Gamergate

[Acsenray]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

Yeah, you know what, you’re right. It’s enough to just call her stupid and call it a day.

Agreed.

[Strassia]

@Orr_G

I really wish I had spent more time editing this paragraph than I did trying to be cute writing it. Some people are responding as if I hold using emotionally-charged language in the way it gets expressed on 4Chan as some noble thing. I don’t; I believe some of those that use it over there do (and some are just gleefully racist, etc, and/or trolling). I find that to be an interesting bit of subculture, and I also believe that particular viewpoint is, obviously, a large part of why that group of people has clashed with feminists in particular.

I apologize that I was less than clear on that distinction.

That is good, because I was reading it you seemed to claim that using hateful slurs was just good free speech, but accusing you of being on the right side of racial or sex discrimination is hate speech and fighting words.

I think something that many white males go through is a rude awaking about group membership and identity. Until my earlier twenties I felt nothing but confusion about people who needed a group identity. Why not be the best you could be and forget about all that. As I go older I realized that I am one of the few who have the luxury to be default. I can be a gamer, not a black gamer. I can be doctor, not a lady doctor, etc.

@Orr_G

I tend to agree with your opinion on libertarianism. While I do appreciate that they hold individual freedom in high regard, I believe they are misguided. As for the language and the ideal of behaving as if the internet is classless (heh), race-less, etc over at 4chan, I believe that’s borne out to be misguided as well.

I meant “lost the plot” as a turn of phrase, but never mind.

Your two bullet points are indeed a part of Gamergate, but it’s clearly more complicated than that. This thing didn’t come from nowhere. “All the stuff” I said goes to noting a few things that fuel the fires. One of those things that has contributed to the butthurt on the 4chan side of things, as it turns out, is indeed a crypto-bizarro defense of libertarianism.

The problem with Gamergate is it so demonstrable comes from a place of malice and ill intent. All the “good” stuff was added on later as a cover and to change the subject. Zoe Quin has nothing to do with corruption in gaming. But destroying her was the start of this whole thing. Everything else is a cover story.

You think there is legitimate issues with ethics in the gaming industry. Call it out. But don’t expect anyone to take you seriously until you separate yourself from the filth that started this mess.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Strassia

You think there is legitimate issues with ethics in the gaming industry. Call it out. But don’t expect anyone to take you seriously until you separate yourself from the filth that started this mess.

They can’t because the “ethical problems” with game journalists basically boil down to a few keychains and the fact that some game journalists are friendly with some game developers. And “friendly” is a GamerGate euphemism for “They don’t start every interview by punching the interviewee in the throat.”

[Strassia]

@Justin_Bailey

They can’t because the “ethical problems” with game journalists basically boil down to a few keychains and the fact that some game journalists are friendly with some game developers. And “friendly” is a GamerGate euphemism for “They don’t start every interview by punching the interviewee in the throat.”

That isn’t quite fair. There are real issues with the big companies buying reviews, cutting off reviewers who give negative reviews and other back end shenanigans. That has nothing to do with the OP and the rest of gamergate, though.

[Acsenray]

@Strassia

That isn’t quite fair. There are real issues with the big companies buying reviews, cutting off reviewers who give negative reviews and other back end shenanigans. That has nothing to do with the OP and the rest of gamergate, though.

In this day and age, it really doesn’t matter at all. With so many online forums and blogs and other ways that gamers can post their own reviews, there’s zero reason that video game journalism—which has always been a p.r. operation rather than objective journalism—matters at all.

[Kobal2]

Don’t forget Let’s Plays.
There’s a good reason publishers sometimes go aggressively against the YouTube accounts of people who stream themselves gaming. There’s also a reason Twitch.tv just got bought out. It’s not so much about copyright and such - and more about the fact that people can see for themselves, day-0, exactly how shit your game is from start to finish.
But do note it works both ways : I’ve bought (or re-bought) games on the basis of insightful or slow-ass LPs myself.

