Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

[Jub]

Well, there are people who play games to pass the time or because they are enjoyable. Then there are people for whom various forms of gaming form the focus of their social lives which are structured around their interactions with a relatively narrow group of people who are similarly situated. Their individual identity largely revolves around this.

It is the difference between someone who goes outside for a game of flag football every now and again, and Athletes.

Now, I am not sure that gamer culture is dead, but it has certainly evolved, with various sorts of gaming now catering to a much large set of demographic and personality characteristics and the group of people who identify as gamers has expanded beyond the meatspace isolated adolescent males it once did.

Some of them view this expansion as threatening to their own individual identities in a way similar to how right-wing reactionaries in some westernethnic nation states react to foreign immigrants.

This is a narrow ass view of what gamer culture is and I'm unsure I like the negative connotations you paint people you define as 'gamers' with. Even on the extreme end where a significant fraction of one's social life revolves around meeting up with friends for the express purpose of playing a game, or games, this doesn't mean that one is a neck beard, dude bro, or socially regressive. Yet this seems to be how you and others use the term 'gamer' in this thread.

I identify as a gamer and do so because I enjoy video games, board games, PnP RPGs, and sports. Every one of these things are forms of games and all shape who I am and what I enjoy doing in my spare time. Does enjoying these things and using them as a means to keep in contact with friends I've had for over a decade make me a gamer or does it make me a 'gamer'? Was I a 'gamer' back in the early and mid 2000's before gaming exploded or was I just a youth who enjoyed games because I grew up with them and used them as a way to bond with friends? Does liking and playing Squeenix RPG's in middle school and roleplaying via the old Avidgamers boards in the early 2000's make the female friends I've known since middle school bigoted neck beards too, or do you just have a narrow and negative view of gaming culture as a self admitted outsider?

[GuppyShark]

Just want to chip in a few thoughts here (pretty sure our latest GG apologist Wild Zontargs is US-based so I'm sure everyone will adequately handle his main arguments)

1) I'm concerned that according to our internal sdnet poll, 29% of sdnetters think GamerGate is about ethics in video games journalism. Way too high. We might as well be 911truth.net or something.

2) Regarding the "but we're left wing progressives, really" survey - If you claim to be left wing but the only cause that actually motivates you to get off your metaphorical couch and do something is a right wing cause, what does that say about what you really believe in? It's easy to hold a progressive attitude when it's other people who are going to have to shoulder the costs of change, but apparently even token efforts towards gender equality are a bridge too far and will not stand.

3) Per the above, people judge you based on what you do, not what you say. You can't pretend the people doxxing, harassing, issuing death threats are not part of GamerGate if that's the only part of the movement actually doing things. Don't like it, start a new goddamned movement.

[bilateralrope]

One claim I keep seeing is that the anti-GG camp are just as bad as the GG camp. What I haven't seen is either an attempt to quantify that* or even examples of the worst of the anti-GG camp that are as bad as the worst of GG.

*I'm not sure how one would attempt this.

A while back, there was an online survey of the political and social opinions of people in the GamerGate camp

Self-selection bias is a big problem with online surveys. Is there anything that makes this survey different ?

Or should it just be ignored like any other online survey ?

[Vendetta]

Well, there are people who play games to pass the time or because they are enjoyable. Then there are people for whom various forms of gaming form the focus of their social lives which are structured around their interactions with a relatively narrow group of people who are similarly situated. Their individual identity largely revolves around this.

It is the difference between someone who goes outside for a game of flag football every now and again, and Athletes.

Now, I am not sure that gamer culture is dead, but it has certainly evolved, with various sorts of gaming now catering to a much large set of demographic and personality characteristics and the group of people who identify as gamers has expanded beyond the meatspace isolated adolescent males it once did.

Some of them view this expansion as threatening to their own individual identities in a way similar to how right-wing reactionaries in some westernethnic nation states react to foreign immigrants.

This is a narrow ass view of what gamer culture is and I'm unsure I like the negative connotations you paint people you define as 'gamers' with. Even on the extreme end where a significant fraction of one's social life revolves around meeting up with friends for the express purpose of playing a game, or games, this doesn't mean that one is a neck beard, dude bro, or socially regressive. Yet this seems to be how you and others use the term 'gamer' in this thread.

