Gamergate - OP updated 27 October

[Frozen Death Knight]

I dont think many of you are too bothered with the swedish language. However, I surprisingly found a lead article about Zoe and #gamergate and sexism in gaming environment, in one of the local newspapers in the north of sweden:
http://www.nsd.se/opinion/motarbeta-...n-8951322.aspx
Seems like the story is still going strong, and mostly the part how Zoe and how other girls were treated

I'm actually from north of Sweden and I know of NSD (it's a heavily socialistic newspaper). Man, what a bad article.

At the end it basically says that the author wants feminism to be heavily ingrained into both regular society and the virtual world. Oh, let's not forget the part about the nieces and how he will do his duty to force this point of view upon them when discussing WoW. Stellar piece of work there. /golfclap

At least the article is labelled as an opinion piece rather than news.

- - - Updated - - -

You do know Sweden is a socialist, feminist stronghold, right? It's also probably the least taken-seriously country in Europe. It's really easy to engage in all sorts of bizarre social programs when you're entirely irrelevant lol.

Sweden may have a relatively huge amount of feminists, but really, the only major support feminism gets in Sweden are from self-proclaimed feminists and the public media, which made such a big deal out of a feminist party barely getting into the Swedish government this year, while continuously smearing the Swedish Democrats that has grown to be the third largest political party in Sweden (it in fact grew even more in poularity as of late in the re-election discussion going on here). Just to make things clear, I do not support the Swedish Democrats at all, but I want to put things into perspective in regards to how Swedish politics looks like at the moment.

Trust me, Swedish feminists aren't nearly as relevant as they think they are.

[Zoaric]

Quite possibly the longest article made by a neutral we've seen yet. Though, that's
probably because it rants a tad... I do think his advice at the end is something people
should look into for themselves. I found it pretty sound myself.

http://thewordonthe.net/12/2014/a-ne...ical-feminism/

I hope everyone had a good Christmas / other holiday(s).

[Celista]

Quite possibly the longest article made by a neutral we've seen yet. Though, that's
probably because it rants a tad... I do think his advice at the end is something people
should look into for themselves. I found it pretty sound myself.

http://thewordonthe.net/12/2014/a-ne...ical-feminism/

I hope everyone had a good Christmas / other holiday(s).

This is not a neutral article in the slightest, the author clearly has several biases if you read the article. You don't even have to dig that deeply for them.

[Deleted]

This is not a neutral article in the slightest, the author clearly has several biases if you read the article. You don't even have to dig that deeply for them.

Yeah, and it would be good to point out that the article is clearly another preachy opinion piece on how poor little girls get kicked in the head - in other words, takes an actual, factual problem, which exists, and has existed for as long as there have been men and women, everywhere on this planet and has nothing to do with gaming, and makes it into something completely different, twisting it and making the nonexistent link between the culprits and gaming - and talks very little about corruption.

[Sorrior]

This is not a neutral article in the slightest, the author clearly has several biases if you read the article. You don't even have to dig that deeply for them.

While I agree he is biased in some ways he VERY VERY VERY well covers the mentality/feelings of men who have been talked down to and feel hurt by all the "feminist" bullshit we have been getting crammed down our throats.

[Gruffertus]

Hallo folks, back again for a little while. I was going to clear up some of the responses to my last post, but I'm guessing that people aren't that bothered about two-month-old arguments? If so, let me know.

I skimmed a bit, but I didn't read all 200 pages since, so apologies if I missed it, but there's an interesting follow-up from the author of one of the main sources of the 'gamers are dead' posts.

There's also an interesting reblog of that - now I know that some of you will probably get a bit agitated about some of the language there, but it's worth pointing out that he's talking about gamers as a demographic, as a group that you try to sell things to. There are, for example, some teenage girls driving around in Ferraris, but no-one builds or sells a Ferrari with a teenage girl in mind, they're not the demographic.

- - - Updated - - -

The main reason that I don't think I'll be around for long is that I don't really have that much to add to my last post - looking at the last few pages, things seem to be roughly what I was predicting - one the one hand you have the Racer EXE video, which is a decent summation of that thread of Gamergate - I don't agree with it all, but it's pretty clear that his heart's in the right place.

On the other hand, yes the media is still fixated on the other story - that this is a fightback against the abuse opinionated women get on the internet. Some of this is due to the origin of the tag, in Quinnspiracy and the abuse Anita Sarkeesian received around the same time. And some of it comes from the people who seem to gravitate to the movement.

So, you have these people that are receiving life-altering amounts of abuse (and in the case of Anita, have been doing so for long before Gamergate started, or indeed before she wrote a word about video games). You can call them professional victims, if you don't mind looking like an asshole. You can suggest that they get things wrong in their criticism, or their games aren't very good, if you don't mind looking like an absolute asshole for suggesting that, if these things were true, they'd justify the abuse. Or you could suggest that no abuse at all, if you don't mind looking like a conspiracy theorist. Or (at the risk of an infraction), you can do all of these, and you'll look like ShadowFanatic, and do you really want to do that?

