Over 1,800 Gaming Professionals Condemn Hate Speech in Open Letter

[Verlander]

Radical feminists? These forums are beginning to look like they've been taken over by some paranoid fringe far right movement.

It'd be super-paranoid to say that someone claiming video games contribute to rape-culture won a GDC 2014 award or anything... Oh wait.

They have a viewpoint that you disagree with, therefore are radical feminists. Good logic. What if Yahtzee had said it? Would the radical feminists still be taking over? Think about it.

They apparently become radical feminists when they're female and care about representation of women in games. Which is ridiculous.

I...I don't know how to tell you guys this, but...

Expecting someone who purports to be a journalist or figurehead in the gaming community to hold themselves to a higher standard of ethics (ie. not going off on tantrums on their Twitters, calling for camps and such) than, say, that guy in League who called you a "Fucking ******," is not in any way indicative of an inability to take abuse.

We take abuse all the time. It just so happens that said abuse mostly comes from fellow gamers.

And, now, apparently from journalists too.

It was given, that's the thing. The community attacked the journalists, and they responded (in some situations poorly).

 

[Tsun Tzu]

It was given, that's the thing. The community attacked the journalists, and they responded (in some situations poorly).

So...eye for an eye. You're completely fine with people previously regarded as professionals behaving like run of the mill internet trolls on social media rather than, say, being adults and responding like adults?

This behavior does not, in any way, invalidate their claim of the high ground in this discussion?

 

[Six Ways]

Turns out most of the so called "gaming professionals" on this list are frauds.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s7k8i1

This guy claims that motion capture artists do not qualify. He claims that producers do not qualify. He claims that if he cannot find any info about them, they do not qualify. More tinfoil hat, clutching-at-straws BS.

 

[Verlander]

It was given, that's the thing. The community attacked the journalists, and they responded (in some situations poorly).

So...eye for an eye. You're completely fine with people previously regarded as professionals behaving like run of the mill internet trolls on social media rather than, say, being adults and responding like adults?

This behavior does not, in any way, invalidate their claim of the high ground in this discussion?

Here's the thing though, the gaming community has been spoken to intelligently, with concepts and ideals presented in a professional manner, so years. And hey, most of the community respects that and carries on. Yet this kind of shitstorm still blows up over, well, nothing. The vocal minority is incredibly vocal, and seemingly not such a minority. In fact, they're more than vocal, they're criminal. So yeah, frankly the insults from journos and suchlike don't phase me at all, they're well deserved.

I'm on this website, I play games, and someone saying "gamers are xyz" doesn't bother me. Why? Because I know I'm not the one being referred to. Then, when the above guys ask for peace, they get more abuse from what appears to be butthurt kids who think they're invincible because internet. The so-called "community" has nothing to complain about.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

It was given, that's the thing. The community attacked the journalists, and they responded (in some situations poorly).

So...eye for an eye. You're completely fine with people previously regarded as professionals behaving like run of the mill internet trolls on social media rather than, say, being adults and responding like adults?

This behavior does not, in any way, invalidate their claim of the high ground in this discussion?

Here's the thing though, the gaming community has been spoken to intelligently, with concepts and ideals presented in a professional manner, so years. And hey, most of the community respects that and carries on. Yet this kind of shitstorm still blows up over, well, nothing. The vocal minority is incredibly vocal, and seemingly not such a minority. In fact, they're more than vocal, they're criminal. So yeah, frankly the insults from journos and suchlike don't phase me at all, they're well deserved.

I'm on this website, I play games, and someone saying "gamers are xyz" doesn't bother me. Why? Because I know I'm not the one being referred to. Then, when the above guys ask for peace, they get more abuse from what appears to be butthurt kids who think they're invincible because internet. The so-called "community" has nothing to complain about.

A simple "yes" followed by a "no" would have sufficed, sir/madam.

 

[Verlander]

A simple "yes" followed by a "no" would have sufficed, sir/madam.

And why is that, because throwing it into context makes it less palatable?

 

[Tsun Tzu]

A simple "yes" followed by a "no" would have sufficed, sir/madam.

And why is that, because throwing it into context makes it less palatable?

Well, no, it isn't palatable in either instance, your tone and word choice imply that further discussion of the subject wouldn't really go anywhere, and I'm tired.

Most of all, it makes your point a lot more concise and actually answers my questions.

 

[Verlander]

Well, no, it isn't palatable in either instance, your tone and word choice imply that further discussion of the subject wouldn't really go anywhere, and I'm tired.

Most of all, it makes your point a lot more concise and actually answers my questions.

