Gamergate, Feminisim, and Journalistic Ethics

[Sdaeriji]

Tell me one GamerGate supporter that isn't a misogynist.

You probably won't believe me if I said me. So I'll say these three women.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segmen ... 71ff000157

You're just intentionally not getting the point now, right?

[Hirota]

You probably won't believe me if I said me. So I'll say these three women.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segmen ... 71ff000157

You're just intentionally not getting the point now, right?

You asked a question, you got an answer. If you can't understand it that's not my problem.

But you shouldn't feel compelled to answer the question you were asked - it doesn't seem particularly productive.

[Sdaeriji]

You're just intentionally not getting the point now, right?

You asked a question, you got an answer. If you can't understand it that's not my problem.

Your "answer" is entirely beside the point.

[CTALNH]

Tell the media that covered her ass that we are displeased?

Why did they take pictures of her ass?

No but when she issued a DMCA for no reason every single media outlet sided with her.

Over a fucking still image.

[Gravlen]

And it starts:

On August 15, 2014, the ex-boyfriend of game developer Zoe Quinn posted a Wordpress blog entitled The Zoe Post. In it, he detailed information pertaining to their relationship, including chat logs he felt showed how she emotionally abused him. Also included was a list of 5 men he claimed she had cheated on him with.

Yes it does start like that, but lets read the entire paragraph and get some intelligent context shall we?
And then it continues...

Hell Hath No Fury Like a Lover Scorned, as the adage goes. A scandalous and inflammatory story, it is little wonder critics of her game and character were drawn to the accusations. This was the beginning of the movement that would take off to become Gamer Gate, a fact that critics of the movement would latch onto as proof of ill intent towards women in the industry. This would be used to attempt to discredit the entire movement time and time again. To say however that Gamer Gate is is caused by Zoe Quinn is like saying World War One was caused by Arch Duke Ferdinand.
It was not that a female game developer had a series of affairs. This became something more than the escapades of an unfaithful lover. It was the revelation of who some of these men were that she was having affairs with. Several prominent members of the independent games scene, including judges of awards that she had won. But it was one of those five names that would prove to be the catalyst for a gaming culture war that had been on the verge of eruption for some time. That name was Nathan Grayson. This name is important because he is a journalist for one of the most visited gaming sites online, Kotaku. Prior to that Grayson wrote for Rock Paper Shotgun, another popular outlet.

(emphasis my own)
This part in bold perfectly tallies with my statement that:

ZQ was the straw that broke the camels back for many.

It still doesn't disagree with my account, and it directly contradicts your previous attempt at correcting "misperceptions".

I suggest you read the entire thing, rather than trying to clumsily cherry pick sentences which you'd like to try and use to justify your perspective, which anyone can dismantle in moments. But, then again, having a wider perspective of the issues isn't going to help your cause is it.

My cause is to stop harassment. I'm sure you can explain why that's a bad cause to have.

Personally, I recommend this one:
http://deadspin.com/the-future-of-the-culture-wars-is-here-and-its-gamerga-1646145844

Again, you should try and read.

(A necessary disclosure: Kotaku is Deadspin's sister site. Both are owned by Gawker Media.)

Do you really expect a gawker sister site to be capable of neutrality? You expect it to be considered credible by those campaigning against corruption in the gaming industry

Who expects neutrality from an opinion piece? I sure don't, and I'm confused as to why you do. However, I do find the arguments persuasive, and the timeline to be correct.

That said, however, I don't see that Gawker sister sites are somehow automagically tainted by all of this. The notion is silly.

It's almost so daft it's adorable. I know you'd like to pretend that I'm clueless (on this particular matter), but really, with these two gems, it's demonstrated that I'm not the only one by a mile. It's my turn to be disappointed Grav old bean.

You're disapointed because I present a narrative you disagree with, and you think that's giving up and walking away? You're being weird today.

[Ifreann]

Why did they take pictures of her ass?

No but when she issued a DMCA for no reason every single media outlet sided with her.

Over a fucking still image.

So your problem is with intellectual property law?

[Gauthier]

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a woman working in the game industry *will* be raped and murdered for daring to speak ill of Gamergate, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that a feminist raped and murdered her as a false flag operation while internet neckbeards high five each other.

