Gamergate reached 1.8 million

[The Question]

That looks like something a 13 year-old would write after binging on Mountain Dew and Skittles. I am wildly entertained. I might use that for my new tagline.

It's a reference.

[YT]9Gtc4DHYvc0[/YT]

 

[Tempest]

It's a reference.

[YT]9Gtc4DHYvc0[/YT]

Ha!

You know, ethically, you should have put a disclaimer on your post to let us know the connection you had with the cartoon. Just sayin'.

 

[The Question]

For serious, though, I find it hilarious that GamerGate is guilty of the exact same kind of overreacting entitled sense of victimhood that they accuse modern feminism of.

Anita Sarkeesian: I think mainstream gaming relies on a lot of sexist tropes, and it would be nice to see more games that avoid them.

GamerGate: STOP OPPRESSING ME!!!!!!!

 

[Shlee]

I love you two. :P

 

[Superwoman Prime]

For serious, though, I find it hilarious that GamerGate is guilty of the exact same kind of overreacting entitled sense of victimhood that they accuse modern feminism of.

Anita Sarkeesian: I think mainstream gaming relies on a lot of sexist tropes, and it would be nice to see more games that avoid them.

If you're just going by the personality you saw on Colbert, maybe.

@ Shlee: Yes, they're cute.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

As a man I feel totally and completely oppressed... Depressed? Repressed. Wait, what am I talking about again?


...um...ETHICS IN VIDEOGAME JOURNALISM

 

[The Question]

If you're just going by the personality you saw on Colbert, maybe.

1: I follow her work. There's really not a difference. What I described is really the sum total of her output in a nutshell.

2: Personality isn't a factor. Regardless of how aggressive or unreasonable you think she is, the fact remains that she's just a critic voicing her opinion. She's not a lobbyist or the head of a well funded activist organization. She wields no power over the industry nor is she attempting to. She's just a person publicly stating what she thinks and making suggestions about what she would like to see. That is not an enemy that needs to be slain. That's just a person wielding a microphone, as people do.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

1: I don't play the Hitman series anymore. If it went away tomorrow, I'd be fine with that. When reviewing that series, she ignored the fact the main character "objectifies" (knocks out or kills and drags to hiding spots) both male and female NPCs. She made it all about the women.

And she wants what she defines as masculine traits dropped from video game MCs altogether. That's a bit more radical than "I want to see more video games drop sexist tropes".

2: "Personality" as in how she presented herself and her beliefs on Colbert.

 

[The Question]

1: I don't play the Hitman series anymore. If it went away tomorrow, I'd be fine with that. When reviewing that series, she ignored the fact the main character "objectifies" (knocks out or kills and drags to hiding spots) both male and female NPCs. She made it all about the women.

You really didn't pay attention to her argument, did you? She never made the claim that the main character only killed women, nor did she say that the problem with the game was that the main character objectifies people by knocking out or killing them and then dragging their bodies into hiding spots.

Her argument was that the game objectifies women and positively depicts sexual violence against women by including scantly clad strippers who have no personalities and who serve no role in the game's story solely as optional targets for the main character's violence. If those NPCs had been taken out of that sequence entirely, it would have had no effect on the game whatsoever, and yet the developers still chose to include a group of sexualized and scantly clad non-characters for the player to kill for fun if he or she feels like it, without any kind of accompanying commentary or in-game penalty for that kind of behavior. That is kind of messed up.

And she wants what she defines as masculine traits dropped from video game MCs altogether. That's a bit more radical than "I want to see more video games drop sexist tropes".

1: It's not radical, because she's not proposing any radical action to achieve that. She's just saying what she would like to see happen and suggesting that developers who watch her videos drop these traits from their games. This is what media critics do. It is reasonable.

2: She doesn't want what she defines as masculine traits dropped from video game main characters. She wants what she defines as negative and harmful masculine traits (a senseless glorification of violence and objectification of women) dropped from video game main characters, or at least for them to be less ubiquitous in gaming (because seriously, this describes most AAA titles).

