Your thoughts on... Nerd/Geek culture of today.

[Zontar]

It's sexist to say gamers were upset because a woman slept with someone? Jesus. That makes about as much sense as that guy that told me it's homophobic to criticise anything Milo has said.

No, it's sexist because it's a misrepresentation of the issue where you're pretending that the problem was men took issue with a woman having sex, not the fact that it has conflict of interest that came form the MEN who had sex with her without disclosing their relationship to her.

-Snip- (Majority is more right than Blizzard)

A the good old majority is always right. A classic.

It's actually more along the line of unanimity. But that ignores the point that man AND women who are fans an paying customers of Blizzard had a problem with the pose being removed on principle, removed because a single man took issue with it on behalf of women (by his own admission) that was to remove a pose that not even a jaded conservative puritan could really argue there is a problem with.

There's really no way to defend Blizzard's action there. Which is probably why pretty much no one tried to do so, though I'm not sure if it's because the progressive press actually realized Blizzard screwed up or the fact that siding with Blizzard would demonstrate their being sex negative.

 

[Zontar]

"Misrepresenting" an issue is now sexist?

Inherently misrepresenting an issue isn't sexist, but doing so in a way that tries to make men look like they are doing so for sexist motivations is.

Anyway I quickly went back to the look at the original thread and had a good laugh about how furious people are at her sleeping with people

Oh boy, 6 examples for the third longest thread in the history of this site. That's like a whopping 0.001% of posts.

Ah the good old "The majority is always right", with some strange sex stuff thrown in and mentioning his daughter being "taken issue with it on behalf of women".

We aren't talking about a majority here, we're talking quite literally (with literal being used in its proper form) 99% here. This isn't "majority is right", this is "those who disagree statistically aren't enough to be considered".

And I see you actually did seem to have read the single post which caused all this. Which begs the question why you seem to be the only other person on the internet who seems to agree with him. Unless you are him, but that seems unlikely. So we have 2 people vs. the virtual entirety of Blizzard's fanbase/consumer base. When doing the math, Blizzard is quote frankly insane, with no other words outside of those regarding a lack of intellect being an accurate description of their actions in that incident.

Thankfully (but not really) their taking down the guys running Vanilla WoW servers is such a spectacular fuck up on their part that most people have forgotten about it anyway.

 

[The Lunatic]

The constant backwards views on women that seems to permeate throughout geek culture has only reinforced the image that a lot of it is made up of "man children" to those outside of it, and to a lot of people inside of it.

Ah yes, the "People have views I disagree with, therefore they must be men".

Seriously? That's pretty sexist, if you want to be some paragon of gender equality like you seem to try to be, perhaps you should look closer to home.

Even in the thread you're using to proclaim people of being sexist, nobody has made as big of a sexist generalization as you have just now.

 

[Zelderahn]

Nerd/geek culture has grown, it has gotten more vocal, it has been given their own dedicated platforms for communication, their interests are being mined by the major producers of main-stream culture (games, movies etc) which provides validation for them.

The larger size means that the demographic within the subculture who are not socially adept/abrasive has also grown larger, their new communication tools has made them more noticeable than before and they are willing+able to use them.

This paints a ridiculously skewed picture of what Geek/nerd culture actually is: Enthusiasts of all stripes. This skewed image is intensely marketable by media individuals who want something they can put up on headlines, the champions of this skewed image (those who are the loudest of the loud group) become celebrities by virtue of echo-chamber affirmation by those who are akin to them.

NONE of these things are surprising, and is more or less just human nature paired down to a section of the population who happens to like 'X' (where X is your average fandom/brand/dev/publisher/writer etc).

To answer the topic: I think geek/nerd culture is pretty radical, and is full of very nice and intensely creative people. We're just not good at depriving missplaced 'outrage culture' their megaphone.

 

[Zontar]

Good thing that never happened then.

If you're making the claim you aren't implying them men who are geeks are inherently sexist against women and that that was the cause of GG, I'm afraid that is in fact exactly what happened.