[Hirota]

My cause is to stop harassment. I'm sure you can explain why that's a bad cause to have.

You should watch the huffington post video I posted earlier. I clearly can't convince you that you're on the wrong side to promote your cause (which is not a bad cause to have!) , maybe these three women will enlighten you.

Mirror as well: http://youtu.be/qtzrUsi6Y1s

[Ruridova]

Question: are there any places where I can find an UNBIASED summary of GamerGate and all the stuff that pertains to it? Because my understanding is rather incomplete. Everything I'm finding is either "ZOMG MISOGYNY" or "ZOMG FEMINAZIS" and I'd like to get the facts, not bullshit vaguely inspired by the truth.

[The Black Forrest]

Question: are there any places where I can find an UNBIASED summary of GamerGate and all the stuff that pertains to it? Because my understanding is rather incomplete. Everything I'm finding is either "ZOMG MISOGYNY" or "ZOMG FEMINAZIS" and I'd like to get the facts, not bullshit vaguely inspired by the truth.

Bias? Well you will find varying degrees no matter where you look.

Basically; the mess started over when Zoe offered a free "game" and was said to have had sex with reporters for a good review. Accusations from the ex-boyfriend.
The forces of good and evil came out. Slut/Whore/women hater were quickly flying about. The 4chan kiddies were doing their doxxing and anonymous threats. Retaliation, etc., etc., etc.

They basically snipe at each other. The gamer people (i have grown tired of gate being applied to everything now) are basically declaring themselves as the great defenders have games and all the want is "unbiased" reviews. Ignoring that you basically have to question the review if the reviewers site/magazine/whatever takes ads from game manufacturers. They have been doing that for decades. I don't think I have ever purchased a game by the recommendations of a third party. Usually I go with my gut or comments by fellow gamers and game store people.

Of course they are the misunderstood victims and are the only ones getting harassed and not fair coverage by the evil main stream media.

Even with the presented video of the three women; I only found the British woman interesting the others were annoying to me. They should go back and simply interview her.

Anyway it's petty and childish and this will blow over as I have seen versions of this type of thing in the past.

You can draw your own conclusions but all the opinions made here and well probably elsewhere; I think you find few have even looked at the game.

Even with the claim of review lies over the game. The only thing I lost was my time involved. About 10-30 minutes counting install time.

Zoe wrote a mediocre concept game and if people ignored the claim of sex for a review; it would have died a quiet death.

[Cenetra]

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a woman working in the game industry *will* be raped and murdered for daring to speak ill of Gamergate, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that a feminist raped and murdered her as a false flag operation while internet neckbeards high five each other.

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a GamerGate "protestor" *will* be murdered for daring to speak ill of a woman working in or near the game industry, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that he deserved it for being a violent misogynist while internet legbeards high five each other.

But seriously, there's plenty of harassment and all around douchey behavior coming from both sides.

Yes, there is a lot of sexism in the video game industry, but what you're doing is effectively painting people as murderous bigots for thinking that maybe "video game journalism" shouldn't be dominated by people who don't play or enjoy games and actually spend most of their time bashing games and slandering everyone who plays them.

[Tahar Joblis]

Question: are there any places where I can find an UNBIASED summary of GamerGate and all the stuff that pertains to it? Because my understanding is rather incomplete. Everything I'm finding is either "ZOMG MISOGYNY" or "ZOMG FEMINAZIS" and I'd like to get the facts, not bullshit vaguely inspired by the truth.

You won't find an objective overview. So start with base source material.

So. Start by reading TheZoePost. This is what started what is now known, not entirely appropriately, as GamerGate. This was written by Zoe Quinn's ex. So far, he looks to have been 100% honest, which is impressive given how much he brought to the table in terms of testimony, so while not objective, he does seem reliable.

What does this source tell us? Well, first and foremost, it tells us that we cannot trust anything that comes directly from Zoe Quinn; it tells us that she's an awful abusive person (though her ex did not identify her as abusive, he described the symptoms very well, and other abuse victims came forward to let him know he was in their company). Second, it tells us roughly when Zoe Quinn was sleeping with whom.

This, in turn, means ... what?

Well, it means that the people who rallied to defend Zoe Quinn were rallying to defend a pretty horrible person. Since this was the opening act of the scandal, those rallying to her defense had good reason to suspect that she was a horrible person, and rallied to her defense anyway. It's a pretty good sociological case for the basic flaw of feminists: Feminists will rally to defend a woman under attack even if she is in the wrong.