So it’s really the same paradigm as movie producers fighting tooth and nails against bootlegs - because their financing model is very much based on first week theatre ticket sales, which absolutely get killed by digital word-of-mouth these days. The days when you could put out a turd but still make a killing by marketing it aggressively are all but over, and boy don’t they like it one bit.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Strassia

That isn’t quite fair. There are real issues with the big companies buying reviews, cutting off reviewers who give negative reviews and other back end shenanigans. That has nothing to do with the OP and the rest of gamergate, though.

No, there’s not. There’s one example from almost ten years ago.

And as a reviewer who has been cut off before, I recognize that that decision is entirely within their rights. Companies don’t have to supply me with review copies. They are not breaking any laws by exercising their right to refuse me a free copy of a game just as I exercise mine if I later buy that game and say it’s shit.

As for other back end shenanigans, what are they?

[Strassia]

@Justin_Bailey

No, there’s not. There’s one example from almost ten years ago.

And as a reviewer who has been cut off before, I recognize that that decision is entirely within their rights. Companies don’t have to supply me with review copies. They are not breaking any laws by exercising their right to refuse me a free copy of a game just as I exercise mine if I later buy that game and say it’s shit.

As for other back end shenanigans, what are they?

This isn’t my issue at all. Since I had kids I am about 7 years behind in my games (I keep meaning to open up and install Far Cry 2, but then here come the kids). But from what I remember there was something recently about some companies hiring reviewers as consultants for input, which in and of itself wouldn’t be a problem. The reviewers who do that supposedly don’t review the game at release. But the allegation was the reviewers were picked based on how negative their past reviews were. And the “input” wasn’t being used for anything. It was just a way to eliminate a bad review.

I can’t vouch for that one way or the other. I don’t even really care. I haven’t bought a game on release in a long time. Any game I buy would be one that has been out long enough that the reviews don’t matter anymore.

My point was that if you do think there is a problem in games journalism, you should get as far away from Gamergate as the internet allows and start over.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Strassia

This isn’t my issue at all. Since I had kids I am about 7 years behind in my games (I keep meaning to open up and install Far Cry 2, but then here come the kids). But from what I remember there was something recently about some companies hiring reviewers as consultants for input, which in and of itself wouldn’t be a problem. The reviewers who do that supposedly don’t review the game at release. But the allegation was the reviewers were picked based on how negative their past reviews were. And the “input” wasn’t being used for anything. It was just a way to eliminate a bad review.

You’re talking about Leigh Alexander. For starters, she’s not a reviewer, so there can be no conflict of interest. But what exactly is wrong with this consultant stuff? She’s not hiding it. There’s no scandal if everything is done out in the open and above-board.

[Bozuit]

@Strassia

I don’t think you are getting it. Being white is an advantage. Being white does not guarantee a good outcome, but it makes it more likely. Just having a white sounding name means your resume is more likely to be put in the call back pile. No one outside of a few fringe radicals has ever said that all white males are either evil or powerful. White is the most advantageous color. Male is the most advantageous sex. Straight is the most advantageous orientation. But that doesn’t mean that straight white male can’t be homeless, or mentally ill, or physically disabled. It just means that no matter what his situation he is likely better than he would be if the only thing that changed was his gender, race, or sexual orientation.

That doesn’t change anything I said. Being white is statistically an advantage. But I don’t consider it appropriate to look at a person and use statistical evidence to draw conclusions about them based on my observations. Of course, we all do that anyway (using crappy evidence), but we try not to, and saying it out loud is just foolish. I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume privilege one way or the other without knowing something more about a person than their appearance.

@Strassia

This particular person claimed that he did not even notice he was being stung until the fourth sting. That just means he is insensitive to the venom, and good for him. But the then mocks someone else who claims that wasp stings hurt a lot and that they couldn’t just sit there like that. His response was to mock the them for their weakness. Just because he barely feels the sting (he compared it to a mosquito), then anyone who is bothered by them must be weak.

I choose this example because it is a rare form of privilege that doesn’t really threaten anyone’s identity. Bringing class, race, sex, and other types of privilege result in a response like the one you just gave above. My hope was this type of example would be one that not set off the defensive alarms that normally come up in these discussions.