Of course, there's the third type, people who are so automatically defensive of games and being a gamer that they percieve everything as an attack even if it means conflating things that different people have said...

Thing is, the multibillion dollar games industry and "gamer culture" are totally different things now, but there's a vocal element of gamer culture who believes that the entire multibillion doller industry belongs exclusively to them and that nobody else is allowed to say bad things about it or its products, and besides those people aren't real gamers anyway.

They're actually a tiny group of people, not in the slightest representative of everyone who plays videogames, but they think they are and the moron faction of GamerGate (the ones not actively hostile to women but too stupid to realise how they cover for the ones who are) will repeatedly insist they are if challenged. (Indeed, one of the articles which attracted most of them to GamerGate, Leigh Alexander's "gamers are over" piece made exactly that point, that "gamer culture" was tiny and insignificant and should be ignored by the games industry itself not pandered to (because it was unwilling to address its toxic elements who were at that time harrassing Zoe Quinn).

[Jub]

Thing is, the multibillion dollar games industry and "gamer culture" are totally different things now, but there's a vocal element of gamer culture who believes that the entire multibillion doller industry belongs exclusively to them and that nobody else is allowed to say bad things about it or its products, and besides those people aren't real gamers anyway.

They're actually a tiny group of people, not in the slightest representative of everyone who plays videogames, but they think they are and the moron faction of GamerGate (the ones not actively hostile to women but too stupid to realise how they cover for the ones who are) will repeatedly insist they are if challenged. (Indeed, one of the articles which attracted most of them to GamerGate, Leigh Alexander's "gamers are over" piece made exactly that point, that "gamer culture" was tiny and insignificant and should be ignored by the games industry itself not pandered to (because it was unwilling to address its toxic elements who were at that time harrassing Zoe Quinn).

One type of gamer culture has been marginalized, but I'd argue that even back in the day it was small next parents buying games for kids and non-assholes adults playing games. So just saying 'gamers are dead' or 'gamer culture is dead' is meaningless because gaming has always been made up of different groups so describing one culture as 'gamer culture' when I doubt it was ever a majority is yellow journalism at best and a blatant attack on people who call themselves gamers but don't belong to the small group of assholes at worst. Instead of using such a broad empty term perhaps they ought to come up with a label that doesn't paint the majority of people who play games with the same brush as a bunch of assholes.

[Vendetta]

One type of gamer culture has been marginalized, but I'd argue that even back in the day it was small next parents buying games for kids and non-assholes adults playing games.

See, here's the thing that you don't seem to get though.

Those people don't consider themselves gamers. They don't care about games beyond the immediate enjoyment of playing them, they don't participate in or view themselves as part of anything that could vaguely be described as "gamer culture"

When people talk about "gamer culture" they are talking about people who are invested in games beyond playing them. The people who buy merchandise, engage in fandoms, go to conventions and so on.

And that culture has a lot more vocal assholes than it should, it's not healthy for a culture to give so much leeway to its assholes but gamer culture does. The people outside that culture who play videogames are the people that Leigh Alexander was saying "gamers" should be ignored in favour of, because they're a more diverse group which are less prone to expressing assholedom about videogames.

[Jub]

Cutting the rest of your post as it's tangential to the point I'm trying to make.

And that culture has a lot more vocal assholes than it should, it's not healthy for a culture to give so much leeway to its assholes but gamer culture does. The people outside that culture who play videogames are the people that Leigh Alexander was saying "gamers" should be ignored in favour of, because they're a more diverse group which are less prone to expressing assholedom about videogames.

I'm a core gamer, and I have been since I was very young, I enjoy discussions about certain fandoms among my friends and enjoy watching coverage of gaming conventions if only to see what pre-rendered tailors turn out to be the least BS at launch. The thing is that my ties to gaming generally end outside of my social circle, I don't frequent gaming reddits or get into comment wars, and could care less about which console is better than the other aside from which has more games I find myself interested in playing. I suspect that many people who fit my description and level of community involvement would still self identify as gamers.

Being the kind of gamer that I am I dislike having a label I self associate with dragged through the dirt be it by media outlets and posters on this board, yet I also no power to do anything about the small percentage of trolls and assholes giving my group a bad name. I don't use twitter, and even if I made an account today, what effect would I have by saying something like #gamer not #gamergate in a tweet? Should I go on facebook and spam my friend list with posts about how gaming should be inclusive even though it would confuse my non-gaming contacts and get nods from my friends that do game?