I find that disappointing, because to me it means that you condone the reactions from the vocal "community". All you wanted to know from me was whether or not I wholeheartedly agree with you, and if I don't then I'm not worth even discussing. Ironically closed minded considering that a major target for you people is Sarkessian.

The full answer to my beliefs (that you didn't ask for, so feel free to ignore) is that people don't deserve the hate given to them by the sham that the 4chan avatar adorned "community" is, and that every one of those journalists had a solid point, communicated in whichever way they felt was appropriate at the time.

It is refreshing that many hateful people are now openly identifying themselves though.

 

[R0guy]

Radical feminists? These forums are beginning to look like they've been taken over by some paranoid fringe far right movement.

It'd be super-paranoid to say that someone claiming video games contribute to rape-culture won a GDC 2014 award or anything... Oh wait.

They have a viewpoint that you disagree with, therefore are radical feminists. Good logic. What if Yahtzee had said it? Would the radical feminists still be taking over? Think about it.

They apparently become radical feminists when they're female and care about representation of women in games. Which is ridiculous.

Tell me, then, what is more radical than blaming videogames for rape? Or to put it in another way, have you ever heard of a more extremist feminist stance ever? Because that's what the word "radical" means.

If Jack Thompson received a GDC award validating his claim that videogames are responsible for school shootings, you bet I'd be pissed.

So let's turn your question around, had Sarkeesian been a man would you still be defending her? Think about it.

Jack Thompson was an exploititive lying con-man who used the exact same strategies that Anita is using now. INCLUDING leveraging death threats sent to him in order to garner support.

 

[R0guy]

The full answer to my beliefs (that you didn't ask for, so feel free to ignore) is that people don't deserve the hate given to them by the sham that the 4chan avatar adorned "community" is

4chan is supporting a charity to bring more women into games development.

So what's your pal Anita done with her 160k$ so far hmmm?

 

[Verlander]

Radical feminists? These forums are beginning to look like they've been taken over by some paranoid fringe far right movement.

It'd be super-paranoid to say that someone claiming video games contribute to rape-culture won a GDC 2014 award or anything... Oh wait.

They have a viewpoint that you disagree with, therefore are radical feminists. Good logic. What if Yahtzee had said it? Would the radical feminists still be taking over? Think about it.

They apparently become radical feminists when they're female and care about representation of women in games. Which is ridiculous.

Tell me, then, what is more radical than blaming videogames for rape? Or to put it in another way, have you ever heard of a more extremist feminist stance ever? Because that's what the word "radical" means.

If Jack Thompson received a GDC award validating his claim that videogames are responsible for school shootings, you bet I'd be pissed.

So let's turn your question around, had Sarkeesian been a man would you still be defending her? Think about it.

Jack Thompson was an exploititive lying con-man who used the exact same strategies that Anita is using now. INCLUDING leveraging death threats sent to him in order to garner support.

Well, lets be clear here, she didn't blame them for rape. So perhaps there is a confusion with terminology that needs to be addressed.

Rape is rape. It's pretty self explanatory.

Rape culture is the societal situation where women are objectified to the point where they're seen by ignorant people as objects over people, where their helplessness and inferiority is determined and promoted, and where it's sometimes even seen as acceptible, or forgivable to rape. It allows for there to be rape apologists, in the same way that gun culture has allowed there to be murder apologists in places like Florida.

Sarkessian believes that the portrayal of women in videogames contributes to rape culture. Not causes, but contributes. Her videos point out where she believes this is happening. I don't fully agree with her, but I at least understand what she's saying.

This does not make her a radical. Just like belief in a religion doesn't make you a radical, belief in an ideology doesn't either. Sarkeesian actually believes that there are several media that contribute to rape culture, including movies and advertising. However, her focus is on videogames, and that's ok. She's allowed to talk about the toys.

This isn't the same as blaming games for rape. Jack Thompson actively said that videogames directly influenced high school shooters to murder people. Sarkeesian hasn't said that videogames cause rape.

As for leveraging death threats? C'mon man, even you can't believe that?

 

[Verlander]

The full answer to my beliefs (that you didn't ask for, so feel free to ignore) is that people don't deserve the hate given to them by the sham that the 4chan avatar adorned "community" is

4chan is supporting a charity to bring more women into games development.

So what's your pal Anita done with her 160k$ so far hmmm?

No, 4chan is trolling, and the "charity" is a competition which is giving non-gamers the chance to design games. It's hardly helping the representation of women in games.

And just because I'm anti-stupid doesn't mean I'm pro-Sarkessian. I just know bigotry parading as benevolence when I see it.