Be careful, sir…

[YT]cGZkCPo7tC0[/YT]

2: "Personality" as in how she presented herself and her beliefs on Colbert.

Which is still completely irrelevant because it doesn't change the fact that she wields no more power or influence over the industry than any media critic, and therefor viewing her as a threat is ridiculous.

 

[Tempest]

1: I don't play the Hitman series anymore. If it went away tomorrow, I'd be fine with that. When reviewing that series, she ignored the fact the main character "objectifies" (knocks out or kills and drags to hiding spots) both male and female NPCs. She made it all about the women.

And she wants what she defines as masculine traits dropped from video game MCs altogether. That's a bit more radical than "I want to see more video games drop sexist tropes".

2: "Personality" as in how she presented herself and her beliefs on Colbert.

I don't agree with everything they say, but I get the method in the, delivery of the message. Sometimes the best way to get what you want is to be so radical and loud that the things that are the actual goals will be a compromise to the other side.

Asking nicely hasn't worked. Sometimes being a little crazy is the only way to get things done.

 

[Shlee]

Being crazy is what gets the reaction from other people, to draw them out and begin the discussion of "okay, this is crazy, but so is this, so what's our middle ground?"

 

[The Question]

Being crazy is what gets the reaction from other people, to draw them out and begin the discussion of "okay, this is crazy, but so is this, so what's our middle ground?"

I honestly don't think any of the things Sarkeesian says are that crazy.

A disproportionate number of video games only have a male player character.

Fact.

A disproportionate number of video games only include female characters who's role in the story is to be rescued, to be a love interest, or both.

Fact.

A disproportionate number of video games feature overtly sexual female characters with no real personality and who don't really factor into the story at all beyond being eye candy.

Fact.

A disproportionate number of video games depict gendered violence against women (usually the aforementioned super sexy non-characters) without taking time to analyze or criticize gendered violence or to humanize the female victims.

Fact.

A disproportionate number of video games depict female sexuality purely in the context of what men find sexually appealing, without delving into the female character's own sexual agency and what she finds fulfilling about sexual activity.

It's certainly a thing that happens, although how disproportionate it is and which individual games count as examples is of course subject for debate.

We should make more video games that do not do these things.

A perfectly reasonable suggestion that advocates not only for a more inclusive and progressive gaming environment but also for greater variety in video games, an absolute win/win.


Nothing crazy about any of that.

 

[Shlee]

Oh, no, I don't think she says crazy things either. I wasn't taking one side or another, just saying that if someone finds someone's opinions to be radical, it tends to get them thinking about it and looking to find people with whom to have a conversation about "okay, so what do we do about it so we can meet a middle ground?"

If you haven't been able to tell, I'm firmly super feminist, and I agree that a lot of things in video games are skewed, sexist, and need looked at critically and honestly, without people getting defensive.

 

[The Question]

Oh, no, I don't think she says crazy things either. I wasn't taking one side or another, just saying that if someone finds someone's opinions to be radical, it tends to get them thinking about it and looking to find people with whom to have a conversation about "okay, so what do we do about it so we can meet a middle ground?"

If you haven't been able to tell, I'm firmly super feminist, and I agree that a lot of things in video games are skewed, sexist, and need looked at critically and honestly, without people getting defensive.

Well, since we're on the subject, I'd like to ask:

Is Bayonetta sexist? I think it is, but I've seen a lot of women defend it and say that they find it empowering, so I'm wondering what others (who are not The End) think.

 

[Shlee]

I haven't done enough research on it. I know the game was made by a female. And I am in no way saying that a female lead character can't be overly sexual or confident in their sexuality and use that to their advantage, and dress how they want and all that stuff. I think the ultimate goal of feminism is to say "you can be whatever you want to be, do whatever you want to do, so long as you are not actively harming other people in your quest to do what makes you happy". So have a lot of sex or don't, or have some sex, or don't have any sex at all, or wear revealing clothing or wear a habit, or whatever. Just... Make those choices because it's what makes you happy and not because it's an obligation or an expectation put on you by others or by a society that doesn't care about you.

