Gamergate reached 1.8 million

[Superwoman Prime]

I went back to rewatch Anita Sarkeesian's 'Damsel in Distress' and 'Women as Background Decoration' videos.

The three DID vids were gold... the third one maybe less so.

(Part 1)

All that is really required to fulfill the DID trope is for a female character to be reduced to a state of helplessness from which she requires rescuing by a typically male hero, for the benefit of his story arc.

Anita later uses the video game "Beyond Good & Evil" as a forgivable example of a female protagonist needing saved. Jade is trapped in a tough spot. Her male friend sets her free, and she goes right back to fighting afterward.

Remember, the DID plot device is something that happens to a female character, and not necessarily something a character is from start to finish. Once in a while she might be given the opportunity to have a slightly more active role in facilitating the hero's quest, typically by opening doors, giving hints, power-ups, and other helpful items.

You could almost use this line with GTA footage. >_>

(Part 2)

Research consistently shows that people of all genders tend to bind the myth that women are the ones to blame for the violence that men perpetrate against them.

This might have been true in the 40's or 50's. I don't know that the modern western world at large automatically attributes domestic violence to women misbehaving. I wish she had shown some of the research on the screen.

Even then... every documentary on Superman mentions his love of beating wife-beaters back in the Golden Age, and that character was more popular than Batman in those days.

Moving on. Anita talks about male protagonists going on revenge quests. Usually the villain victimizes the MC's wife or daughter, ranging from kidnapping to cold-blooded murder. I am personally sick of seeing this trope everywhere.

If we dig a little deeper into the subtext, I'd argue that the true source of the pain stems from feelings of weakness and/or guilt over his failure to perform his socially-prescribed patriarchal duty to protect his women and children.

Consequently, violent revenge-based narratives, repeated ad nauseum can also be harmful to men, because they help to further limit the possible responses men are allowed to have when faced with death or tragedy. This is unfortunate, because interactive media has the potential to be brilliant for people of all genders to explore difficult or painful subjects.

(Part 3)

She covers the potential harm of 'ironic sexism'. That is, casting sexist tropes in a humorous light without actually trying to subvert them.

Also, there are games where playing as a female is exclusively a matter of appearance. The "female" part is window dressing, and nothing more.

At the thirteen minute mark, she says the DID trope is wrong even if the protagonist is female. At least... I think that's what she was getting at. Is it wrong even if the main female's story arc is furthered by saving the DID? Well, there's still a female being needlessly depowered for an extended period of time, so I'd guess "yes".

 

[Superwoman Prime]

And now.... 'Women as Background Decoration'.

Non-playable sex objects can usually be found on the sidelines of role-playing or open world-style games, populating the many virtual strip clubs, red light districts, or brothel locations that have become almost obligatory in so-called "mature" titles. Such characters are programmed with crude, looping, sexualized behavior or dialogue as a way of adding an extra layer of "seedy" flavor to game universes.

Sexual Objectification is the practice of treating or representing a human being as a thing or mere instrument to be used for another's sexual purposes. Sexually objectified women are valued primarily for their bodies, or body parts, which are presented as existing for the pleasure and gratification of others.

Mmkay.

Incidentally, this trope exists in game that may allow players to pick a female avatar. But the presence of a woman inhabiting the role of protagonist, even if well developed, doesn't do anything to negate the fact that NPSO are still specifically crafted to pander to a presumed heterosexual male ego.

A clip plays from Mass Effect 2. In the Omega club Afterlife, Shepard sits and watches an asari provocatively dance on a tabletop. Passively watches.

Who cares?

Interactive media has the potential to be the perfect medium to genuinely explore sex and sexuality. But that's not what's happening here. These interactions set up a transactional relationship in which women are reduced to a base sexual function. It frames female sexuality as something that belongs others, rather than as something women enjoy for themselves.

What about superficial and consensual flirting? Do a man and woman absolutely have to build a deeper emotional relationship before that becomes acceptable?

