GamerGate, Feminism, and the true face of Hate.

[The20]

Yoshpet

sitting cow

Denial, ad hominem, strawman, and lies? That's all you've got for me? Why did I bother writing that all out...?

You go ahead and get back to me with some evidence there was a "massive" amount of trolls, and explain why they should be associated with the Gamergaters who denounce them and report them for said trolling, and I'll just overlook the fact that you claimed I denied anyone was trolling when I specifically mentioned them doing so in the post you quoted and responded to piecemeal.

You know, i always thought she was a troll, but here you are responding to her like she's not. Am i wrong?

[X of Castigation]

Gamergate is making a really good case for why net neutrality should be abolished.

[sitting cow]

Yoshpet

sitting cow

>with its legitimate complaints

what legitimate complaints. and were those made before or after the threats on 4chan.

>Anonymous internet trolls can still dox and harass feminists and women without GG.

i never said they couldn't. what's your point here?

>GG does not mollify people's anger at the harassment, redirect it, or anything that would help cover up these actions

well actually it does

> and the majority of GG's members that were apparently duped into thinking it was a real movement openly oppose and track down the harassers they're supposed to be covering for.

okay so was it a real movement or not then? and first you say gg can't possibly redirect or mollify people's anger at harassment, now you say they were duped. eating your own words much?

>It actually acts like a lightning rod, causing people to stereotype and blame gamers instead of a handful of hostile trolls.

or maybe gamergate did that to itself. and also, only some people are "blaming gamers". not everyone who is "against" gamergate.

>spectators eat it up like idiots

no that's mostly just you smile

>So, uh, where was the massive pro-misogyny movement in all of that again?

the 'handful of trolls' was actually a massive amount. not to mention all the other people (there's been at least 3 others on this forum, which is a lot considering like, 20 people post here total and maybe only 10 people have posted in the threads on gg) including yourself, who have been shown what gamergate was about to begin with and still continue to argue that it didn't start out that way and there was no trolling or sexism at all.

the trolling is a part of the "movement" whether you accept it or not. i don't even know why you feel such a need to defend this "movement" tbh. i think i view anyone who tries to deny that any trolling took place so hard, especially after being shown other evidence, is a troll themselves.

Denial, ad hominem, strawman, and lies? That's all you've got for me? Why did I bother writing that all out...?

You go ahead and get back to me with some evidence there was a "massive" amount of trolls, and explain why they should be associated with the Gamergaters who denounce them and report them for said trolling, and I'll just overlook the fact that you claimed I denied anyone was trolling when I specifically mentioned them doing so in the post you quoted and responded to piecemeal.

except that's not what my post contains at all. you are welcome to actually argue it rather than just glossing over it saying it's all denial and fallacies. i'm waiting.

why the ******** should i have to provide any more sources

you first

i never said that you denied any trolling i said that you denied trolling that was associated with gamergate, which is what you did... rolleyes

[Yoshpet]

The20

You know, i always thought she was a troll, but here you are responding to her like she's not. Am i wrong?

No, you're right. I have a weakness for attempting sincere conversation with insincere people.

[Yoshpet]

I AM R U

There arguments from the more reasonable Gamergate supporters, and I think they're serious ones, such as the concern about games journalism and the close relationships between game devs and journalists. But there's this massive fear around Gamergate - even with those valid issues, its not a movement associated with a just cause, it's associated with fear. Its like being concerned about high drug rates among Africa-American communities, so joining the KKK. I'm going to quote this article because it says what I think much more eloquently than I can express it - any attempt to put it into my own words ends up as plagiarism, so I'm just going to quote dump.

Quote:

People are terrified - they've read the forums, where hateful sexist and transphobic slurs are tossed around like it's nothing, where women targets are given code names and insane conspiracy theories and militaristic jargon sit side by side with voices impotently urging for calm. They've seen the Twitter reply-feeds of the women (and men) who speak out against Gamergate

- I've witnessed this myself happen to my friends, my partner's co-workers, both males and females. Saying anything results in 100s of messages of abuse, threats (some just obscene in their lurid detail) and threats to "dox" them - all for saying "hmmm, maybe you shouldn't threaten people". Its gotten to the point where people are choosing not to talk about it - where its easier that way, safer that way, because you don't want to jeopardize your safety, mental and physical health, or job. I know people, not a few, who work in the games industry or just have always played games, who no longer use the term "gamer" to describe themselves - they call the label toxic, now.