Returning to Bayonetta, I'd have to see some of the game play. From what The End had mentioned about it, "Bayonetta" lets you (how the f*** a video game character 'let's you' do anything is beyond me) move the camera angles around to see her how you like? Among other things? I dunno... I realize it's made by a woman, but that doesn't mean it can't fall under the category of misogynistic. It just screams "cater to the male gaze because they're the ones who will most likely be playing your game" but I could be wrong. Let me do some reading and watching and I will bring you a better answer.

 

[The Question]

I haven't done enough research on it. I know the game was made by a female. And I am in no way saying that a female lead character can't be overly sexual or confident in their sexuality and use that to their advantage, and dress how they want and all that stuff. I think the ultimate goal of feminism is to say "you can be whatever you want to be, do whatever you want to do, so long as you are not actively harming other people in your quest to do what makes you happy". So have a lot of sex or don't, or have some sex, or don't have any sex at all, or wear revealing clothing or wear a habit, or whatever. Just... Make those choices because it's what makes you happy and not because it's an obligation or an expectation put on you by others or by a society that doesn't care about you.

Returning to Bayonetta, I'd have to see some of the game play. From what The End had mentioned about it, "Bayonetta" lets you (how the f*** a video game character 'let's you' do anything is beyond me) move the camera angles around to see her how you like? Among other things? I dunno... I realize it's made by a woman, but that doesn't mean it can't fall under the category of misogynistic. It just screams "cater to the male gaze because they're the ones who will most likely be playing your game" but I could be wrong. Let me do some reading and watching and I will bring you a better answer.

Well, one very important thing that needs to be clarified: Bayonetta was not created by a woman. One of the art designers on the development team was a woman, but Bayonetta was created by Hideki Kamiya, a man.

 

[Shlee]

Ah. I had heard that the artist/creator was a woman, but... That puts a lot of it into perspective... Yeah... Let me do some research. :P

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Ah. I had heard that the artist/creator was a woman, but... That puts a lot of it into perspective... Yeah... Let me do some research. :P

That's what I'm doing.

The thread topics expanded beyond GamerGate controversy to include women and video games in general. I wish the thread title could be changed to something more fitting.

 

[The Question]

While people are doing research, this video is hilarious:

[YT]nsdIHK8O5yo[/YT]

 

[Tempest]

While people are doing research, this video is hilarious:

[YT]nsdIHK8O5yo[/YT]

If you give me $15,000 , I will research on whether those are all the same skull, or if he has a bunch of them scattered through his house.

 

[The End]

Her argument was that the game objectifies women and positively depicts sexual violence

Is it sexual violence because they're strippers?!!

Are you aware that this segment of Anita's received a lot of criticism from sex positive feminists, and from sex workers?

Anita referred to sex workers as 'prostituted women'.

http://gintaxalvissforever.tumblr.c...rkeesian-refers-to-sex-workers-as-prostituted
http://everyday****ephobia.wordpres...erfs-the-westboro-baptist-church-of-feminism/

against women by including scantly clad strippers who have no personalities

None of the NPCs have personalities.

and who serve no role in the game's story solely as optional targets for the main character's violence.

Every single NPC in the game is an optional target.

If those NPCs had been taken out of that sequence entirely, it would have had no effect on the game whatsoever,

You could say that, again, about many of the NPCs.

and yet the developers still chose to include a group of sexualized and scantly clad non-characters for the player to kill for fun if he or she feels like it, without any kind of accompanying commentary or in-game penalty for that kind of behavior. That is kind of messed up.

So I see that you haven't played Hitman: Absolution.

You are penalized when you knock out NPCs and don't hide them. You are penalized when you kill NPCs. The only way to achieve higher ranks, and the highest rank of Silent Assassin, is to ONLY kill the mission target and no one else.