I get what you mean. Apologies for being a little disrespectful, it’s just such an unexpected (and therefore amusing) example of privilege.

Seriously, though, try not to flap about; if you’re boring, the insects will move on.

@Acsenray

Indeed, one of the privileges of being a straight, white man is having the freedom to define your own identity without first being put in a box of race, gender, or sexual preference. It’s the privilege of being the “default human” in Anerican society.

Good point.

[The_Hamster_King]

@Kobal2

There’s a good reason publishers sometimes go aggressively against the YouTube accounts of people who stream themselves gaming.

On the other hand, Sony added a new button to the PlayStation 4 controller just so people can upload gameplay video as easily as possible. Sony’s position is that streams and uploads are free advertising.

[Acsenray]

Jacobin magazine has an interesting take on this situation — In Defense of Gamers

Peter Frase characterizes the violent reaction against people like Sarkeesian and Quinn as simply another aspect of right-wing reactionary-ism against a more inclusive, egalitarian society in which white men don’t control all the levers of power —

The assimilation of games into the larger culture poses a problem for a reactionary segment of gamers, however. It means engaging with a society that, while it is still capitalist and patriarchal, still suffused with racism, has also been challenged for decades by those it has traditionally marginalized. Wider engagement inevitably changes the parameters of geek culture, as new voices and new ideas are incorporated.

Some gamers would like it both ways: they want everyone to take their medium seriously, but **they don’t want anyone to challenge their political assumptions or call into question the way games treat people who don’t look and think like them. **They hate and fear a world where games are truly made by and for everyone, where women make up a majority of the gaming audience, where a trans woman dominates one of the world’s great eSports.

…

Right-wing gamers project an overweening sense of superiority and entitlement, while at the same time constructing an identity based on marginality and victimization. In this, though, they aren’t really that different from many revanchist movements in capitalist societies. They’re much like the Tea Party right, which laments the disappearance of the America it recognizes — that is, the America where straight white men are systematically advantaged.

This is a basic element of the reactionary mind: a fundamental opposition to equality as such. So it is with gamers for whom, as Tim Colwill puts it,** “the worst possible thing that can happen here is equality.” **This group of angry gamers no longer “recognizes their country,” as it were, what with all these women and queers and leftists running around.

…

**What threatens these gamers is both the notion that gaming does not exist exclusively to reassure their misogynist preconceptions, **and that those preconceptions can be challenged. For not only is the culture of games broadening, but the big-budget commercial segment that most caters to their backward fantasies is contracting relative to indie, mobile, and web games.

As Leigh Alexander points out in her sophisticated deconstruction of the gamer identity, **“It’s hard for them to hear they don’t own anything, anymore, that they aren’t the world’s most special-est consumer demographic, that they have to share.” **Change the words “consumer demographic” to “beneficiaries of the welfare state,” and you could be talking about Tea Partiers defending their Medicare while denouncing welfare queens.

[The_Hamster_King]

In other news, the Gaters have convinced Intel to pull their advertising from Gamasutra because they disagreed with the content of an editorial column. (Actually, the Leigh Alexander article quoted by Ascenray.) Gamasutra is one of the main game industry sites on the Internet. It has job listings, industry news, blogs about game programming, etc.

And apparently the latest Gater plan is to go after the Digital Games Research Association. DiGRA is a group that publishes an academic journal on game studies and holds a yearly conference. They’re reading every paper DiGRA has published and plan to write rebuttals of papers they find objectionable.
Source

[Justin_Bailey]

@Acsenray

Peter Frase characterizes the violent reaction against people like Sarkeesian and Quinn as simply another aspect of right-wing reactionary-ism against a more inclusive, egalitarian society in which white men don’t control all the levers of power —

I’m probably repeating myself, but what kills me about this whole thing is that you can make legitimate criticisms against Sarkeesian’s arguments without resorting to calling her a bitch.

In the first five minutes of her first video alone she mentions early Nintendo games Donkey Kong and Sheriff. While discussing Donkey Kong, she mentions that it was originally set to be a Popeye adaptation and then turned into a King Kong riff when the rights fell through. And for Sheriff, she references the popular “tie a woman to the train tracks” trope.