Now. The sexual sadism found in Sleeping Dogs, Dishonored, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Grand Theft Auto IV, Saints Row: The Third, Red Dead Redemption, The Godfather II, Hitman: Absolution, Fallout: New Vegas, Just Cause 2... is morally reprehensible. Video games don't need to be as open-ended as real life. Companies and developers determine possible action in a game. There were people who actually went out of their way to include rewarded sexual sadism as possible choices. There are worse people who went out of their way to include that, while making it mandatory for game story progression. That is disturbing.

However... what The End said should also be taken into account. If a tiny minority of players even choose those actions, it says more about the companies and/or game developers than it would the players: there are bad apples there, or people confused as to what players want.

 

[Tempest]

-sigh- Here we go again....

@The End (once again)

The waters have gotten a little muddy.

'Anti-gamergaters' aren't against journalistic integrity.

The problem is that for all your complaining about 'journalism' and 'integrity' is that all your complaints are lodged against the woman who slept with a journalist.

You are not complaining about the male journalist. You don't even mention him! You don't talk about his failings in journalism. You don't talk about how to keep gaming journalism free of bias.

What you do talk about is how horrible Quinn is. You talk about how her game is stupid. You talk about how she slept around. You talk about how you don't like her feminist behavior. Or how so many of her supporters are feminist. You talk about how you don't like SJW. You talk about women of color supporting gamergate. You talk plenty about how mean SJWs are to men.

But you don't talk about the men involved in this mess

This has been true of the gamergate movement since the start.

And that is why you get the people saying that gamergate is sexist. Blaming the woman, and ignoring the sins of the man, is a typical pattern of behavior that is based on sexist thinking.

And one other thing. Yes, violence against prostitutes in video games is problematic. Prostitutes are among the most vulnerable, with many (not all, of course) of them coming from broken or abusive homes, or working in prostitution because they were sold into that life when they were very young. Degradation of prostitutes is a big problem; they are considered garbage or expendable. The idea of continuing to think of them and treat them as such is not something I would want to proudly stand behind.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

You know, I don't think there's anything wrong with an open dialogue on these issues. I think when you go on a point by point argument, you could find alot of things that are probably unfair in critiques against things in comics, movies, or games.

For me, I think setting matters and gives context. In a setting like The Witcher, which much like Game of Thrones is set in a fantasy setting that's inspired by World History, having a male dominated society where women are in a far different place than where our current society has reached...I think it's unfair to expect a story in that setting to not cover that aspect at all. It's insane not to.

But, there are things that can still be learned. The damsel in distress trope is common in games, which why I thought it was impressively subversive in The Witcher 2 when during a sidequest, you had the option to side with a female elf that was being blamed by human guards. Damn near every player I've seen mention it, all sided with her. I did, too. And really for no real reason other than how we've been conditioned to expect a female npc is probably a damsel...and people in power are probably abusing their power. But, it turned out the guards were right, she was a rebel, and wound up leading you and the guards to a trap that got them all killed and you facing down a squad of rebels. In a case like that, I think that was a smart way that the developer, CDProjekt Red, used the trope to pull one over on us, the gamer. So, I think if game developers open themselves up to thinking about how to address some storytelling shorthand, shortcuts, or tropes that ultimately accumilate when you have a product that needs to be finished by a deadline with quests needing to fill up that world...you can find some interesting solutions that can be a good response.

I do think, that sometimes some critiques can be unfair. Hideo Kojima, for example, took a ton of heat over the character design of Quiet in the upcoming (it hasn't even been released yet) MGS5. I think there was a tinge of Western elitism in calling a 51 year Japanese developer some kind of "monster" or "disgusting". Anyone who looks at Quiet, and doesn't even take into account the context where it's coming from...that seemed unfair.

With all that being said, gamergate seems to have been about one thing, became another, and then wound up being something else entirely. It's really hard to take it as an actual dialogue with how the extremist elements have seemingly hijacked it, and made it theirs. Which is the real problem, I think.