Quote:

Gamergate has become defined by fear, and that fear is not going away, because no one has the power to make it go away. Gamergate may have a logo and a mascot, but it has no leader, and as a result its many supporters can remain unaccountable for any actions they deem the work of fringe extremists. The movement's moderates can repeatedly disavow harassment—as some did in the aftermath of Day's doxxing—and chide those who go too far for hurting the cause. Yet it is difficult to submerge oneself in the anger and hate-speech coursing through so many GG forums and online discussions without feeling like it is an unseverable element of the movement.

- I feel Gamergate is only comparable to feminism if you look to the radfem movement, which has its own identity and even label within feminism, and is routinely rejected as extreme, unnecessary, and violent. Yet even they don't seem to go the lengths current Gamergate supporters are going to, in organising well orchestrated online attacks that leave people too terrified to live in their own houses, too terrified to fight back, let along speak out against them...

Please believe me when I say I'm not trying to excuse all the vitriol being flung between the two sides, and especially not the death threats and doxxing going on. What I don't understand is the belief that Gamergate openly supports and organizes these threats when they openly denounce them and actively report them instead. I bolded a sentence at the end of your post to highlight the kind of generalization that confuses me.

How can we say to abandon the legitimate issues because people are scared and associate negative things with the movement, especially in light of a very obvious fear-mongering campaign being produced by the media which is under criticism? The motives to muddy the water are very apparent, and to believe that GG is just an excuse to be misogynistic is to be wildly reductive about the events so far.

Have you seen the Huffpost Live video where three female GG supporters are asked to explain what they think GG is really about? The host continually interrupts their attempts to discuss journalism with leading questions about misogyny, and at one point even goes to each girl in turn and asks them to admit that feminism is an important discussion to have about gaming, and one girl even refuses to address the question because it was irrelevant to what she was talking about. The media surrounding these events is dripping with bias. Everyone needs to be a little more skeptical instead of acquiescing to buzzwords like misogyny with nary a thought.

[Yoshpet]

Also, I'd like to add that some of the professional victims in this situation are actively posting flamebait to the GG hashtag. I've seen Sarkeesian very blatantly baiting people, and I have no sympathy for someone who claims they've been chased out of their home simply for being a prominent woman and then turns around and antagonizes the people she's apparently fleeing from. That's about as disingenuous as you get, but I guess if people pay you for being harassed, you will seek out and egg on that harassment.

[I AM R U]

Yoshpet

I AM R U

There arguments from the more reasonable Gamergate supporters, and I think they're serious ones, such as the concern about games journalism and the close relationships between game devs and journalists. But there's this massive fear around Gamergate - even with those valid issues, its not a movement associated with a just cause, it's associated with fear. Its like being concerned about high drug rates among Africa-American communities, so joining the KKK. I'm going to quote this article because it says what I think much more eloquently than I can express it - any attempt to put it into my own words ends up as plagiarism, so I'm just going to quote dump.

Quote:

People are terrified - they've read the forums, where hateful sexist and transphobic slurs are tossed around like it's nothing, where women targets are given code names and insane conspiracy theories and militaristic jargon sit side by side with voices impotently urging for calm. They've seen the Twitter reply-feeds of the women (and men) who speak out against Gamergate

- I've witnessed this myself happen to my friends, my partner's co-workers, both males and females. Saying anything results in 100s of messages of abuse, threats (some just obscene in their lurid detail) and threats to "dox" them - all for saying "hmmm, maybe you shouldn't threaten people". Its gotten to the point where people are choosing not to talk about it - where its easier that way, safer that way, because you don't want to jeopardize your safety, mental and physical health, or job. I know people, not a few, who work in the games industry or just have always played games, who no longer use the term "gamer" to describe themselves - they call the label toxic, now.

Quote:

Gamergate has become defined by fear, and that fear is not going away, because no one has the power to make it go away. Gamergate may have a logo and a mascot, but it has no leader, and as a result its many supporters can remain unaccountable for any actions they deem the work of fringe extremists. The movement's moderates can repeatedly disavow harassment—as some did in the aftermath of Day's doxxing—and chide those who go too far for hurting the cause. Yet it is difficult to submerge oneself in the anger and hate-speech coursing through so many GG forums and online discussions without feeling like it is an unseverable element of the movement.

- I feel Gamergate is only comparable to feminism if you look to the radfem movement, which has its own identity and even label within feminism, and is routinely rejected as extreme, unnecessary, and violent. Yet even they don't seem to go the lengths current Gamergate supporters are going to, in organising well orchestrated online attacks that leave people too terrified to live in their own houses, too terrified to fight back, let along speak out against them...

Please believe me when I say I'm not trying to excuse all the vitriol being flung between the two sides, and especially not the death threats and doxxing going on. What I don't understand is the belief that Gamergate openly supports and organizes these threats when they openly denounce them and actively report them instead. I bolded a sentence at the end of your post to highlight the kind of generalization that confuses me.