Anita's segment is further questionable, as when she has had no issue previously using other people's playthroughs for footage, she recorded the Hitman segment herself (the segment in which 47 drags the bodies around), when she's claiming the game INVITES you to do this. You can pour through hours upon hours of playthroughs online, as Thunderf00t did, and you'll find no one doing this with the bodies, most people simply sneak past the strippers altogether.

1: It's not radical, because she's not proposing any radical action to achieve that.

Both her and her writer/producer Jonothan McIntosh want to see game review sites refer to theories like the male gaze when reviewing games.

She's just saying what she would like to see happen and suggesting that developers who watch her videos drop these traits from their games. This is what media critics do. It is reasonable.

She is trying to shame the industry and shame the community into compliance. She links real life tragedies to her own commentary, with NO evidence. That is not reasonable.



Anyway,


Happy to report that GamerGate has made #OpSKYNET trend. #OpSKYNET is a new Op in which people of GamerGate can follow whoever tweets the tag, increasing the voices that people listen to, so people don't have to rely on the big voices, and further increasing the sense of community.

I think anti-GamerGate continues to completely misunderstand GamerGate. GG's success, I think, is due in part to the Streisand effect, and the sense of community and true diversity.

 

[The End]

She received torrents of harassment from people calling her a **** and threatening to rape and murder her. She has been stalked repeatedly since this whole thing started. Someone doing something wrong does not then justify other people doing wrong things to that person.

Inexcusable behavior. As it is also, when the women of GamerGate are doxxed and threatened.

SJW is a term and a category that GamerGate invented. There is not a homogenous group of people who self identify as SJWs. Saying that Dunham's defenders are "SJWs" is meaningless, as GamerGate are the ones who decide who is and who is not an "SJW."

lol, what?

The term SJW has existed LONG before GamerGate. GamerGate has existed for months; the term SJW has existed for YEARS. There's a definition of the term on Urban Dictionary that dates to 2011. I've personally been aware of the term for years. It's not easy to find the origins of the term.

None of these people have the influence that you say they do. None of them are dictating the course of gaming. None of them have had any appreciable impact on gaming. None of them have any kind of authority for any kind of "thought policing." They're just people with microphones publicly sharing their opinions. There is no evidence of any kind that they wield any special influence over the community or the industry.

One of them is a judge for IGF.
Two of them are/were (respectively) writers for multi-million dollar publications.




It's easy to demonstrate, objectively, that ArsTechnica is either lying or misinformed about #Notyourshield. You can find the screenshots on 4chan that explicitely say NOT to use the hashtag if you're a cis white male. The tag was first used by a black guy on twitter.

I posted all of that info way earlier in the thread.

WHO are these sock puppets?!


LOTS of real women and people of colour use the hashtag. You can find their photos and their videos.

Again; I have to emphasize the racism and sexism of 1. Ignoring that women and minorities whom disagree with you exist. 2. Insisting that their voices don't matter.

It is absolutely disgusting and it completely destroys any moral superiority it is that you think you have.

Is this person a sock puppet?

[YT]BQseps564Cg[/YT]

Or this person?

[YT]IdUkCI3Wk6I[/YT]

This?

[YT]MMqJ1NpwU9I[/YT]

Or these women?

[YT]cjdiC2ednok[/YT]

Or these women?

https://***********/_CrystalRaine
https://***********/setfiresfeeljoy
https://***********/DigiFaeSarah
https://***********/_HouseOftheDead
https://***********/QueenyMartha
https://***********/CandaceMcCarty
https://***********/EllieBaker92
https://***********/vivicool995
https://***********/AmandaShebang
https://***********/mjanetmars
https://***********/GMShivers
https://***********/QuinVasNormandy
https://***********/lizzyf620
https://***********/IvyTwisted
https://***********/smilexslime

You're kinda contradicting yourself Question, earlier you said that you acknowledge that women are in the movement, now you're repeating propaganda that #Notyourshield and #GamerGate are sockpuppets. This is a demonstrably false, deeply flawed, sexist talking point. Have you forgotten the streams of photos of women and minorities I've posted using GamerGate and Notyourshield? Have you forgotten the examples, of people absolutely humiliating themselves when they accuse specific women and people of colour of being sock puppets?