Second, it means that the ethical complaints - such as they are - are as warranted as they could be. Zoe was indeed sleeping with people she really shouldn't have been sleeping with (such as her boss), and this casts suspicion on her credibility as a game dev (and her lovers' credibility in evaluating her game; another gave her game favorable mentions, another was involved in some fashion with an indie game award.

Now... does this really merit all the attention? No. We're talking about someone being personally horrible, mostly. The reason why it became front and center issue #1 is that anti-feminists and feminists both wanted to make this about women/misogyny/feminism in gaming... anti-feminists because Zoe Quinn made a nice example of a woman being horrible in gaming, feminists because male gamers make a nice unsympathetic target to beat on.

[Gauthier]

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a woman working in the game industry *will* be raped and murdered for daring to speak ill of Gamergate, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that a feminist raped and murdered her as a false flag operation while internet neckbeards high five each other.

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a GamerGate "protestor" *will* be murdered for daring to speak ill of a woman working in or near the game industry, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that he deserved it for being a violent misogynist while internet legbeards high five each other.

But seriously, there's plenty of harassment and all around douchey behavior coming from both sides.

Ah yes, the classic False Equivalence Defense.

Yes, there is a lot of sexism in the video game industry, but what you're doing is effectively painting people as murderous bigots for thinking that maybe "video game journalism" shouldn't be dominated by people who don't play or enjoy games and actually spend most of their time bashing games and slandering everyone who plays them.

So far the only reported death threats made in the nontroversy were all directed towards women in the gaming industry allegedly by Gamergate supporters. There has yet to be a news story of a death threat being made against a Gamergate supporter, unless you're going to tell us the mainstream media are comprised of penis-hating Social Justice Warriors. Plus, those death threats can also come with rape threats and as we all know the first thing men are always threatened with is rape. So yeah, it's a bit fair to paint them as murderous bigots

[The Black Forrest]

\
Feminists will rally to defend a woman under attack even if she is in the wrong.

Kind of like MRAs rally to defend a man under attack even if he is in the wrong.

Second, it means that the ethical complaints - such as they are - are as warranted as they could be. Zoe was indeed sleeping with people she really shouldn't have been sleeping with (such as her boss), and this casts suspicion on her credibility as a game dev (and her lovers' credibility in evaluating her game; another gave her game favorable mentions, another was involved in some fashion with an indie game award.

*shrugs* Her sexual escapades aren't a way to measure the game.

Frankly, who cares. For all the talk of its about the game; nobody seems to grasp Ok. Bad game, ripped off (even though Depression Quest is free), I won't play another one of yours. Reviewers (never use them for game decisions myself) ok. You wrote a crappy review; I won't read you anymore.

feminists because male gamers make a nice unsympathetic target to beat on.

They kind of made themselves a target with the rape and death talk, doxxing, etc., etc.

[Hirota]

Question: are there any places where I can find an UNBIASED summary of GamerGate and all the stuff that pertains to it? Because my understanding is rather incomplete. Everything I'm finding is either "ZOMG MISOGYNY" or "ZOMG FEMINAZIS" and I'd like to get the facts, not bullshit vaguely inspired by the truth.

Black Forrest and Tahar have given you some guidance on where to start, I'd add http://www.historyofgamergate.com/ to that list.

It's not entirely unbiased, but it should help you to fill in those holes in your understanding. Also, if there are any questions you want answered, I'm happy to give it my best effort from my admitedly pro-gamergate perspective to help.

[Ashmoria]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

[Dyakovo]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

Of course not.

[Gauthier]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

Of course not.

The only way journalistic corruption in the gaming industry can be rooted out is to drive out every woman with threats of rape and murder if not actual rape and murder. Because gaming journalism is corrupted by the presence of vaginas in the gaming industry. BROS BEFORE HOS! *nod nod*

[Hirota]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

We always have. We're just busy trying to ward off the lies told in the press and by certain people, at the same time.

Their arrows may blot out the sun, but the brothers and sisters of gamergate continue to fight in the shade.