But then she looks directly into the camera and scolds Nintendo (and Shigeru Miyamoto) for daring to treat women in video games this way and start the whole sexism train rolling. She never once comes back around to the fact that Nintendo was A) parodying a movie from the 30s and B) referencing some of the earliest films in cinema history. Talking about society embracing these tropes for nearly a century is a seriously important part of the puzzle. But it’s pushed aside so she can tsk tsk at game publishers.

[Acsenray]

@Justin_Bailey

But then she looks directly into the camera and scolds Nintendo (and Shigeru Miyamoto) for daring to treat women in video games this way and start the whole sexism train rolling. She never once comes back around to the fact that Nintendo was A) parodying a movie from the 30s and B) referencing some of the earliest films in cinema history. Talking about society embracing these tropes for nearly a century is a seriously important part of the puzzle. But it’s pushed aside so she can tsk tsk at game publishers.

I don’t understand your point. She already mentions that it is a common trope in popular culture. Those kinds of depictions of women in films and other media have been roundly criticized. She’s just applying that same analysis to video games.

After all, “He did it first,” isn’t a very compelling argument.

And she also makes the point that simply calling something a “parody” doesn’t work if all you are doing is recreating the trope.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Acsenray

I don’t understand your point. She already mentions that it is a common trope in popular culture. Those kinds of depictions of women in films and other media have been roundly criticized.

First of all, 1979 was quite different from today. Secondly, holding a King Kong parody (which did see a major theatrical remake just a few years earlier) to some kind of loftier standard because it happened to be a game is absurd. Sarkeesian wants to have a discussion about culture as a whole, but wants to limit to games, and cherrypicks games as offenders seemingly at random.

Leigh Alexander she ain’t.

[The_Hamster_King]

And another female game developer has been forced to leave her home because of death threats. This time it’s Brianna Wu , the creator of Revolution 60.

[Acsenray]

@Justin_Bailey

First of all, 1979 was quite different from today.

This objection makes no sense. If you were doing a study of the problematic depiction of women in literature, it would make sense to start from as far back as you could go in literature. If you were doing a study of the problematic depiction of women in films, it would make sense to start from as far bad as you could go in films.

Sarkeesian is illustrating examples of the problematic depiction of women in video games, so saying that one particular example is from 1979 is no objection at all.

Secondly, holding a King Kong parody (which did see a major theatrical remake just a few years earlier) to some kind of loftier standard because it happened to be a game is absurd.

This sentence is practically meaningless. So what if it is a King Kong parody? It has a female character whose role within the game can be analyzed. So what if it followed a major theatrical remake? It has a female character whose role within the game can be analyzed?

And your reference to “some kind of loftier standard” is similarly meaningless. There is a woman depicted in the game and Sarkeesian is analyzing that depiction.

Sarkeesian wants to have a discussion about culture as a whole, but wants to limit to games,

Sarkeesian wants to have a discussion about the depiction of women in video games, which is a perfectly reasonable and sensible framing of a discussion.

You could similarly have a discussion about the depiction of women in superhero comics, or in sitcoms or in soap operas or in slasher films. She picked video games.

and cherrypicks games as offenders seemingly at random.

I don’t even know what relevance the term “cherry pick” is supposed to have here. Is she supposed to randomly sample video games?

If the subject of her study is to say “there are some troubling aspects of the depiction of women in video games,” then it makes sense for her to look at video games that have troubling depictions of women in them.

You seem to be forcing her work to be part of a thesis that they’re not written to defend and then criticizing her for failing to defend it. That sounds like the classic definition of a straw man argument.

Leigh Alexander she ain’t.

This sentence, like all your others, seems to have been chosen from a hat without any regard to its relevance or meaning.

[Leaper]

I’m really really surprised no one has used the info revealed in these kinds of campaigns to commit more serious crimes. It’s not like the message boards can filter out the truly crazy/sociopathic.

[Ike_Witt]

@The_Hamster_King

And another female game developer has been forced to leave her home because of death threats. This time it’s Brianna Wu , the creator of Revolution 60.

WTF is wrong with people?