 

[Six Ways]

So let's turn your question around, had Sarkeesian been a man would you still be defending her? Think about it.

Verlander answered the rest, but thought I'd jump in here and turn your question around. If Sarkeesian had been a man, she wouldn't have received all this harrassment in the first place so there'd be nothing to defend.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

Well, no, it isn't palatable in either instance, your tone and word choice imply that further discussion of the subject wouldn't really go anywhere, and I'm tired.

Most of all, it makes your point a lot more concise and actually answers my questions.

I find that disappointing, because to me it means that you condone the reactions from the vocal "community". All you wanted to know from me was whether or not I wholeheartedly agree with you, and if I don't then I'm not worth even discussing. Ironically closed minded considering that a major target for you people is Sarkessian.

The full answer to my beliefs (that you didn't ask for, so feel free to ignore) is that people don't deserve the hate given to them by the sham that the 4chan avatar adorned "community" is, and that every one of those journalists had a solid point, communicated in whichever way they felt was appropriate at the time.

It is refreshing that many hateful people are now openly identifying themselves though.

*sigh*

Point taken. I forget that others haven't been engaged in this for weeks on end.

I just wanted to gauge who I was speaking to and the endorsement of harassment was all I needed, since I'm genuinely tired of having circular arguments with folks who don't see a problem with people being assholes to one another. To be frank, if you'd said the same thing, but about the gamers doing the harassing, you'd be strung up and ignored by your "side."

Know, immediately, that I disagree with you. The "sham" has an easily reconcilable purpose, obtaining journalistic integrity, and to claim that these journalists have a solid point...to put us all in camps, or that we're worse than ISIS, is just downright awful of you...but, with all of that said...

How about an olive branch in the form of attempted discussion then?

Here's the thing though, the gaming community has been spoken to intelligently, with concepts and ideals presented in a professional manner, so years. And hey, most of the community respects that and carries on. Yet this kind of shitstorm still blows up over, well, nothing. The vocal minority is incredibly vocal, and seemingly not such a minority. In fact, they're more than vocal, they're criminal. So yeah, frankly the insults from journos and suchlike don't phase me at all, they're well deserved.

If you sincerely believe that the folks were speaking to the people who were upset in an intelligent manner, presenting their concepts and ideals as professionals, then I'm going to need some citation. This entire ordeal has been pock-marked with journalists uniformly turning their noses up at people, declaring that there is nothing to talk about and that we're all clearly sexists for saying anything...then, after the questions didn't stop, began publishing articles decrying the "misogynerds" and the, apparently, inherent horribleness of "gamers" as well as their wish for us to just "go away."

If you still refer to the mountain of evidence that's been compiled as "nothing" then I'm going to have to disagree with you once more and possibly question what your definition of "nothing" happens to be. The "vocal minority" is not usually able to garner celebrity support, maintain a certain level of organization, attain over a million views on videos related to the subject as well as millions of searches and hits on sites pertaining to information, and keep a subject trending on Twitter for multiple weeks.

Calling us criminal is downright hyperbolic. If you're referring to threats, like Anita's or Sony's bomb, then you're barking up the wrong tree. Neither of those was by me or 99.95% of the people involved in this, or even gamers at all. So, what, pray tell, is criminal about it?

We disagree on basic principle as to whether or not harassment and bullshit is "deserved" since I, and the vast majority of those involved, do not support harassment and, in fact, decry the practice.

I'm on this website, I play games, and someone saying "gamers are xyz" doesn't bother me. Why? Because I know I'm not the one being referred to. Then, when the above guys ask for peace, they get more abuse from what appears to be butthurt kids who think they're invincible because internet. The so-called "community" has nothing to complain about.

Do you consider, or have you ever considered, yourself a "gamer?" Well stop. The term is over and your ever using it again, according to the dozens of articles, is to equate yourself to rampaging misogynerds and sexist basement dwelling virgins.

The "above guys" are a hodgepodge of journalists, devs, producers, writers, blog runners, and etc. etc. etc. many of which are connected to specific people, are on a particular side of the issue, and have spent days engaging in harassment similar to what they're now publicly denouncing. Not calling them out on those facts is out of the question, what with the overall goal of getting past this kind of blatant narrative building.

Have you been keeping up with information? Have you looked into any of the grievances? Do you care at all about conflicts of interest and a supreme lack of ethical standards in the journalistic field covering and, consequently, influencing your hobby? If you haven't and don't, then why on earth even bother to contribute to the discussion in the first place? By all means, go, play games, and leave the conversation be if that's the case. Believe me, you'd be a lot happier.