 

[Tempest]

I do think, that sometimes some critiques can be unfair. Hideo Kojima, for example, took a ton of heat over the character design of Quiet in the upcoming (it hasn't even been released yet) MGS5. I think there was a tinge of Western elitism in calling a 51 year Japanese developer some kind of "monster" or "disgusting". Anyone who looks at Quiet, and doesn't even take into account the context where it's coming from...that seemed unfair.

Well, maybe calling him a monster is excessive. But the design? Um...really? She's a torture victim, she's handicapped, and the best thing they could do with her was give her big breasts and a tiiiiiiiiny bikini top? I realize that "he has his reasons" (she had to use her shirt to stop someone from bleeding out, and no one had an extra t-shirt?), but unless all the men start trotting around shirtless and wearing tight pants to show off their rippling leg muscles, then there is no real 'reason' for her outfit.

Come on. I love the backtracking. "I didn't mean erotic. I just meant sexy. Like guns are sexy. And cars are sexy".

Uh-huh.

I believe him.

 

[Victarion]

Why is journalistic integrity in videogame journalism considered an important topic?

 

[Tempest]

Why is journalistic integrity in videogame journalism considered an important topic?

Because a developer slept with a journalist who, one time before, wrote a positive sentence about her game. After they slept together, the journalist never disclosed that they were dating.

Mind you, the journalist never wrote an actual review of the game. Just one sentence that was a positive statement about the game, and it was written months before a relationship with the developer came to be.

 

[Victarion]

We're only talking about videogames, though. Stepping back, the source of the outrage seems, well, outrageous.

 

[Tempest]

We're only talking about videogames, though. Stepping back, the source of the outrage seems, well, outrageous.

Well, I do believe that there should be integrity in all journalism.

The outrage is a bit much. Especially since this all came to be because the developer's ex-boyfriend was the one who started it. Zoe Quinn cheated on her boyfriend (I think?), and he was naturally upset about it. So he posted a blog listing her sexual activities, and the names of the people she'd been with.

Almost immediately after the post went up, she received death threats, and threats of rape. Her personal information was hacked. It was then claimed that she lied about all that.

Oh, and gamergate was born from the ashes of the threats, as an attempt to explain that the outrage was because of journalistic integrity. And it's totally not about belittling a woman and her sexual life. And it's all the SJW's fault anyway.

 

[The End]

You don't want to talk about the men...

Half my posts or more talk about Jonathan McIntosh

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

seriously this video summed up the whole thing

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob

TWO AND A HALF ****ING YEARS AGO

why are idiots(people who attack her)still trying to attack this as something more than it is

Edited: just incase someone gets offended by general terms

 

[The End]

Giving Voice to the Voiceless: The #NotYourShield Project

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzwGIHUCtjU

[YT]tzwGIHUCtjU[/YT]

Women and minorities on screen speaking. A handful of quotes from the video.

Angela Night: I support GamerGate, I write a blog about feminism and video games, I don't need anybody to speak for me. I am #notyourshield, and I am not a sock.

Julie: My name is Julie and I support GamerGate because I support journalistic integrity. For supporting GamerGate I have been called names, harassed, and doxxed.

Liz: My name is Liz. I am a confirmed pro-gamergate sockpuppet account created by 4chan. And as a result I have received threats of death, violence, and doxxing. And I am still #notyourshield.

Katie: My name is Katie and I stand with GamerGate because it is ridiculous to blame an entire group of people for the actions of a few bad eggs.

@OMNE503: I'm a minority gamer and I support GamerGate because I am tired of these journalists and activists pretending I don't exist because I don't support their agendas or their narratives, and I am not their shield.

Karl: I have been a gamer for most of my life. I've had enough from so called game journalists call us misogynists for disagreeing with them. This is why I support GamerGate.

@navisavvygamer: I'm pro-gamergate and a supporter of hashtag notyourshield. I have been accused of being a sockpuppet account on multiple occasions and I am tired of people deciding what I should think because I am a woman. I can make decisions on my own, thankyou.


*Bolded for the notice of people that think they can write off notyourshield as sockpuppets sent by 4chan.