But hey if all the original threads contradict what you say then I must be wrong eh.

Hey now, just because a few people took issue with a person having sex with 5 others while in a committed relationship doesn't change the objective fact that what drove the Quinspiracy wasn't the fact she had sex with other people, but the fact the gaming press as well as other sites (including 4chan and Reddit, which at the time was enough on its own to warrant hundreds of people looking into the matter). You know this already on top of it all.

Oh man, doubling down on the "The majority is always right"? I mean I love your commitment to that classic argument haha.

Is it really a majority when statistically those who wanted or supported it being removed don't even exist? I'm sorry, but when those supporting something are only a fraction of the margin of error and statistically do not exist, then the phrase "argument from majority" is disingenuous as it implies a minority large enough to constitute being worth mentioning even exists. This isn't argument from majority, this is argument from universality. It's like those who voted "yes" to joining Argentina in the Falklands.

 

[Zontar]

Getting upset because a woman might have slept with people? Yeah that is sexist. You said that was intentionally misrepresenting, I say you're attempting historical revisionism and went to find the original threads to show what they said.

See here's the thing you seem to not understand: there's a difference between "upset a women slept with people" and "upset a women slept with people while in a committed relationship". The former is something very few people take issue with, the latter is one very few people don't take issue with. That's what happens when you live in a society that has had monogamy as the norm for so long we literally do not know how far back it started because it pre-dates our written and oral history.

You are painting this issue as if those who took exception to that are the taking issue with the former, when in reality it's the latter and the difference is so large it's disingenuous to even imply they are comparable.

"but the fact the gaming press as well as other sites"? But the fact they what? Didn't get outraged about TMZ nonsense of some nobody maybe sleeping with people?

How terrible. They should have been outraged about a women sleeping with people eh?

The fact they didn't get outraged wasn't the issue. You know this already.

The fact they didn't report on it (despite the fact that had it been a man they would have, and we know this because not a month before they literally did that) wasn't the issue. You know this already.

The fact a woman slept with people in itself isn't the issue. You know this already.

The fact that the person in question who slept with people who broke every rule of journalism by not disclosing their relationship while reporting on her work is the issue. You know this already.

The fact gaming sites, as well as Reddit and 4chan attempted systematic censorship of all discussion on the matter is what made this go from typical monthly gaming drama everyone forgets about into something people took legitimate interest in. You know this already.

We've done this song and dance already, you and I many times over the past two years and I've also seen you do it with others in that time. You can't pretend you don't know these facts when discussing them with people who know that you are aware of them. Unless you have a memory formation problem that you haven't told us about, there is no excuse for the constant need of these established facts to be repeated.

Oh the majority makes Blizzard's game? That's like, tripling down on "The majority is always right" hahaha. I'm going to be honest, I'm loving how much you've repeated that argument like it's a good one. No attempts to change it, just double down and hope it makes sense the fourth time haha.

The majority of people who buy Blizzard's games are, in fact, the ones who should be considered when making and changing a game. This isn't even Economics 101, this is Economics 100.

You may be complaining about the "majority is always right" argument, but the problem is this isn't a law being passed, it's economics, and in economics the majority is, in actuality, right, at least when it comes to who one caters their products to.

But then again it's disingenuous to call it a mere majority given it's in reality a near unanimity, with those who wanted or supported the change being so few they statistically do not exists.

When it comes to a company doing something related to its product(s) where on one side it's the near totality of their consumer base and on the other wise it's so few people that one hand can be used to count them with fingers to spear, you're god damn right that's a case of the majority is right, and those who think otherwise are the people who would in a meritocracy never rise high enough in the corporate ladder to ever be in a position to make such a call in the first place.

 

[Silvanus]

Any of you know how the electron transport chain in your cells works? How about the magnetic coercivity of a material works, or how to calculate it? Do you know anything about fluid dynamics, quantum mechanics, relativity, classical mechanics, cosmology or astronomy? Maybe you're into number theory, or statistics, or game theory? Are you working in rocketry, software, etc?