How can we say to abandon the legitimate issues because people are scared and associate negative things with the movement, especially in light of a very obvious fear-mongering campaign being produced by the media which is under criticism? The motives to muddy the water are very apparent, and to believe that GG is just an excuse to be misogynistic is to be wildly reductive about the events so far.

Have you seen the Huffpost Live video where three female GG supporters are asked to explain what they think GG is really about? The host continually interrupts their attempts to discuss journalism with leading questions about misogyny, and at one point even goes to each girl in turn and asks them to admit that feminism is an important discussion to have about gaming, and one girl even refuses to address the question because it was irrelevant to what she was talking about. The media surrounding these events is dripping with bias. Everyone needs to be a little more skeptical instead of acquiescing to buzzwords like misogyny with nary a thought.

For the most part, it has not been in the media over here - I've read some articles online that friends have linked me to, all off gaming sites, but the vast majority of my experience has been watching friends be harassed. Yes, there is the important issue of gaming journalism - you think people were fine with it before Gamergate? That's not true, and the claims of concern about journalistic integrity are being constantly lost because Gamergate keeps using horrible tactics to get their way. I'm not just concerned with misogyny, I think that's an element of it, but not the whole picture, and I think that's supported by the fact that for all their claims of concern about journalistic integrity, they don't seem too bothered by it when it suits them - only if its women sleeping around or indie gamers who pander to "SJW" interests.

[X of Castigation]

I wonder how these internet video game heroes will take it when they discover how utterly inconsequential they are in reality.

[Yoshpet]

I AM R U

For the most part, it has not been in the media over here - I've read some articles online that friends have linked me to, all off gaming sites, but the vast majority of my experience has been watching friends be harassed. Yes, there is the important issue of gaming journalism - you think people were fine with it before Gamergate? That's not true, and the claims of concern about journalistic integrity are being constantly lost because Gamergate keeps using horrible tactics to get their way. I'm not just concerned with misogyny, I think that's an element of it, but not the whole picture, and I think that's supported by the fact that for all their claims of concern about journalistic integrity, they don't seem too bothered by it when it suits them - only if its women sleeping around or indie gamers who pander to "SJW" interests.

I don't at all think people were fine with journalism before Gamergate. I think it was the straw that broke the camel's back, and the fact that the media under criticism responded by coordinating the release of 12 articles on the same day, which generalize and slander people who identify as "gamers" has only fanned the flames. Why people keep suggesting that gamers should be A-OK with their media outlets stereotyping, alienating, and attempting to "leave them behind" is beyond me. It's not the kind of issue that's going to be ignored because someone cried misogyny.

You say "Gamergate keeps using horrible tactics to get their way" but this is a baseless accusation. You cannot apply the actions of a few to the whole, especially when the remainder denounces and works against that troublesome minority. That's not even touching on the fact that prominent GG supporters have also received threats, been doxxed, etc. The situation is a lot more complicated than GG being vile and using unscrupulous tactics.

How people rationalize that some freakshow calling up a person at home and saying creepy, threatening things should be applied to everyone who has posted under or supported #GamerGate is impossible for me to understand. It's wishful thinking, really. If prejudice against gamers and wild assumptions about who anonymous internet trolls actually are could end this dialog then it already would have.

[Yoshpet]

Senator Armstrong

I wonder how these internet video game heroes will take it when they discover how utterly inconsequential they are in reality.

Yes, consumers have zero power in the free market. Zero.

Let's talk about your credentials, power, and relevance since you seem so ready to talk down to everyone else. Who the hell are you again?

[HMS Thunder Child]

God-The-RapistV2.0

HMS Thunder Child

Yoshpet

HMS Thunder Child

98% white dudes, 1% white women, 1% everyone else. Reckon that's equitable to some folks.

Are you talking about playable protagonist only or representation at all? I would agree to the former but not the latter.

Character creation is the way of the future! I prefer the games that let me make my player.

Pros and cons to that. Character creation prevents deliberate tailoring of a story to fit a particular experience whereas a set protag will fit that role nicely. Character creation, unless it's extremely in depth like some Choice of Games titles, will typically result in a generic, colorblind (and genderblind, etc) portrayal, and even CoG games don't do much better. I want queer stories. I want stories about people of color. About people with disabilities, et cetera. Character creation is good, too, don't get me wrong, but it's not the only way of the future. Getting out of the white man bearded hero rut is necessary, too.

How many video games do you buy a year? How do you let the industry know that you, as a buyer, want these things? How many game Devs do you know or talk to? How many gaming forums are you an active member of?

