring posts: either renounce the claim and admit that you have no evidence that this has been proven demonstrably false, or back up your claim and produce the data that this has been proven demonstrably false.