Or do you just play games like most of the world, and ***** online like most of the world? Find your own "culture".

I had no idea that only certain fields of knowledge counted. How bizarre.

You are painting this issue as if those who took exception to that are the taking issue with the former, when in reality it's the latter and the difference is so large it's disingenuous to even imply they are comparable.

Frankly, when the "exception taken" concerns a complete stranger and then continues on for over a year, far beyond the point at which all relevant parties have been made aware, then it's still an example of ridiculous prurience. At this point, it does far more harm than good, and it serves only to make the episode more painful for all involved to have it constantly dragged out, endlessly, on a thousand internet forums by obsessive strangers.

 

[Zontar]

Frankly, when the "exception taken" concerns a complete stranger and then continues on for over a year, far beyond the point at which all relevant parties have been made aware, then it's still an example of ridiculous prurience.

Well then it's a good thing it didn't continue for over a year given how it very quickly disappeared and was overshadowed by the questions of why such an inconsequential standard controversy of the week had attempts at systemic censorship committed by websites all over the place (including two which at the time would never have dared to do so with anything that wasn't illegal), and then the Gamers are Dead articles where posted and the Quinspiracy was dead once and for all.

 

[Silvanus]

Well then it's a good thing it didn't continue for over a year given how it very quickly disappeared and was overshadowed by the questions of why such an inconsequential standard controversy of the week had attempts at systemic censorship committed by websites all over the place (including two which at the time would never have dared to do so with anything that wasn't illegal), and then the Gamers are Dead articles where posted and the Quinspiracy was dead once and for all.

Bollocks. It's still provoking prurient commentary on a daily basis-- you just condemned her yourself, one post ago.

 

[Zontar]

Bollocks. It's still provoking prurient commentary on a daily basis-- you just condemned her yourself, one post ago.

Well it is the topic that was brought up by Pluvia in an attempt to pain GamerGate and nerds in general as misogynists who don't like the idea of women having sex with people. It's a little hard to counter a baseless accusation without making mention of it.

Plus with that low bar for what constitutes provoking commentary on something, it's hard to think of anything at all that has happened in the past 100 years that doesn't qualify. Setting the bar so low makes it meaningless.

 

[Silvanus]

Well it is the topic that was brought up by Pluvia in an attempt to pain GamerGate and nerds in general as misogynists who don't like the idea of women having sex with people. It's a little hard to counter a baseless accusation without making mention of it.

You countered that accusation by asserting that the condemnation was valid, then? That proves his point, and mine.

Plus with that low bar for what constitutes provoking commentary on something, it's hard to think of anything at all that has happened in the past 100 years that doesn't qualify. Setting the bar so low makes it meaningless.

Everything provokes some kind of commentary, obviously. This has been recurring endlessly on dozens of sites for over a year now. It's a stranger's private life. Leave it alone now.

 

[Josh123914]

Any of you know how the electron transport chain in your cells works?

Yes. Much of the rest, no.
Why are you shaming people that didn't get a STEM education?

 

[Zontar]

You countered that accusation by asserting that the condemnation was valid, then? That proves his point, and mine.

Quite the contrary, as it disproves Pluvia's assumption that taking issue with a person in a committed relationship who sleeps with others is the same as taking issue with someone who sleeps with others, and that because of the later is sexist the former must also be sexist. I didn't prove your point and neither I nor anyone else proves Pluvia's.

Everything provokes some kind of commentary, obviously. This has been recurring endlessly on dozens of sites for over a year now. It's a stranger's private life. Leave it alone now.

It's not a private life when that stranger goes out of their way to attempt to keep it in the limelight. The reason Quinn's name keeps coming up but not Greyson's isn't because of sexism, it's because Greyson kept his head down and his mouth shut when it was happening instead of going online, making an ass of himself, becoming a propagandist, oh and violating a person's rights with an illegal and unconstitutional gag order while simultaneously cyber-stalking that same person.

