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

[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.

 

[Verlander]

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.

That's nothing to do with rape. I don't represent Zoe Quinn or her beliefs.

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.""

You were referring to the name of a 70's right wing feminist group that Sarkeesian wasn't a member of (or born in time to have been a member of)? Forgive me for not getting the reference

And yeah, there's arguments for and against Rape Culture. I'm not saying that she was right, only that her essays and videos on the subject don't automatically make the gaming industry radicalised, or her undeserving of winning an award. The industry would only be radicalised if they banned people for holding beliefs.

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?

This is the line I feel where we irreparably disagree. I don't believe that she's extreme at all. ALL she does is point out shit bits in video games on an online video series. That's not extreme, not by a long shot. Over the years feminists have done all sorts of things, including violent actions. Even then, the feminist movement has always largely been peaceful and about equality.

If you want a discussion on the usefulnesses of feminism, I'm right up there with you. I think it's an outdated way of thinking, and that anything constructive that it could have achieved, it has already done so. I refuse to accept whiny bitches on the internet as being "extremists" though.

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

Who even is that? I wan't arguing that nobody fakes death threats, just that Sarkeesian and Quinn don't appear to. Given the reaction against Sarkeesian so far, it's not exactly hard to believe, especially in the wake of the Sony bomb threat

 

[Verlander]

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.

You totally had me up to here. I don't live in the US, but I used to, in Atlanta. I've never had to tip toe around black people, in any country. There seems to be this perception that we've lost a freedom somewhere along the line, but I've never, ever been stopped from saying what I wanted to, to who I wanted to. Same with gay folks, I've never had an issue. The closest I've had is a transexual person on this site got upset when I said that I wasn't attracted to them, and it had been a misunderstanding. How exactly do you have to tip toe around people? What rights have we lost?

 

[Verlander]

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?

Agreed, but I'll stop you right away. You're absolutely mad if you think that this is about journalistic integrity. Oh, I don't doubt that some people care about it, or maybe even a lot of people have an issue with it. However the response is well beyond that. It's known, downright advertised that videogame journalism is funded by corporations, biased, and otherwise "corrupt"... not unlike all media journalism. This isn't a case of the wool falling from the innocent eyes of the gaming community.

What this is about, and always has been about, is that an idiot woman who's been shouting her mouth off about "feminism" (the worst kind of -ism, clearly) was caught out being a fat hypocrite, and the internet seized on that. Largely, I don't have a problem with that, but what I do have a problem with is the extent of the backlash, the scale of which prompted the linked responses.

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. 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.

I said "for years". These public figures who are dishing out dirt are largely people who write on a regular basis in support of the community. They are people who are personally invested in gaming, the industry and whatever. That's the only reason why they're even identifiable above, say, you or me. Their reaction to "Zoegate" has been rude, sure, because it's insane seeing people form such an online lynch mob. I never said that they were level headed in this situation, but rather that they are professionals, and clearly aren't out to murder people who own consoles.

As for your second paragraph, that just seems naive, without meaning to insult you. Of course you can. Opinions on this are split to that level, and this thing has become so huge it's swept up people who may not normally vocalise their beliefs. People are watching these videos just trying to keep up, and there have been many opportunists on both sides, with firm right wingers who already hate personalities like MovieBob making videos about him to take advantage of the situation, and man haters taking advantage in the same way to prove how sexist the games community is. Of course they are.

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 glad you do, but you are aligned with a group of people that are doing criminal acts. Hacking, "doxxing", making bomb and death threats... that's not just one guy, and these things haven't happened just once. Are they gamers doing it? Given it's a gaming situation, I think it's safe to assume so. Is it the 00.05% as you've suggested? Neither of us know that. The verbal abuse is very real, and very very visible.

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.

No, I've not, and I won't. I'm an enthusiast, but "gamer" has always held a negative connotation for me, now even more so.

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.

The community reacts to a leak about a woman disproportionately, rudely and dangerously. Some figureheads decry this reaction. Now the community is upset that they got called names. You see how ridiculous this sounds? But that's it, boiled down to it's most basic level. It's like the bank robber asking for an apology from the council because they stubbed their toe on the way out.

I've looked into the grievances, yes. They're ridiculous. Even if you all care about journalistic integrity (and I'm prepared to put money that this group of people aren't out protesting against cable news, or bias in music magazines) the reaction and actions of the group are obscene and deserve to be called out. Now, I would never have compared you to ISIS, mostly because as a comparison it doesn't make immediate sense, but the intention behind it stands: if being a "gamer" means that you are the sort of person to create this kind of shitstorm over something so trivial, that you are the kind of person who will hack, abuse and attack in the most despicable way, then that identity needs to be torn down. There's no excuse for it, and while I fully appreciate that YOU have legitimate grievances, and want to discuss and tackle them in a constructive manner, many more don't. They are opportunistic and would be considered a stain in any community.