Some people would like you to think that Gamergate is nothing more than a rag-tag bunch of neckbeard misfits from 4chan and 8chan with no organised agenda other than a general mysogny and anger towards women in the industry. This is a lie, perpetrated by key members in the gaming industry (and naively swallowed and recycled by some people) because they are incapable of debating on an equal footing about the purpose of Gamergate, and would rather try and bury the movement under a smear campaign.

If I'm honest, the truth is probably somewhere inbetween what I'm saying, and what you'd see in the press - its not as simple as looking at one source and relying upon that for an answerr. What I would suggest is you look at some of the resources who have tried to stay neutral in the debate - particularly the escapist and the huffington post web casts - and keep an open mind.

If you have questions which I can answer for you, I can't guarantee to give you an impartial answer, but I can promise to try and give you a fair answer.

[Ifreann]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

We always have. We're just busy trying to expose the lies told in the press and by certain people, at the same time.

Their arrows may blot out the sun, but the brothers and sisters of gamergate continue to fight in the shade.

I love how your response to being asked about what you're actually doing to achieve your goals does not involve anything about what you're doing to achieve your goals.

[The Black Forrest]

so have gamergaters started talking rationally about what to do about gaming journalism yet? is there any actual action on what is supposed to be their reason for existing as a group?

We always have. We're just busy trying to ward off the lies told in the press and by certain people, at the same time.

More like trying to deny what is going on.

Your three ladies started saying the gamer people didn't do anything and it was all the otherside doing it all but later started to explain well there are just a small amount of people.

If it was only about the game, then you should be taking "the bad elements" on directly.

Their arrows may blot out the sun, but the brothers and sisters of gamergate continue to fight in the shade.

You think you are the Spartans?

Some people would like you to think that Gamergate is nothing more than a rag-tag bunch of neckbeard misfits from 4chan and 8chan with no organised agenda other than a general mysogny and anger towards women in the industry.

Ok. What's with all the slut/whore, death threads, doxxing?

What does sexual improprities have to do with the judgement of the game?

I am curious to how many gammers will dribble on about free market in economics talk and yet won't act on their prinicples and not play a game from Zoe or bother reading reviews from a tainted source anymore.

This is a lie, perpetrated by key members in the gaming industry

Ok. As a former member of the Galatic Empire (NWC and 3DO), who are these people?

(and naively swallowed and recycled by some people) because they are incapable of debating on an equal footing about the purpose of Gamergate, and would rather try and bury the movement under a smear campaign.

I guess you listen to your own people.

If I'm honest, the truth is probably somewhere inbetween what I'm saying, and what you'd see in the press - its not as simple as looking at one source and relying upon that for an answerr. What I would suggest is you look at some of the resources who have tried to stay neutral in the debate - particularly the escapist and the huffington post web casts - and keep an open mind.

You should follow your own advice. What purpose does it for your group with slut/whore and doxxing serve?

If you have questions which I can answer for you, I can't guarantee to give you an impartial answer, but I can promise to try and give you a fair answer.

As Ifreann pointed out you might start by laying out your efforts to achieve these goals..

[Ralkovian Grand Island]

I'm just waiting for the sordid eventuality that a GamerGate "protestor" *will* be murdered for daring to speak ill of a woman working in or near the game industry, and the usual suspects will reflexively say that he deserved it for being a violent misogynist while internet legbeards high five each other.

But seriously, there's plenty of harassment and all around douchey behavior coming from both sides.

Ah yes, the classic False Equivalence Defense.

Yes, there is a lot of sexism in the video game industry, but what you're doing is effectively painting people as murderous bigots for thinking that maybe "video game journalism" shouldn't be dominated by people who don't play or enjoy games and actually spend most of their time bashing games and slandering everyone who plays them.

So far the only reported death threats made in the nontroversy were all directed towards women in the gaming industry allegedly by Gamergate supporters. There has yet to be a news story of a death threat being made against a Gamergate supporter, unless you're going to tell us the mainstream media are comprised of penis-hating Social Justice Warriors. Plus, those death threats can also come with rape threats and as we all know the first thing men are always threatened with is rape. So yeah, it's a bit fair to paint them as murderous bigots

I agree with Gauthier. When death threats are issued by one side, we should ignore all the concerns of that side and paint them as terrible monsters, even if there is some evidence to show that there might be people just claiming to receive death threats and lying about it.