Unfortunately, it's going to take me a while to get back to you, should you respond, since I need to sleep then work, but I'll make an honest effort at it.

 

[giles]

Over 1800 people are openly condemning an illegal action (hate speech)?

Wow, such bravery. Clearly worthy of coverage. I can't wait for them to condemn other illegal acts. Maybe we can get even more signatures on the next open letter "Murder is wrong"?

 

[R0guy]

So let's turn your question around, had Sarkeesian been a man would you still be defending her? Think about it.

Verlander answered the rest, but thought I'd jump in here and turn your question around. If Sarkeesian had been a man, she wouldn't have received all this harrassment in the first place so there'd be nothing to defend.

Read what I said. Two words: Jack Thompson.

 

[kael013]

Here's the thing though, the gaming community has been spoken to intelligently, with concepts and ideals presented in a professional manner, for years. And hey, most of the community respects that and carries on.

Well, yes and no. Most of the time it is in a professional manner, but whenever the massive shitstorms sweep over that professionalism seems to disappear rather quickly. ME3 Ending being the most recent example of that. If it had been a small issue, then (I believe) the news about it would have been rather impartial, the journalists reporting on it having an opinion on it but ultimately not giving a fuck, but it was the opposite with tons of mud-slinging and generalizations within the opening 48 hours. Same's happening now. Why these big issues are so polarizing to people who's job requires impartiality I'll never understand...

[quote/]Yet this kind of shitstorm still blows up over, well, nothing. The vocal minority is incredibly vocal, and seemingly not such a minority. In fact, they're more than vocal, they're criminal. So yeah, frankly the insults from journos and suchlike don't phase me at all, they're well deserved.[/quote]
I agree with this to a point. Saying that the assholes are worse than ISIS, while a massive exaggeration, is OK. Labeling anyone who disagrees with you - even if they have really rational arguments and valid concerns - misogynists is understandable since that's a common defense of the close-minded. To me, however, the line has been crossed. Using Gamergate (whatever the fuck that is, so much misinformation) as a justification to call for the death of all men isn't OK. Calling gamers - not just the assholes, ALL gamers - subhuman scum that deserve to be executed is [i/]definitely[/i] not understandable.

(In case you haven't read that yet, here you go):
K. Thor Jensen - (Videogames Journalist)

Spoiler

and Helena Horten - (Videogames Journalist for Vice)

Spoiler

Generalizations - especially when combined with vitriol - are bad, they lead to misunderstandings and blowing things out of proportion by making targets out of demographics instead of individuals. And people don't like being a target, especially when they haven't done anything wrong.
[quote/]I'm on this website, I play games, and someone saying "gamers are xyz" doesn't bother me. Why? Because I know I'm not the one being referred to. [b/]Then, when the above guys ask for peace, they get more abuse from what appears to be butthurt kids who think they're invincible because internet.[/b][/quote]
And when a gamer asks for peace they get more abuse from what appears to be people on a power high who think they're invincible because internet (personal experience). It goes both ways.

Also, you have thick skin, good for you. Unfortunately, I don't think that's gonna help in this case. Past experience tells me this is most likely gonna end up like white people having to tip-toe around black (African-american? A few of my friends don't like that one since their families have been in America for enough generations to lose any cultural ties to Africa) people's sensibilities lest they be called a racist oppressor or straight males having to do the same with gay people. I've had to put in a lot of placating statements, acknowledging that the feminists and journalists have valid points for example, yet I've still been insulted and called a misogynist (not on The Escapist thankfully, but elsewhere). It's really quite depressing.

 

[Six Ways]

Read what I said. Two words: Jack Thompson.

The fact that you compare her to Jack Thompson is exactly what I'm talking about. A man applying feminist critique to video games would not be.

People would disagree, sure. But they wouldn't claim that she is literally trying to destroy videogames in the manner of a madman who was actually literally trying to destroy videogames.

 

[R0guy]

Rape is rape. It's pretty self explanatory.

Tautology. We probably both agree on what it is, but then again Zoe Quinn, before this whole affair, had written at length about how adultery was a form of non-consensual sex.

Rape culture is the societal situation where women are objectified to the point where they're seen by ignorant people as objects over people, where their helplessness and inferiority is determined and promoted, and where it's sometimes even seen as acceptible, or forgivable to rape. It allows for their to be rape apologists, in the same way that gun culture has allowed there to be murder apologists in places like Florida.

From the Wiki: "The first published use of the term appears to have been in 1974 in Rape: The First Sourcebook for Women, edited by Noreen Connell and Cassandra Wilson for the New York Radical Feminists."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

So hopefully we've established now that my use of the word "radical" applies.