Disgusting.

Think critically. Ask yourself why ArsTechnica would say that. Could it be because they were part of what happened on August 28th, when a number of publications posted articles to the effect of 'gamers are dead'? Could it also be because they're implicated in the GameJournoPros collusion? You couldn't ask for a more biased source. They don't actually post evidence of sockpuppetry. They just claim it. And you, ignorant of the sexist and racist implications and the many examples of real people using the tag, swallow it up.

THAT'S why you don't understand GamerGate. Believe it or don't believe it, its a diverse community. As long as you can't or won't accept that, you'll never understand GamerGate and so you'll never be able to stop it.

I will spell it out in black and white.

YOU ARE ALIENATING THE WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOUR OF GAMERGATE WHEN YOU SAY THEY ARE SOCK PUPPETS

Why would an anti use the talking point of sockpuppetry?

It is woefully misguided, to use that ArsTechnica article as a source, its months out of date in terms of its talking points.

We are now 3, nearly 4 months into GamerGate. It continues to be tweeted into the tens of thousands every single day. There is no sign of it stopping. To attribute the movement to 4chan, which gamergate's been banned from for months, or to sock puppets - is misguided.

Go to twitter. Type in #GamerGate, or #Notyourshield, or #OpSKYNET.

Pick a few accounts that use the hashtag.

Pick, say, 10. Read their timelines. Do they seem like people sent by 4chan? When you read that ArsTechnica article, did it ever occur to you to actually go to the source (gamergate on any online social media where they are active) and think, 'now, when they say they're set up by 4chan and are sock puppets, does this seem accurate?' You didn't ask yourself that because you are in an echo chamber.

I mean for crying out loud, you want GamerGate to stop but you can't even acknowledge that they're real people.

 

[The End]

I haven't done enough research on it. I know the game was made by a female. And I am in no way saying that a female lead character can't be overly sexual or confident in their sexuality and use that to their advantage, and dress how they want and all that stuff. I think the ultimate goal of feminism is to say "you can be whatever you want to be, do whatever you want to do, so long as you are not actively harming other people in your quest to do what makes you happy". So have a lot of sex or don't, or have some sex, or don't have any sex at all, or wear revealing clothing or wear a habit, or whatever. Just... Make those choices because it's what makes you happy and not because it's an obligation or an expectation put on you by others or by a society that doesn't care about you.

Returning to Bayonetta, I'd have to see some of the game play. From what The End had mentioned about it, "Bayonetta" lets you (how the f*** a video game character 'let's you' do anything is beyond me) move the camera angles around to see her how you like? Among other things? I dunno... I realize it's made by a woman, but that doesn't mean it can't fall under the category of misogynistic. It just screams "cater to the male gaze because they're the ones who will most likely be playing your game" but I could be wrong. Let me do some reading and watching and I will bring you a better answer.

One thing I'd suggest is, search for Bayonetta cosplay.

How many men can you spot?

I think the talking point that she is designed FOR men falls apart when you look at the women that enjoy the character (and also what they write about the character).

 

[The Question]

Inexcusable behavior. As it is also, when the women of GamerGate are doxxed and threatened.

Okay. That still doesn't hurt my point at all.

lol, what?

The term SJW has existed LONG before GamerGate. GamerGate has existed for months; the term SJW has existed for YEARS. There's a definition of the term on Urban Dictionary that dates to 2011. I've personally been aware of the term for years. It's not easy to find the origins of the term.

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

One of them is a judge for IGF.
Two of them are/were (respectively) writers for multi-million dollar publications.

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.

It's easy to demonstrate, objectively, that ArsTechnica is either lying or misinformed about #Notyourshield. You can find the screenshots on 4chan that explicitely say NOT to use the hashtag if you're a cis white male. The tag was first used by a black guy on twitter.

I posted all of that info way earlier in the thread.

WHO are these sock puppets?!


LOTS of real women and people of colour use the hashtag. You can find their photos and their videos.