 

[R0guy]

Who even is that? I wan't arguing that nobody fakes death threats, just that Sarkeesian and Quinn don't appear to. Given the reaction against Sarkeesian so far, it's not exactly hard to believe, especially in the wake of the Sony bomb threat

What I think,

When it comes to Quinn:

1) As established earlier, she seems to be a person prone to extreme exagerations, lies and hypocrisy.
2) She shouldn't have cried wolf and brought abuse to WizardChan, a forum reserved for suicidal depressives, and get her game greenlit in the process. Nor should she have used Robin William's death to promote her game.

When it comes to Sarkeesian, I tend to agree more with you. However:

1)It certainly hasn't been established that the rape/death threat came from a gamer or was because of her stance on video-games. Thinking that women are more or less likely to get raped for their political ideology, is downright batshit if you ask me.

2)Discussion (and especially criticism) of her work shouldn't be constantly dismissed because of the threats made against her.

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.

You shouldn't paint all of 4chan with the same brush.


^I'd argue that this is more likely to encourage more women to participate in game development, if only for talking about the women who actually contribute to our favourite passtime. As opposed to what Anita "Kickstarer-politician" Sarkeesian and Zoe "Choose your own adventure with a metacritic score of 1/10 creator" Quinn are doing.

 

[kael013]

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.

You totally had me up to here. I don't live in the US, but I used to, in Atlanta. I've never had to tip toe around black people, in any country. There seems to be this perception that we've lost a freedom somewhere along the line, but I've never, ever been stopped from saying what I wanted to, to who I wanted to. Same with gay folks, I've never had an issue. The closest I've had is a transexual person on this site got upset when I said that I wasn't attracted to them, and it had been a misunderstanding. How exactly do you have to tip toe around people? What rights have we lost?

Glad you've never had to deal with this. But just because you haven't doesn't mean others haven't either. Most basic example: The word "******". Black people can use it to refer to other black people all the time. I can't, since I'm a white guy, without, at best, getting dirty looks and at worst being called a racist. Why am I not allowed to use a word to refer to them that they use? Because it has negative connotations, yet they use it freely. That's privilege, not equality. Another example would being told I'm "so white" and to go home and do stereotypical white guy things when I do something that is seen as a "black person thing" like rapping - and failing miserably. So I'm not good at rapping, I know I'm not but I do it in public sometimes because people laugh at my failure and I like that - the fact they're laughing, not the fact they're laughing [i/]at[/i] me - because I'm a clown. Yet the insults at my ineptitude are couched in race. My dad has had to deal with far worse (he's had people screaming at him during group meetings at work). I don't know anyone who's had a problem with gay people either, but I know there are assholes in all demographics, so it stands to reason that there are gay people somewhere in the world who are... overly sensitive.

Hope that clears my meaning up.

 

[Verlander]

What I think,

When it comes to Quinn:

1) As established earlier, she seems to be a person prone to extreme exagerations, lies and hypocrisy.
2) She shouldn't have cried wolf and brought abuse to WizardChan, a forum reserved for suicidal depressives, and get her game greenlit in the process. Nor should she have used Robin William's death to promote her game.

When it comes to Sarkeesian, I tend to agree more with you. However:

1)It certainly hasn't been established that the rape/death threat came from a gamer or was because of her stance on video-games. Thinking that women are more or less likely to get raped for their political ideology, is downright batshit if you ask me.

2)Discussion (and especially criticism) of her work shouldn't be constantly dismissed because of the threats made against her.

I think some men are angry enough to threaten rape and violence on a woman for what she's saying. Other than that though, I'm pretty much on board with what you're saying. I've never said that I'm a fan of Quinn, just that the response has been disproportional. Frankly, I didn't know who she was before this.

You shouldn't paint all of 4chan with the same brush.

I'd argue that this is more likely to encourage more women to participate in game development, if only for talking about the women who actually contribute to our favourite passtime. As opposed to what Anita "Kickstarer-politician" Sarkeesian and Zoe "Choose your own adventure with a metacritic score of 1/10 creator" Quinn are doing.

I feel that there are better ways than all of them, but I don't think Sarkeesian was ever fighting for more women to be involved. I think she's just trying to point out shit. Frankly, it's all she actually is doing.

The "Vivian" thing though... a representation of a girl who isn't sexualised or objectified? That kinda IS what Sarkessian's been asking for.

 

[Six Ways]

Most basic example: The word "******". Black people can use it to refer to other black people all the time. I can't, since I'm a white guy, without, at best, getting dirty looks and at worst being called a racist. Why am I not allowed to use a word to refer to them that they use? Because it has negative connotations, yet they use it freely. That's privilege, not equality.