In fact, we should start imprisoning and deporting everyone who makes death threats.

[The Black Forrest]

Ah yes, the classic False Equivalence Defense.



So far the only reported death threats made in the nontroversy were all directed towards women in the gaming industry allegedly by Gamergate supporters. There has yet to be a news story of a death threat being made against a Gamergate supporter, unless you're going to tell us the mainstream media are comprised of penis-hating Social Justice Warriors. Plus, those death threats can also come with rape threats and as we all know the first thing men are always threatened with is rape. So yeah, it's a bit fair to paint them as murderous bigots

I agree with Gauthier. When death threats are issued by one side, we should ignore all the concerns of that side and paint them as terrible monsters,

It doesn't help your cause when that nonsense goes on.

even if there is some evidence to show that there might be people just claiming to receive death threats and lying about it.

Your evidence?

In fact, we should start imprisoning and deporting everyone who makes death threats.

I don't think the gamer people would like that.

[Ralkovian Grand Island]

It doesn't help your cause when that nonsense goes on.

I agree. If your group has a cause, even if it's noble, if they step out of line, we have to destroy them. Destroy them all in fact.

Your evidence?

In the OP it's posted. But generally the lying from the feminist side and the failure to report any of these threats to the police. Other then anonymous death threats, which have no way of independent verification, she hasn't been threatened with any physical letters, etc. which can at least be shown as actual evidence rather than all this hearsay. I'd say it like this, if she didn't profit immensely from the publicity of 'death threats' then maybe people would be willing to actually believe her when things she said don't add up.

However, since the general reaction to the Death Threats is taking them face value even after it's agreed that these people are all around horrible people with little to no independent verification, I'm inclined to disbelief.

I don't think the gamer people would like that.

I'm sure they can totally fake receiving death threats from feminist to have them deported.

[Page]

Question: are there any places where I can find an UNBIASED summary of GamerGate and all the stuff that pertains to it? Because my understanding is rather incomplete. Everything I'm finding is either "ZOMG MISOGYNY" or "ZOMG FEMINAZIS" and I'd like to get the facts, not bullshit vaguely inspired by the truth.

You won't find an objective overview. So start with base source material.

So. Start by reading TheZoePost. This is what started what is now known, not entirely appropriately, as GamerGate. This was written by Zoe Quinn's ex. So far, he looks to have been 100% honest, which is impressive given how much he brought to the table in terms of testimony, so while not objective, he does seem reliable.

What does this source tell us? Well, first and foremost, it tells us that we cannot trust anything that comes directly from Zoe Quinn; it tells us that she's an awful abusive person (though her ex did not identify her as abusive, he described the symptoms very well, and other abuse victims came forward to let him know he was in their company). Second, it tells us roughly when Zoe Quinn was sleeping with whom.

This, in turn, means ... what?

Well, it means that the people who rallied to defend Zoe Quinn were rallying to defend a pretty horrible person. Since this was the opening act of the scandal, those rallying to her defense had good reason to suspect that she was a horrible person, and rallied to her defense anyway. It's a pretty good sociological case for the basic flaw of feminists: Feminists will rally to defend a woman under attack even if she is in the wrong.

Second, it means that the ethical complaints - such as they are - are as warranted as they could be. Zoe was indeed sleeping with people she really shouldn't have been sleeping with (such as her boss), and this casts suspicion on her credibility as a game dev (and her lovers' credibility in evaluating her game; another gave her game favorable mentions, another was involved in some fashion with an indie game award.

Now... does this really merit all the attention? No. We're talking about someone being personally horrible, mostly. The reason why it became front and center issue #1 is that anti-feminists and feminists both wanted to make this about women/misogyny/feminism in gaming... anti-feminists because Zoe Quinn made a nice example of a woman being horrible in gaming, feminists because male gamers make a nice unsympathetic target to beat on.

- Whiny exes are the most honest and reliable sources ever. Especially pretentious ones who write ten thousand word manifestos.

- Are alleged people sleeping together consenting adults? Yes? Then you can't say they "shouldn't" be.

- Indeed, we're taking about someone being personally horrible - Quinn's ex, whose manifesto is about on the same ethical level of revenge porn considering its intent.

- How are male gamers an "unsympathetic target" when they have an entire circle jerk in their favor all over the net?