Again; I have to emphasize the racism and sexism of 1. Ignoring that women and minorities whom disagree with you exist. 2. Insisting that their voices don't matter.

It is absolutely disgusting and it completely destroys any moral superiority it is that you think you have.

Is this person a sock puppet?

[YT]BQseps564Cg[/YT]

Or this person?

[YT]IdUkCI3Wk6I[/YT]

This?

[YT]MMqJ1NpwU9I[/YT]

Or these women?

[YT]cjdiC2ednok[/YT]

Or these women?

https://***********/_CrystalRaine
https://***********/setfiresfeeljoy
https://***********/DigiFaeSarah
https://***********/_HouseOftheDead
https://***********/QueenyMartha
https://***********/CandaceMcCarty
https://***********/EllieBaker92
https://***********/vivicool995
https://***********/AmandaShebang
https://***********/mjanetmars
https://***********/GMShivers
https://***********/QuinVasNormandy
https://***********/lizzyf620
https://***********/IvyTwisted
https://***********/smilexslime

You're kinda contradicting yourself Question, earlier you said that you acknowledge that women are in the movement, now you're repeating propaganda that #Notyourshield and #GamerGate are sockpuppets. This is a demonstrably false, deeply flawed, sexist talking point. Have you forgotten the streams of photos of women and minorities I've posted using GamerGate and Notyourshield? Have you forgotten the examples, of people absolutely humiliating themselves when they accuse specific women and people of colour of being sock puppets?

Disgusting.

Think critically. Ask yourself why ArsTechnica would say that. Could it be because they were part of what happened on August 28th, when a number of publications posted articles to the effect of 'gamers are dead'? Could it also be because they're implicated in the GameJournoPros collusion? You couldn't ask for a more biased source. They don't actually post evidence of sockpuppetry. They just claim it. And you, ignorant of the sexist and racist implications and the many examples of real people using the tag, swallow it up.

THAT'S why you don't understand GamerGate. Believe it or don't believe it, its a diverse community. As long as you can't or won't accept that, you'll never understand GamerGate and so you'll never be able to stop it.

I will spell it out in black and white.

YOU ARE ALIENATING THE WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOUR OF GAMERGATE WHEN YOU SAY THEY ARE SOCK PUPPETS

Why would an anti use the talking point of sockpuppetry?

It is woefully misguided, to use that ArsTechnica article as a source, its months out of date in terms of its talking points.

We are now 3, nearly 4 months into GamerGate. It continues to be tweeted into the tens of thousands every single day. There is no sign of it stopping. To attribute the movement to 4chan, which gamergate's been banned from for months, or to sock puppets - is misguided.

Go to twitter. Type in #GamerGate, or #Notyourshield, or #OpSKYNET.

Pick a few accounts that use the hashtag.

Pick, say, 10. Read their timelines. Do they seem like people sent by 4chan? When you read that ArsTechnica article, did it ever occur to you to actually go to the source (gamergate on any online social media where they are active) and think, 'now, when they say they're set up by 4chan and are sock puppets, does this seem accurate?' You didn't ask yourself that because you are in an echo chamber.

I mean for crying out loud, you want GamerGate to stop but you can't even acknowledge that they're real people.

Oh Jesus ****ing Christ…


Okay, so let me just cut through all of this ********:

earlier you said that you acknowledge that women are in the movement, now you're repeating propaganda that #Notyourshield and #GamerGate are sock puppets.

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. And no point did I say that everyone using the hashtag was a sock puppet, nor did the article I posted.

But of course, instead of arguing against the point I actually made, you would rather pick something I mentioned in passing and twist it ins to something you can build an argument against that has very little to do with my point.

For someone who keeps complaining about (and completely misunderstanding) people using the genetic fallacy, you're awfully guilty of…

[YT]cGZkCPo7tC0[/YT]

 

[The Question]

Anyway, here's some really good arguments from a very reasonable person:

[YT]8N-tkrxAEWw[/YT]

[YT]AB66tcIqDiE[/YT]

[YT]_D4l0izPVM0[/YT]