[hrugner]

I doubt there are many people here willing to exchange being correct for not looking like an asshole to the sad few people dedicated to never being pleased with a damn thing in their entire life.

[Edge-]

You can suggest that they get things wrong in their criticism, or their games aren't very good, if you don't mind looking like an absolute asshole for suggesting that, if these things were true, they'd justify the abuse.

Wait...what? How is being critical of criticism (fact checking it, calling out inconsistencies, etc.) making one look like an absolute "asshole"? And where is the jump to if you're critical of some of the things they've said/done that somehow means that you're justifying the abuse?

I'm horribly confused.

[Calfredd]

You can suggest that they get things wrong in their criticism, or their games aren't very good, if you don't mind looking like an absolute asshole for suggesting that, if these things were true, they'd justify the abuse.

Telling someone there is fault in their critic or video game is not being an asshole anymore than telling a professional writer their work is full of spelling mistakes on their final draft or a programmer their code is full of bugs. Being silent on mistakes is not the way to go unless you want lies and misinformation to be spread unchecked.

[noahjam326]

To the responses above; that is exactly what has happened. In fact I think that particular point is exactly what made so many people on the fence lean towards "pro-GG." It's the same idea behind "trust and believe." It's the idea that you should just believe whatever person X has to say and if you even think about trying to even just verify their information then you're instantly labelled a terrible human being. We've seen evidence of this beyond even Gamergate. It doesn't make sense but people do it.

I doubt there are many people here willing to exchange being correct for not looking like an asshole to the sad few people dedicated to never being pleased with a damn thing in their entire life.

Unfortunately I have to agree with this. Especially having discussed the Gamergate topic with people in real life. Or even any other hotly debated subject. While being on the internet and using anonymity helps some people express their true feelings easier. When facing a real person and discussing these issues (and any issue really) shows that a lot of people aren't always willing to stand by their convictions. That's not to sound mean, but it seems to be very true from what I've seen. I also wouldn't blame somebody for backing down when being threatened in such a manner. Sometimes damaging a relationship over a potentially meaningless point is not worth it. At least from my experience with more issues than just Gamergate; it seems a lot of people that are wiling to push so hard they would damage a personal relationship just won't have their minds changed anyway.

[Csnyder]

*mod snip wall o' text*

'Don't drop in just to express your disbelief over people making a big deal about it; what's important to the people participating in this thread may not be important to you, and that works vice-versa.'

excuse me, you are telling me to not post the fact that i think the whole thing is crap....lol fuck you kid
get over yourself for one thing and get a real job asshole. you are a power hungry little shit.
who do you think you are by telling us what to post or not to post
fuck face idiot. ican give my opinion when and where i want. im not sure where you are from but in america i can say what the fuck i want and to who i want
oh youll ban me, good, im being banned from a site that tells people what they can and cant post
fuck you once again you piece of shit, try to take away my rights and ill bury your ass kid.....yes in the ground

Please post productively and respectfully. Infracted. -Edge

[Calfredd]

'Don't drop in just to express your disbelief over people making a big deal about it; what's important to the people participating in this thread may not be important to you, and that works vice-versa.'

excuse me, you are telling me to not post the fact that i think the whole thing is crap....lol fuck you kid
get over yourself for one thing and get a real job asshole. you are a power hungry little shit.
who do you think you are by telling us what to post or not to post
fuck face idiot. ican give my opinion when and where i want. im not sure where you are from but in america i can say what the fuck i want and to who i want
oh youll ban me, good, im being banned from a site that tells people what they can and cant post
fuck you once again you piece of shit, try to take away my rights and ill bury your ass kid.....yes in the ground

Did you really quote the entire opening OP just to rage at mods because instead of civilly discuss why you think this whole thing is bad you'd rather say everyone is a terrible person?

[noahjam326]

I know the above post doesn't really deserve any kind of attention, but it seemed to be a good example for a point I'd like to make. I actually agree with Csynder. I think flat-out "banning" any post that only wants to mention their reaction to Gamergate is wrong (not claiming the mod edit is making such a claim). If somebody can provide a well-thought out post about how an "outsider" perceives the events and how they unfold could be a really beneficial piece of perspective for all parties involved. I would welcome more people to share their perspective on the events from their position if they can communicate that thought in a constructive way. I think that point is one of the great things about not just this thread, but the larger Gamergate movement. That even if somebody says something you don't agree with, if they present the idea well enough it won't be instantly dismissed (a few individuals notwithstanding). I just wanted to use Csynder's post to share that; that people should be welcomed to present their take/reaction on the events of Gamergate. So long as they can do so constructively; which is really what most of Gamergate and their supporters seem to be about. Reasonable and trustworthy discourse.