 

[The End]

seriously this video summed up the whole thing

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/5950-Tropes-vs-MovieBob

TWO AND A HALF ****ING YEARS AGO

why are idiots still trying to attack this as something more than it is

Tropes vs Women is an ongoing series.

 

[The End]

Okay. That doesn't change the fact that saying "most of her defenders are SJWs" is completely meaningless.

If you can arbitrarily declare that, I can arbitrarily declare that writing off gamergate as misogynists is completely meaningless. See how that works?

That's not really that much influence. And people who are judges for contests and people who write for multi-million dollar publications are allowed to have political opinions.

Such spin. Much denial.

You believe anonymous trolls represent and influence gamergate, a movement in the tens of thousands. But you don't believe that judges on game festivals or employees of game press publications, are influential in gaming or to their readers. How much cognitive dissonance does it cause to hold both these ideas in your brain.

No I'm not. I mentioned in passing that it had been proven that some of the accounts spamming the hashtag were sock puppets while in the process of making the much larger point of illustrating the disingenuous origins of the hashtag and how screen caps prove that it and GamerGate in general started of purely as a cynical PR ploy.

1. Who are these confirmed sock puppet accounts sent by 4chan? You are reading and taking on face value claims about notyourshield and gamergate.
2. Who cares if Alec Baldwin was the first person to use #GamerGate in a tweet? Over 2 million tweets and nearly 4 months later, how is that relevant, how does that deal with the actual supporters who number in the tens of thousands and their positions?
3. By repeating the talking point that #notyourshield was primarily influenced by sock puppet accounts (no evidence for this), they're giving license to anti-gamergate folk to suspect that any woman or minority that supports gamergate is fake; and we have SEEN this in practice on multiple occasions.

It's disgusting. It's a silencing tactic. YOU are repeating this for them. There is no strawman about that.

There are more than enough genuine people that use these hashtags to make these talking points absolutely worthless. The sockpuppet talking point does nothing other than further alienate real women and minorities. You do yourself a disservice by repeating it. The sockpuppet talking point is a no-win for you. How do you not understand this.

 

[The End]

For the record: I have been insulted on multiple occasions in this thread.

Recent examples.

*checks to see if 'The End' is still totally insane.



Yep, still is.

And the_ultimate_evil called me and Prime idiots.


I have no interest in reporting anyone's posts. I am happy to let negative and hateful rhetoric remain so that people can see it. I am more than capable of supporting my own positions.

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

Tropes vs Women is an ongoing series.

So is the big picture, and archer, the Simpsons, super hero beat down the antiques roadshow that's not the point. The point was that this could have been all nipped in the bud right at the start of the majority of responses were not the expected caveman " ohh woman say something is disagree with get the clubs"

Hell even in the video the host says he will disagree with her but guess what he and a lot of other watched the videos disagreed and went about they're lives they didn't demand she and others like her be raped, shot, killed stabbed and made an example. Which is what's still going on two and half years later.

For the record: I have been insulted on multiple occasions in this thread.

Recent examples.



And the_ultimate_evil called me and Prime idiots.


I have no interest in reporting anyone's posts. I am happy to let negative and hateful rhetoric remain so that people can see it. I am more than capable of supporting my own positions.

I never called you or prime an idiot guess what if I did the post would read
" users name is a fkn idiot"


Do not try and put words in my mouth. I used a general term for the morons who go overboard like the video was discussing I've yet to see that happen here yet

 

[The End]

Oh right, its a coincidence that Prime was talking about women vs tropes, and that you'd then say that.

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

Oh right, its a coincidence that Prime was talking about women vs tropes, and that you'd then say that.

Actually yes is was, I posted that from the quick reply from about 3 pages back while trying to catch up, I remember seeing the ep and thought it would be something for this thread

If prime feels that I have insulted him we can discuss it like adults, but after reading his posts he may disagree with some of the points made in the series, which I do as well but I never seen him condone violence or make threats against this host so I don't see him in the same category that My comments and the videos subject were aimed at. I never mentioned or quoted either of you personally like I said if I wanted to I would have there is no need for you to get involved as it had nothing to do with you I mean after all #yournothisshield

For someone who is constantly saying people need to look at the indivuals and separate the true gamer gate fans and the morons who attack you don't seem to be able to do that with your own side of the argument if you immediately jump on the defensive like that

 

[Tempest]

You don't want to talk about the men...

