You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
I follow a lot of commentators and discussion videos on Youtube, such as persons like Sargon of Akkad, Vee, Randomercam, etc. Essentially the primary point of Gamergate is just ethics in journalism, which began rather strongly in opposition to the antagonist and unethical behaviors of the so-called gaming journalists publishing articles claiming "gamers are dead".
But it's not so simple. What emerging behaviors you began to see is that people accused of this unethical behavior, such as sexual relationships and other nepotism without disclosure, was a reactionary claim that Gamergate was sexist. Then you get all this incredibly targeted rhetoric with people like Zoe Quinn and 3rd wave feminists coming out of the woodwork, and while nobody from Gamergate gets to talk to the media, these women who are not even competent members of gaming development communities would get on shows like The Colbert Report (Clarifying: Anita Sarkeesian appeared on this show, not Zoe Quinn).
So while gamergate is focused on ethics in games journalism, the people they caught constructed this incredible straw-man of sexism in the gaming industry instead. So you have people, like Zoe Quinn Anita Sarkeesian*, who get on shows like The Colbert Report who are blatantly lying not only about sexism in the industry but also supposed harassment from Gamergate to prove their goal is sexism and not ethics.
This got so bad that more popular and monetarily free persons in that community literally hired people to go through an analyze the claimed sources of harassment and - surprise - the majority of claimed harassment came from new troll accounts on things like Twitter. What's more, they concluded little to no real harassment was taking place. This gives you an idea of, to me, how incredibly low these people will stoop to drag the name of gamers through the mud for political and monetary advantages. That same woman, Zoe Quinn (and Anita, moreso Anita AFAIK), has made millions of dollars selling the rhetoric that gamers are sexist and games need to have a more "feminist" agenda.
If you're uncertain of any of this, the information is out there. For every single video depicting gamers as sexist, or studies depicting gamers as sexist, there are very detailed and objective videos pointing out why it's bullshit. Of course, again, it was the women who got on the media which heard nothing from Gamergate. Feminism, as an agenda, is incredibly lucrative if you can sell the straw man that "gamers are sexist", as persons like Zoe Quinn have done.
We're entering an uncomfortable scenario where disagreeing with women will get them screaming sexism and, frighteningly, it seems to work. These people make millions off donations every time they claim harassment, with no critical oversight from the media.
I usually try to stay away from the whole drama and it's the first time I hear their argument and....It's infuriating ! what is wrong with these women? I'm a woman that games and gamed all my life, I've never been triggered by some fictive character, I've never been harassed. I feel like these women are the "girl gamer" we've all heard of before and they've always been annoying.
I don't know enough about Zoe Quinn to have a clear opinion of her or her intentions, but I can speak about Anita Sarkeesian.
Anita has not said gamers are sexists (as far as I know). She said more or less that the industry was generally sexist. What she condemns, is too many games that either don't have female characters or the ones that they have are incredibly shallow and two dimensional, actually serving a single purpose in advancing the plot story. She's not saying this game is sexist, and so is this one, and that one, etc. She says this situation in general is bad, because there are almost no alternatives. The problem she talks about is not the current games, which she said many times she enjoys, it's the lack of at least a few that would picture women as humans with all it means to be human.
And for saying that, and only that, she has been attacked and harassed online, and maybe a bit offline as well. Many people have claimed she said all sorts of things she didn't say. She complained that people harassing her were sexist, not all gamers. And I seriously believe these attacks are coordinated by a smallish group of mentally disturbed people, and a few sheep moron who couldn't see the truth if we rubbed it in their faces.
And by the way, Hollywood movies are only slightly better than mainstream video games when it comes to general representation of women. A lot of work has to be done there as well.
I will raise the common point I most often hear, and that is "If you want an alternative, make one". The second point, and please don't reply to the prior one without also knowing how this impacts it, is that those alternatives so far presented simply don't sell. In our society, you make what sells. What people who've participated in "Gamergate" have routinely discovered is that these big names in feminism, in relation to games, don't actually drive up sales or get sales. Their market consists almost entirely of non-gamers. Even when they suggest people buy a certain game, that game flounders.
Therefore, it is of dubious intent to suggest there need be "alternatives". Why punish people for idealizing forms? Why criticize that? If you have a problem with an imagined ideal, that is your personal thing you need to work through and overcome. Our ideals of body and form have existed further back than the ancient Greeks, and Egyptians, and we have always held ideals of form to look upon and see beauty.
What I gather from most of these feminists and comments on the "problem of ideals in games", is they are more upset with comparing themselves to that ideal. As a Buddhist would say, this is an internal problem, not a problem with the world. Work together to solve it within yourselves, and learn to appreciate the beauty of forms we can create in this beautifully advanced technological world. Don't repress it, embrace it, because it's harmless.
I would argue that this explanation is a very skewed version of the story, or at least, its only an explanation of the heated arguments that got OP confused. The original motivations of the parties involved turned into this argument, which as all things do, grow out of their control. Punk_As_Pingu has a very clear explanation of the origination of the problem somewhere below, the one that was downvoted for not saying SJW enough.
I did gloss over the original motivator (but did mention it) because the evasion of the true problem (ethics in journalism) with crying sexism is, unfortunately, becoming an even bigger problem than ethics in journalism. They control the entire public narrative.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Fact_Checking_Alien 0 points 16 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago (edited ago)
I follow a lot of commentators and discussion videos on Youtube, such as persons like Sargon of Akkad, Vee, Randomercam, etc. Essentially the primary point of Gamergate is just ethics in journalism, which began rather strongly in opposition to the antagonist and unethical behaviors of the so-called gaming journalists publishing articles claiming "gamers are dead".