A response (from the Wiki): "Caroline Kitchens, in a 2014 article in Time Magazine titled "It?s Time to End ?Rape Culture? Hysteria" suggested that "Though rape is certainly a serious problem, there?s no evidence that it?s considered a cultural norm. ...On college campuses, obsession with eliminating 'rape culture' has led to censorship and hysteria."[74] Heather MacDonald suggested that "In a delicious historical irony, the baby boomers who dismantled the university?s intellectual architecture in favor of unbridled sex and protest have now bureaucratized both."[75] According to Joyce E. Williams, "the major criticism of rape culture and the feminist theory from which it emanates is the monolithic implication that ultimately all women are victimized by all men.""

This does not make her a radical. Just like belief in a religion doesn't make you a radical, belief in an ideology doesn't either.

Of course it doesn't. But just because something is a religion or an ideology, doesn't automatically not make it radical either, there's left-wing and then there's communism, there's a right-wing and then there's neo-nazism. Which is why I asked you if you know any other brand of feminism that goes further into the extreme than Anita?

As for leveraging death threats? C'mon man, even you can't believe that?

http://trib.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/university-of-wyoming-police-rape-threat-came-from-alleged-target/article_f412613b-e144-5fb5-bbfb-2178bbd68821.html

 

[Robert B. Marks]

I signed the open letter before it closed. I also posted my reasons on my Livejournal, and I think they're relevant to quote here:

This is an important fight. Back when I was writing Garwulf?s Corner from 2000-2002, video gaming faced its greatest challenge up to that point ? a court ruling stripping video games of their freedom of speech rights on the grounds that they were not capable of communicating ideas. We were the ?young Turks? at that time, and looking back on it, it was a fight we were in severe danger of losing. Happily, we won.

But, having proven that video games can communicate ideas, for the medium to continue to grow we must now explore and examine what those ideas are and what they mean. For this, there must be open communication and development. There must be the creative freedom to develop games covering whatever issues the developer desires, and there must be the freedom to examine the tropes of games, and their implications. Alongside this must be the freedom to discuss and dispute what has been said. There must be the freedom to both create and criticize.

This freedom is in jeopardy.

Any campaign of harassment is meant to silence. Nobody should have to face death threats for daring to speak up about sexism in games, or harassment for being a female game developer. There should not be game developers driven out because they can no longer stand the abuse from the very people they make games for. And yet all of these things are happening. And it has to end.

But there?s more than that. Those of us who fought for the basic rights of the medium to be recognized struggled hard in that battle for legitimacy. When the word ?gamer? comes to refer to reactionary abusive misogynists willing to harass and threaten anything they dislike, it reflects on the medium itself. The legitimacy that we fought tooth and nail to win can be lost. These abusive misogynist ?gamers? cannot be allowed to continue to speak for gaming.

So it is time to stand and be counted. If you are a member of a game development studio, or a writer for a game fan site, or connected to the industry at all, and you haven?t signed the open letter, please sign it. This may be one of the most important struggles of gaming today, and it is a fight we can lose.

Now, regarding the petition - that is the most misguided and chilling thing I've seen in a long while.

The message behind the open letter is basically this: "Anybody should be able to play, make, or talk about games without harassment, and the gaming community should stand against campaigns of harassment and abuse." This should be the least controversial statement in gaming history. And, since it's an open letter, as opposed to a petition, it stands as a statement of principles that everybody should be able to get behind. At most, it is a request for the community to actually do something about the problem members in its ranks.

The message behind the petition is this: "Not all gamers are bad ones, and the game industry should shut up about harassment campaigns directed at them and those who comment on games." Since it's a petition, it's a demand for action.

The number of game developers and commentators driven from their home or the industry by campaigns of abuse and harassment in the last 30 days rose by 3, if I recall correctly.

The number of gamers driven from their home or the medium by game developers or video game journalists by campaigns of abuse and harassment in several decades remains 0. The day this number changes will be the day that game developers can be accused of "spreading hate" against gamers.

Almost 2500 people across the industry signed the open letter declaring that nobody should ever face abuse and harassment for playing, making, or talking about games. Over 5000 people signed a petition declaring that the game industry shouldn't complain when its members are harassed and terrorized by part of the community.

Anybody still wonder why gamers have earned a bad name?

In another, related thread, somebody posed the question of how you're supposed to condemn people on the Internet for bad behaviour. Well, it's simple - you stand up where your voice can be heard, and you say "That's wrong." That's all there is to it. Funny how many excuses for inaction are floating around right now.