Depends on titles available, gog/steam/etc sales, and anything major I want to get. At least 10 a year though, I'd say.

I'm a "garmes news" writer. I write about these things. I'm vocal on several gaming news websites comments sections (in addition to writing) and I provide feedback for a handful of games.

I only ever talked to two personally. They were douches. It wasn't much of a conversation.

Gaming forum as in like... reddit, or do you count comment sections because I find those preferable. Straight up forums, four or five actively, and a few more in the past before I moved on entirely from the developers and their products. My biggest contributions are to CoG and TTG.

[HMS Thunder Child]

toasega

HMS Thunder Child

This is really weak. Like, I know you think anecdotes prove stuff, but a misguided child making bad decisions is... well... a misguided child.

How about you talk about the grown men who doxxed Anita or Zoe or Brianna or any other woman for daring to touch their precious manbaby toys?

What makes them "manbaby toys"? What then, in your opinion, is something suitable for a "Grown Man", since you seem to view men as children?

How about we talk about how you, personally, would react if someone tried to take away things that YOU cared about?

You misunderstood.

Toys aren't just for children. CS Lewis and what not. The attitudes of male gamers are childish however, and I don't consider what are effectively toys (pure leisure/play articles/objects/whatever) to be deserving of such highbrow treatment.

Yeah, gaming could be an artform, but it isn't. Handful of examples of games qualifying as art, but the vast majority falls well into niche garbage.

That said, that holds true for a lot of media, but at least they try to make an effort to do better, at least outside of academia where garbage is still touted as "real art."

And you also don't understand that I game. A lot. It's important to me. And I have to deal with crybaby dudes trying to take that from me on the daily. Every time a dude sexually harasses me or stalks me or continually propositions me while I'm trying to game, I'm pushed away from what is supposed to be my leisure and escape. So there you go. Question answered.

[God-The-RapistV2.0]

HMS Thunder Child

Depends on titles available, gog/steam/etc sales, and anything major I want to get. At least 10 a year though, I'd say.

10 a year. A year?

Are you joking right now? 10 a year? And you think that makes you a viable source of income for Game Publishers? Why the hell would they EVER listen to your input on video game development?

10 ...

I purchase more BOARD games than that a year. I the last 3 months I've probably purchased 50(ish) video games.

How the ******** can you possibly be anything but a jittering monkey when it comes to 'writing' about anything game related.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

HMS Thunder Child

toasega

HMS Thunder Child

This is really weak. Like, I know you think anecdotes prove stuff, but a misguided child making bad decisions is... well... a misguided child.

How about you talk about the grown men who doxxed Anita or Zoe or Brianna or any other woman for daring to touch their precious manbaby toys?

What makes them "manbaby toys"? What then, in your opinion, is something suitable for a "Grown Man", since you seem to view men as children?

How about we talk about how you, personally, would react if someone tried to take away things that YOU cared about?

You misunderstood.

Toys aren't just for children. CS Lewis and what not. The attitudes of male gamers are childish however, and I don't consider what are effectively toys (pure leisure/play articles/objects/whatever) to be deserving of such highbrow treatment.

Yeah, gaming could be an artform, but it isn't. Handful of examples of games qualifying as art, but the vast majority falls well into niche garbage.

That said, that holds true for a lot of media, but at least they try to make an effort to do better, at least outside of academia where garbage is still touted as "real art."

And you also don't understand that I game. A lot. It's important to me. And I have to deal with crybaby dudes trying to take that from me on the daily. Every time a dude sexually harasses me or stalks me or continually propositions me while I'm trying to game, I'm pushed away from what is supposed to be my leisure and escape. So there you go. Question answered.

I disagree with your individual points, but support the theme of your position as I understand it.

I completely disagree that games are not art forms. They are clear expressions of their maker's creative ideas and concepts put forth in a medium. When it comes to defining "Art", a broader definition is more appropriate than a needlessly limiting one.

I do however find the violence towards people who in some gamer's minds have violated "journalistic integrity" so inappropriate. While games are art, they are produced by for-profit companies, so did anyone ever seriously treat articles calling the latest Halo "The game of the year" or the newest hack-and-slash "The best ever made!" when they come from magazines and blogs with a financial interest in the game's success? If they did, that was their mistake. And even if there was some sort of integrity worth protecting here, what exactly is the breech? That the people collectively like a game or support a view? Just as you will get artistic magazines which treat a particular artist or style as the flavor of the month, gaming is of course going to be the same. Just as I would not threaten to kill or rape someone because they like Degas and not Dali, I would not do the same because a gaming mag or blog likes a game, for whatever reasons they may have.