But it's not so simple. What emerging behaviors you began to see is that people accused of this unethical behavior, such as sexual relationships and other nepotism without disclosure, was a reactionary claim that Gamergate was sexist. Then you get all this incredibly targeted rhetoric with people like Zoe Quinn and 3rd wave feminists coming out of the woodwork, and while nobody from Gamergate gets to talk to the media, these women who are not even competent members of gaming development communities would get on shows like The Colbert Report (Clarifying: Anita Sarkeesian appeared on this show, not Zoe Quinn).
So while gamergate is focused on ethics in games journalism, the people they caught constructed this incredible straw-man of sexism in the gaming industry instead. So you have people, like
Zoe QuinnAnita Sarkeesian*, who get on shows like The Colbert Report who are blatantly lying not only about sexism in the industry but also supposed harassment from Gamergate to prove their goal is sexism and not ethics.This got so bad that more popular and monetarily free persons in that community literally hired people to go through an analyze the claimed sources of harassment and - surprise - the majority of claimed harassment came from new troll accounts on things like Twitter. What's more, they concluded little to no real harassment was taking place. This gives you an idea of, to me, how incredibly low these people will stoop to drag the name of gamers through the mud for political and monetary advantages. That same woman, Zoe Quinn (and Anita, moreso Anita AFAIK), has made millions of dollars selling the rhetoric that gamers are sexist and games need to have a more "feminist" agenda.
If you're uncertain of any of this, the information is out there. For every single video depicting gamers as sexist, or studies depicting gamers as sexist, there are very detailed and objective videos pointing out why it's bullshit. Of course, again, it was the women who got on the media which heard nothing from Gamergate. Feminism, as an agenda, is incredibly lucrative if you can sell the straw man that "gamers are sexist", as persons like Zoe Quinn have done.
We're entering an uncomfortable scenario where disagreeing with women will get them screaming sexism and, frighteningly, it seems to work. These people make millions off donations every time they claim harassment, with no critical oversight from the media.
Edit: I derped some names.
[–] SenatorYeezus 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
That was Anita Sarkeesian
[–] solo-mermaid 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I usually try to stay away from the whole drama and it's the first time I hear their argument and....It's infuriating ! what is wrong with these women? I'm a woman that games and gamed all my life, I've never been triggered by some fictive character, I've never been harassed. I feel like these women are the "girl gamer" we've all heard of before and they've always been annoying.
[–] Fact_Checking_Alien ago
HERP DE DHURP LEMME FIX DIS
[–] Bastou ago
I don't know enough about Zoe Quinn to have a clear opinion of her or her intentions, but I can speak about Anita Sarkeesian.
Anita has not said gamers are sexists (as far as I know). She said more or less that the industry was generally sexist. What she condemns, is too many games that either don't have female characters or the ones that they have are incredibly shallow and two dimensional, actually serving a single purpose in advancing the plot story. She's not saying this game is sexist, and so is this one, and that one, etc. She says this situation in general is bad, because there are almost no alternatives. The problem she talks about is not the current games, which she said many times she enjoys, it's the lack of at least a few that would picture women as humans with all it means to be human.
And for saying that, and only that, she has been attacked and harassed online, and maybe a bit offline as well. Many people have claimed she said all sorts of things she didn't say. She complained that people harassing her were sexist, not all gamers. And I seriously believe these attacks are coordinated by a smallish group of mentally disturbed people, and a few sheep moron who couldn't see the truth if we rubbed it in their faces.
[–] Bastou 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
And by the way, Hollywood movies are only slightly better than mainstream video games when it comes to general representation of women. A lot of work has to be done there as well.
[–] Fact_Checking_Alien ago
I will raise the common point I most often hear, and that is "If you want an alternative, make one". The second point, and please don't reply to the prior one without also knowing how this impacts it, is that those alternatives so far presented simply don't sell. In our society, you make what sells. What people who've participated in "Gamergate" have routinely discovered is that these big names in feminism, in relation to games, don't actually drive up sales or get sales. Their market consists almost entirely of non-gamers. Even when they suggest people buy a certain game, that game flounders.
Therefore, it is of dubious intent to suggest there need be "alternatives". Why punish people for idealizing forms? Why criticize that? If you have a problem with an imagined ideal, that is your personal thing you need to work through and overcome. Our ideals of body and form have existed further back than the ancient Greeks, and Egyptians, and we have always held ideals of form to look upon and see beauty.
What I gather from most of these feminists and comments on the "problem of ideals in games", is they are more upset with comparing themselves to that ideal. As a Buddhist would say, this is an internal problem, not a problem with the world. Work together to solve it within yourselves, and learn to appreciate the beauty of forms we can create in this beautifully advanced technological world. Don't repress it, embrace it, because it's harmless.
[–] TEA-EARL-GREY-HOT ago
I would argue that this explanation is a very skewed version of the story, or at least, its only an explanation of the heated arguments that got OP confused. The original motivations of the parties involved turned into this argument, which as all things do, grow out of their control. Punk_As_Pingu has a very clear explanation of the origination of the problem somewhere below, the one that was downvoted for not saying SJW enough.
[–] Fact_Checking_Alien ago (edited ago)
I did gloss over the original motivator (but did mention it) because the evasion of the true problem (ethics in journalism) with crying sexism is, unfortunately, becoming an even bigger problem than ethics in journalism. They control the entire public narrative.