If it was just the sex, only the sex and nothing but the sex then she's be as old news as Dorito's Pope, a meme most gamer's don't even understand anymore. But that wasn't what happened and instead a terrible person did terrible things on a consistent basis and the internet, being the internet, didn't forget.

Here's a very, very easy way to be forgotten that everyone who is against GG seems to either not be willing to accept or simply can't understand: the easier and simplest (and realistically only) way to be forgotten by the internet is to stop, let time pass and go into obscurity. That's it. That's as of yet the only way we have learned to let the internet forget us. But because a lot of those who are big names who are against GG tend to suffer narcissistic personality disorder that isn't likely to happen any time soon.

Thankfully for Zoe though she hasn't done any high profile acts lately, and with the rise of pro-pedophilia op-ed writers at places like Salon the internet has others to focus its disgust at.

 

[The Lunatic]

Snip

So, could you explain how your belief that only men would take issue with a woman sleeping around with game journalists isn't sexist?

Why is it you feel that's something only men would do?

Why is it you feel that these men are "Man-children"?

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Since this thread has now turned into a typical 7-page circlejerk including all the usual topics like Gamergate, inclusion of women, history of bullying etc. I've come to realize "geek culture" has way too much time on its hands. Which is why I really hope to find a job in the coming weeks, just to get a sense of what living in real world is actually like again. When you don't have all week to think of rebuttals to insipid online arguments, when you have to live on a decent diet, exercise, meet friends and so on, you gain a bit of perspective. I've had enough of sitting on my ass being able to play video games all day. At one point in my life I thought it to be the fulfillment of my dreams, when no one would force you to do anything. But now I've had my time doing it, time for something else.

 

[Zontar]

Oh shit wait, she was in a relationship?

That makes it totally not sexist then. Good thing you cleared that up!

You... you do understand that Western society is dominantly, to the point of near exclusivity outside of a few cults and religious sects, a monogamous society, right? Despite your attempt at sarcasm, it does, actually, change quite a bit.

Of course you know that already.

Wait, Reddit and 4chan didn't want TMZ bullshit about a nobody on their forums?

Also emphasis on the bold and underlined part. Harassing women had become so normal that even you described it as "typical monthly gaming drama".

Typical. Monthly. Gaming. Drama.

Something that's so normal in the gaming community that even you described it as typical and monthly.

I have to ask, do you know about Reddit and 4chan outside of knowing their names? Because, at least back in 2014 before both started to change dramatically, they where both sites that had an "anything goes" policy so long as whatever it is in question isn't illegal. The fact that they took down what was (and in many ways despite their changes in the years since still is) considered normal and unnoteworthy was itself a red flag for many and enough on its own to ask why there seemed to be an attempt to keep this information quiet.

Also, what's with the "harassing women" nonsense? We where not talking about anything that could possibly be mistaken out of misinterpretation to be such and you know this very well.

What made this typical was that it was drama involving people who where working in the industry, no one could read this thread and honestly come to the conclusion that it was anything else. You remember Dorito's Pope? That was one such incident. Oh look at how many women got harassed because of that /sarcasm.

To be honest, looking at 2014 the ONLY incident that one could even pretend was about harassing women in gaming for the entire year before that was the incident where Quinn (ironically) lied about an image board for clinically depressed people harassing her and then sending a mob to harass them. You've got to love the irony of that if it wasn't so despicable.

Oh jeez the majority is always right? What an argument!

It's a stronger argument then literally none at all, which so far is what you and the literal only other person on the internet who took issue with the pose have to say on the matter.

It's simple economics: if a near unanimity of your paying customers want one thing, and so few people that one hand is all you need to count them with want another, the only people who will take the side of the latter don't have the competence to make such decisions for a company if they had reached their position by earning it.

I'm sorry you hate this basic reality of economics, but that's how capitalism works.

 

[Zontar]

Does it change it massively enough to make it not sexist?

Given how the reaction being sexist wouldn't even be a considered if she was a man, yes, the change is in fact massive enough to make it not sexist. Unless you're going to pretend the reaction to a man cheating on his girlfriend (who he also abused) with 5 women wouldn't get a negative reaction from people.