Half my posts or more talk about Jonathan McIntosh

Is he a journalist that Zoe slept with? No? Then you aren't talking about the person you need to be talking about. Nathan Grayson. That's the guy you should be talking about if you are so concerned about ethics in journalism.

Where are all your posts about him? Where are all your posts actually talking about the changes you want made in journalism? Or in judging?

It's terrible that some people were falsely vilified. It's not nice. Both sides need to stop that kind of nonsense. Anyone, and I mean anyone, who hacks and disperses personal information should get into trouble. Anyone who threatens another person should face prosecution. I don't care what 'side' anyone is on.

But, please.

Until you started digging into things, you were very fast to dismiss the harassment of people who aren't part of gamergate. You did everything you could to justify it, defend it, prove how it was all fake, or lies, or just over-reaction.

So pardon me when I find your sudden interest and anger over doxxing and harassment to be insubstantial. Maybe you really care, but I think this is another attempt by you to dismiss the harassment non-gamergaters have faced.

Not all gamergaters attacked Zoe and her supporters, and not all anti-gaters are attacking gamergate supporters.

So let's focus on the actual issue at hand, which is the integrity of journalism. Do you know anything about the journalist? You know, the person who was the one to allegedly violated his ethics?

 

[Spider-Who?]

So let's focus on the actual issue at hand, which is the integrity of journalism.

This is a joke, right? This is how this thread has been from the beginning:


The End: Let's talk about the problem with ethics in gaming journalism!

SHH: You're an idiot. Gamergate is just a front misogyny. You should be talking about that.

The End: Those are just trolls and a large portion of gamergate supporters that are women; misogyny is wrong; gamergate supporters are trying to clear that up.

SHH: You're an idiot. Gamergate is just neckbeards attacking women.

The End: Yes, there are terrible people doing terrible things, but real gamergate supporters are pro-women and want to talk about the problems in journalism.

SHH: No, they all hate women.

The End: That's not true! Look, here's proof.

SHH: Why aren't you talking about journalism?



You people need to make up your damn minds.

(FTR - I don't give two ****s about "gamergate", but this thread is full of pretentious blowhards)

 

[Tempest]

This is a joke, right? This is how this thread has been from the beginning:


The End: Let's talk about the problem with ethics in gaming journalism!

SHH: You're an idiot. Gamergate is just a front misogyny. You should be talking about that.

The End: Those are just trolls and a large portion of gamergate supporters that are women; misogyny is wrong; gamergate supporters are trying to clear that up.

SHH: You're an idiot. Gamergate is just neckbeards attacking women.

The End: Yes, there are terrible people doing terrible things, but real gamergate supporters are pro-women and want to talk about the problems in journalism.

SHH: No, they all hate women.

The End: That's not true! Look, here's proof.

SHH: Why aren't you talking about journalism?



You people need to make up your damn minds.

(FTR - I don't give two ****s about "gamergate", but this thread is full of pretentious blowhards)

Oh yes, that sounds reasonable. Except that when people pointed out misogyny, he's denied it, excused it, and wanted nothing more than to trash 'SJWs', feminists, and so on.

Not to mention that when he's been repeatedly corrected about some of the things he's passed along, he denies it or ignores it.

I haven't seen a post yet that actually talks about the journalist who was allegedly in the wrong. I've only seen him complain about SJWs, Zoe, and now he's finally talking about women and other minorities who are involved in gamergate. But notice he only brought them up when he ran out of ways to complain about SJWs.

I have no problems discussing journalism integrity. But that isn't what happened.

And if you think I'm judging him, fine. I've seen his other posts in other threads that confirm my opinion that he's misguided in his view of women, and what misogyny actually is, and how it damaging it can be.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Oh yes, that sounds reasonable. Except that when people pointed out misogyny, he's denied it, excused it, and wanted nothing more than to trash 'SJWs', feminists, and so on.