[Coronius]

'Don't drop in just to express your disbelief over people making a big deal about it; what's important to the people participating in this thread may not be important to you, and that works vice-versa.'

excuse me, you are telling me to not post the fact that i think the whole thing is crap....lol fuck you kid
get over yourself for one thing and get a real job asshole. you are a power hungry little shit.
who do you think you are by telling us what to post or not to post
fuck face idiot. ican give my opinion when and where i want. im not sure where you are from but in america i can say what the fuck i want and to who i want
oh youll ban me, good, im being banned from a site that tells people what they can and cant post
fuck you once again you piece of shit, try to take away my rights and ill bury your ass kid.....yes in the ground

If trolling, it's damn good trolling.

[Sorrior]

Actually this is pone of the few sites at least originally ENCOURAGED people to talk about this.

[Calfredd]

I know the above post doesn't really deserve any kind of attention, but it seemed to be a good example for a point I'd like to make. I actually agree with Csynder. I think flat-out "banning" any post that only wants to mention their reaction to Gamergate is wrong (not claiming the mod edit is making such a claim). If somebody can provide a well-thought out post about how an "outsider" perceives the events and how they unfold could be a really beneficial piece of perspective for all parties involved. I would welcome more people to share their perspective on the events from their position if they can communicate that thought in a constructive way. I think that point is one of the great things about not just this thread, but the larger Gamergate movement. That even if somebody says something you don't agree with, if they present the idea well enough it won't be instantly dismissed (a few individuals notwithstanding). I just wanted to use Csynder's post to share that; that people should be welcomed to present their take/reaction on the events of Gamergate. So long as they can do so constructively; which is really what most of Gamergate and their supporters seem to be about. Reasonable and trustworthy discourse.

I don't know why you'd agree with Csynder when all he did was rage. You've seen Dhrizzle and others post in here being against GG (not necessarily anti-gg though) at least talk to us while also having KinginYellow, MFDoom, and Parallel just come in here and yell at us saying we're wrong and we deserve whatever ill fate we get. If you can come in here and explain why we are wrong for being GG I'd love for them to post in here, but just saying we're wrong and should be hated should at least be ignored or infracted should all they post was trolling or inflammatory.

[noahjam326]

I don't know why you'd agree with Csynder when all he did was rage. You've seen Dhrizzle and others post in here being against GG (not necessarily anti-gg though) at least talk to us while also having KinginYellow, MFDoom, and Parallel just come in here and yell at us saying we're wrong and we deserve whatever ill fate we get. If you can come in here and explain why we are wrong for being GG I'd love for them to post in here, but just saying we're wrong and should be hated should at least be ignored or infracted should all they post was trolling or inflammatory.

I have a strong feeling you didn't read read very far past my first 2 sentences...

[Calfredd]

I have a strong feeling you didn't read read very far past my first 2 sentences...

No I did but you almost said what I said just 100x better or is it I said what you said just 100x worse? You said you agreed to his post but again, all he did was rage. You however also said you used his post as an example of how not to constructively discuss something.

[Edge-]

I know the above post doesn't really deserve any kind of attention, but it seemed to be a good example for a point I'd like to make. I actually agree with Csynder. I think flat-out "banning" any post that only wants to mention their reaction to Gamergate is wrong (not claiming the mod edit is making such a claim). If somebody can provide a well-thought out post about how an "outsider" perceives the events and how they unfold could be a really beneficial piece of perspective for all parties involved. I would welcome more people to share their perspective on the events from their position if they can communicate that thought in a constructive way. I think that point is one of the great things about not just this thread, but the larger Gamergate movement. That even if somebody says something you don't agree with, if they present the idea well enough it won't be instantly dismissed (a few individuals notwithstanding). I just wanted to use Csynder's post to share that; that people should be welcomed to present their take/reaction on the events of Gamergate. So long as they can do so constructively; which is really what most of Gamergate and their supporters seem to be about. Reasonable and trustworthy discourse.

If someone is going to go into a long-running thread to completely ignore any and all discussion to post, "lawl you're all stupid for caring about this." they're contributing nothing to the discussion, and those types of posts generally derail any existing discussion...kinda like the post you just quoted did.

It's the exact reason for why those kinds of posts were warned against near the top of the OP : /

If they want to come in and add an opinion on the topic that allows for some kind of discussion, that's totally fine though. There have been plenty of people on all sides who have come and gone with as little as a single post but been able to post an on-topic opinion that could be discussed.

[noahjam326]

Instead of focusing on the hatred and vitriol of the post, I chose to use it as a moment to promote friendly and productive discourse, which is a strong pillar of Gamergate I've personally enjoyed. Rather then see the next page and one-half be a back-and-forth complainfest where the poster in question shit-slings while the regular posters tryto counter every word in his post. I felt it beneficial to try and handle the situation differently and take what was originally a terribly written and unconstructive comment and turn it into something that can be used positively. I also find that doing so usually irritates the original poster because they're generally looking to start a fight, and it becomes defused almost instantly.