It's not privilege. It's a tiny, tiny rebalancing. Fact is, when you call a black person the n-word, you're participating in and contributing to an endemic and historically significant oppression of black people. When people laugh at your 'whiteness', it does you no significant harm, and it's not a product of any systemic harm being done to you and others like you. It's kind of a dick move, but it's not at all the same.

 

[R0guy]

With a metacritic score of 1/10 creator"

Why did you refer to Metacritic? You seem to imply that having a low Metacritic means your game is bad - as if it were a fact. But what happens when a game you like has a low score? Is Metacritic then not right and this criticism wrong? I'm curious.

Ugh... When I say Metacritic score, it's actually Metacritic user score. And yeah, Metacritic scores arn't objective truths, so if you enjoyed reading depression quest, all the power to you.

All I'm pointing out is the jarring disconnect between the amount of positive press coverage DQ has received compared to what the readerbase wants.

snip

Glad we found common ground.

 

[Verlander]

Glad you've never had to deal with this. But just because you haven't doesn't mean others haven't either. Most basic example: The word "******". Black people can use it to refer to other black people all the time. I can't, since I'm a white guy, without, at best, getting dirty looks and at worst being called a racist. Why am I not allowed to use a word to refer to them that they use? Because it has negative connotations, yet they use it freely. That's privilege, not equality. Another example would being told I'm "so white" and to go home and do stereotypical white guy things when I do something that is seen as a "black person thing" like rapping - and failing miserably. So I'm not good at rapping, I know I'm not but I do it in public sometimes because people laugh at my failure and I like that - the fact they're laughing, not the fact they're laughing [i/]at[/i] me - because I'm a clown. Yet the insults at my ineptitude are couched in race. My dad has had to deal with far worse (he's had people screaming at him during group meetings at work). I don't know anyone who's had a problem with gay people either, but I know there are assholes in all demographics, so it stands to reason that there are gay people somewhere in the world who are... overly sensitive.

Hope that clears my meaning up.

Hah, ok, I can see more clearly the direction you're coming from. These things are steeped in nuance. I've called black friends "******", and they've laughed, and thrown derogatory insults back at me. It's banter. If I did that on the street, I'd get a negative reaction, it's an insult. If you called a black person a ****, they'd no doubt get pissed as well, it's an insult as well. You're free to use both words though, there's nothing stopping you, you'll just get a reaction from them. Black people use the word as an insult as well.

Your other example seems more personal, but I'll try and tackle it - when you participate in an activity that is intrinsically cultural, and you are not of that culture, then it will always be the most immediate point of focus. Imagine a Kenyan man trying out at Sumo... it's an extreme example, but when reviewing where it went wrong, it's not unreasonable to suggest that he's not naturally of the right build or mindset.

Now rapping is a pop culture activity, and so you're far less likely to get a constructive or reasonable criticism. I don't know the last time anyone seriously pulled apart and discussed the music merits of Katy Perry, for instance. Rap is that step further, insofar as it's long been politically associated with black America. Equality doesn't mean forgetting that once things were very unequal. However, it's also something that you're not excluded from. You might have to work a little harder to get there, which sucks, but on the flipside the average black person has to work a little harder to be recognised in business.

I'm not the douche that says "black people, homosexuals and women had it so hard, so now you deserve to struggle, cos white privilege". That's an unreasonable response. What I'm saying is that your struggles will be matched by others in different areas, and that you're not expected to stop doing anything.

 

[kael013]

I'm not the douche that says "black people, homosexuals and women had it so hard, so now you deserve to struggle, cos white privilege". That's an unreasonable response. What I'm saying is that your struggles will be matched by others in different areas, and that you're not expected to stop doing anything.

Yeah, it's all pretty complicated. Thanks for dealing with this like a reasonable adult, that's been rare for me this week. Personally, as an ethical hedonist, I hate this social inequality. People should be able to say and do whatever they want as long as it makes them happy (as long as the pain isn't equal or greater than the pleasure, so I'm not endorsing stuff like mass murder or rape). And while it's true that no one's really forcing me to stop doing that stuff, well, positive punishment and all that.

Well, since we've got everything sorted, I'm out of here. Hope you have a pleasant [s/]day[/s] [s/]week[/s] life.

 

[KazeAizen]

I don't even know who you are referring to, give me some names and examples please. I can tell you where I first heard about it, Thunderfoot, Repzion and InternetAristocrat. I dont know how you feel about them but I am curious to find out.

I've never even heard of them. These are the guys that I've heard of.

 

[anthony87]

snip

That you Boudica?

 

[Something Amyss]

This has nothing to do with gaming press! These people who signed the letter were devs and executives at gaming companies!

Hell, journalists aren't saying (at least, not as a whole) "gamers are bad," and neither are the devs here, so it's even less relevant.