Hey it wasn't me that described it as "typical monthly gaming drama".

You're right about that, but you're also wrong in that you took the statement that it was monthly gaming drama and twisted it to be about harassment of women out of nowhere.

Well the majority is always right you say, so did Blizzard listen to them?

I mean that's probably the best way to find out if the majority creates Blizzard's game for them. To find out if they're always right.

I don't know what your point here is outside of the fact Blizzard's current executive leadership is filled with morons (as their reaction to Vanilla WoW servers and their taking said servers down shows). Here's a simple rule of economics: if your consumer base wants X, and you take away X, that's bad for business. Is it bad enough to cause the business to shut down? No. Is it bad enough to cost more money then keeping X would have been? There's really no way to argue anything else.

 

[The Lunatic]

Snip

So, you say you aren't targeting men, then specifically target men.


You're using the term "Man-Children" to describe a group of people who take interest in a woman sleeping with some journalists and then claiming you're not saying that they're men.

Which is it? You can't use "Man-children" to describe people and not have it be a gendered insult, as "Man" is literally in the insult you're using.

 

[IceForce]

Well then it's a good thing it didn't continue for over a year given how it very quickly disappeared and was overshadowed

, and then the Gamers are Dead articles where posted and the Quinspiracy was dead once and for all.

Well, quite obviously it didn't "disappear" and wasn't "overshadowed" and wasn't "dead once and for all", when literally two posts later you go on another tirade all about how awful Zoe is. Specifically:

It's not a private life when that stranger goes out of their way to attempt to keep it in the limelight. The reason Quinn's name keeps coming up but not Greyson's isn't because of sexism, it's because Greyson kept his head down and his mouth shut when it was happening instead of going online, making an ass of himself, becoming a propagandist, oh and violating a person's rights with an illegal and unconstitutional gag order while simultaneously cyber-stalking that same person.

Remind me again, who was the journalist in this equation? Who was it that allegedly breached journalistic ethics? Certainly not the person you keep railing against.

 

[Zontar]

Well, quite obviously it didn't "disappear" and wasn't "overshadowed" and wasn't "dead once and for all", when literally two posts later you go on yet another harangue all about how awful Zoe is.

Instead of re-writing what I already wrote regarding this to Silvanus I'll just post a direct link [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.938029-Your-thoughts-on-Nerd-Geek-culture-of-today?page=7#23645981]. It's more efficient that way.

Remind me again, who was the journalist in this equation? Who was it that allegedly breached journalistic ethics? Certainly not the person you keep railing against.

I keep railing against? Look, you can be against corrupt journalists by going after the people who they admit to having lied to as a means to get money (their advertisers) while acknowledging the fact that someone who abused their partner while cheating on them with multiple people is a terrible person. Is it is only something that's permissible when men are the ones doing it?

Something being sexist if it was a man in the situation wouldn't be sexist if it was a woman? What? That makes even less sense.

On the contrary, that isn't the point I was making. I'll repeat my point: if Zoe has been a man who abused his girlfriend while cheating on said girlfriend with 5 women, most people who would hear about that would take exception to it, and no one would even be entertaining the idea that doing so is sexist in any way. Yet because Zoe is a woman you seem to be doing so.

Which would be the case if "out of nowhere" meant "what we've been discussing for the last few posts".

But hey. I thought it was a huge thing, and you thought it was so small and common place that it's just typical monthly gaming drama. You said it, not me.

On the contrary, YOU said it was about harassment. I, on the other hand, said such controversies where some journalist or member of the industry screws up is common place. You took that and acted as though I was saying harassment was that common place. That was all you, not me. And it was, in fact, out of nowhere, given the context of our conversation until that point.

Blizzard is stupid and the majority is always right? What an argument.

Are you actually going to make an argument defending Blizzard, or the fact that mathematically and objectively they made a terrible business decision given how the people who supported them statistically do not exist? Or the fact your calling it a "majority" downplays the fact that those who aren't part of said majority statistically do not exist?