Not to mention that when he's been repeatedly corrected about some of the things he's passed along, he denies it or ignores it.

I haven't seen a post yet that actually talks about the journalist who was allegedly in the wrong. I've only seen him complain about SJWs, Zoe, and now he's finally talking about women and other minorities who are involved in gamergate. But notice he only brought them up when he ran out of ways to complain about SJWs.

I have no problems discussing journalism integrity. But that isn't what happened.

And if you think I'm judging him, fine. I've seen his other posts in other threads that confirm my opinion that he's misguided in his view of women, and what misogyny actually is, and how it damaging it can be.

I wasn't taking a stance for or against anyone's opinions on gamergate, only pointing out how people are choosing to "discuss" it; and I stand by my (admittedly sarcastic) summary. I have seen VERY little attempts from the anti-gamergate crowd to actually discuss anything other than repeating their focus on HOW it started and insulting the pro-crowd for defending where gamergate is now (which may or may not be valid). In short, the anti crowd has been forcing the pro crowd away from their intended discussion points by making them defend against the heinous actions of a few.

And now, we've come full circle by the anti crowd damning the pro crowd for NOT talking about their "issue" with journalism. It's a joke. The pro crowd is a joke for thinking ethics in GAMING journalism is somehow this incendiary moment of our time (while steadfastly refusing to acknowledge the far more important lack of ethics in REAL journalism); and the anti crowd is a joke for pretending to be SJW as a way to unleash their own hypocritical brand of trash talk.

Each side is parading around thinking they're warriors against some social villainy, and they all fail to realize they've turned the whole thing is a giant ****ing joke.

 

[The Question]

I wasn't taking a stance for or against anyone's opinions on gamergate, only pointing out how people are choosing to "discuss" it; and I stand by my (admittedly sarcastic) summary. I have seen VERY little attempts from the anti-gamergate crowd to actually discuss anything other than repeating their focus on HOW it started and insulting the pro-crowd for defending where gamergate is now (which may or may not be valid). In short, the anti crowd has been forcing the pro crowd away from their intended discussion points by making them defend against the heinous actions of a few.

And now, we've come full circle by the anti crowd damning the pro crowd for NOT talking about their "issue" with journalism. It's a joke. The pro crowd is a joke for thinking ethics in GAMING journalism is somehow this incendiary moment of our time (while steadfastly refusing to acknowledge the far more important lack of ethics in REAL journalism); and the anti crowd is a joke for pretending to be SJW as a way to unleash their own hypocritical brand of trash talk.

Each side is parading around thinking they're warriors against some social villainy, and they all fail to realize they've turned the whole thing is a giant ****ing joke.

I don't see how that's the case. The anti-gamergate side isn't debating gaming journalism because they either agree that gaming journalism is messed up or they have no opinion. They're problem is people using that as an excuse for ****** behavior.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I don't see how that's the case. The anti-gamergate side isn't debating gaming journalism because they either agree that gaming journalism is messed up or they have no opinion. They're problem is people using that as an excuse for ****** behavior.

Read this thread again. The major stance of the anti crowd has been forcing the topic to be about the trolls and thereby 1) claiming that the journalism side is null and void due to the troll origins; and 2) forcing the pro side to focus on arguing against that notion. The other major reaction from the anti crowd is to simply ignore and posts the to contrary and sling insults.

 

[The Question]

Read this thread again. The major stance of the anti crowd has been forcing the topic to be about the trolls and thereby 1) claiming that the journalism side is null and void due to the troll origins; and 2) forcing the pro side to focus on arguing against that notion. The other major reaction from the anti crowd is to simply ignore and posts the to contrary and sling insults.

Which is exactly what I said.


The people who oppose GamerGate are not arguing about the issue of journalistic integrity because that has nothing to do with what they don't like about GamerGate. I'm not sure what the problem with that is, in of itself. The people who oppose GamerGate are not defending video game journalism. That's not what their dog in this fight is.