Now you might, or might not, ask why I even care about this given my lack of connection to the greater gaming culture? I care because I dislike that people still see gamers as basement dwelling losers who play violent games and jerk off to shit like Rapelay. This latest coverage of gamers only further serves to paint the average person who plays games and identifies as a gamer in a poor light regardless of what they play, why they call themselves a gamer, and how able to chastize those idiots that get media attention they may be.

Nobody likes getting called an asshole for shit they didn't do, but when gamers speak up about it we get called whiners or have people like you saying we have it coming for being vocal enough against the assholes who also call themselves gamers. I'd like it if the media, and certain members of this forum, could lay off the stereo types and come up with a better term to target the assholes who do shit that makes them look like assholes.

[madd0ct0r]

so you dislike the bad assocaitions to the term gamer, but not enough to challenge the people who are creating the bad associations?
Or is that your reason for posting, and you've identified the commentators as the source of the bad assocaitions instead of the actions of the group you self identify with?

The enemy is always external right?

[Jub]

so you dislike the bad assocaitions to the term gamer, but not enough to challenge the people who are creating the bad associations?
Or is that your reason for posting, and you've identified the commentators as the source of the bad assocaitions instead of the actions of the group you self identify with?

The enemy is always external right?

If I started calling you an asshole based solely on your gender, race, religion, sexuality, or culture and then started making claims that you deserve it because you didn't fight hard enough to change public perception of your group I'd be banned form this forum. The same would also go if I started calling the members of the various group you belong too a bunch of narrow minded assholes based on my dealings with you thus far. So why don't you fuck yourself with the high horse you rode in on.

[Vendetta]

so you dislike the bad assocaitions to the term gamer, but not enough to challenge the people who are creating the bad associations?
Or is that your reason for posting, and you've identified the commentators as the source of the bad assocaitions instead of the actions of the group you self identify with?

The enemy is always external right?

If I started calling you an asshole based solely on your gender, race, religion, sexuality, or culture and then started making claims that you deserve it because you didn't fight hard enough to change public perception of your group I'd be banned form this forum. The same would also go if I started calling the members of the various group you belong too a bunch of narrow minded assholes based on my dealings with you thus far. So why don't you fuck yourself with the high horse you rode in on.

This is, of course, bullshit.

Gaming is a pastime you voluntarily engage in and the gamer community is one which you are voluntarily part of.

Unlike all of those other things.

You choose to associate with a community which has a higher-than-normal asshole ratio, and you defend that community despite its assholes, and you claim to be powerless to correct the behaviour of assholes with whom you voluntarily associate which seems more to indicate an unwillingness to try.

[Jub]

This is, of course, bullshit.

Gaming is a pastime you voluntarily engage in and the gamer community is one which you are voluntarily part of.

Unlike all of those other things.

Because what I enjoy as a hobby is purely arbitrary and thus trivial to change? You are aware that people tend to gravitate towards hobbies based on certain predetermined patterns of though and learned behaviors aren't you? You can't honestly believe that all hobbies are purely a matter of arbitrary choice, so this must be some attempt at trolling. If you honestly believe the above you should quit every hobby you currently partake in unless you devote some amount of time to improving the public perception and police the behaviors of the worst members of said communities world wide. After all it doesn't matter that nobody in your circle of influence is the cause of your groups bad public rep because you personally aren't crusading for change.

You choose to associate with a community which has a higher-than-normal asshole ratio, and you defend that community despite its assholes, and you claim to be powerless to correct the behaviour of assholes with whom you voluntarily associate which seems more to indicate an unwillingness to try.

I self identify as a gamer, choose because I define gamer as a person who plays and enjoys a multitude of games and spends a significant fraction of their time engaged in playing them and meet those criteria. My interactions with gaming culture are pretty much limited to playing a few online games with friends, I don't belong to a clan in any of them, some PnP games, these days mostly carried out via skype, and maybe getting out to a few tabletop war gaming sessions at my FLGS, and keeping up with gaming news through a few youtube sources who's opinions on which games I might like are usually accurate. Why should I have any responsibility to change gaming culture just because I play some games and desire to be able to call myself a gamer without getting strange looks and having to answer awkward questions?

-----

On another note, Vendetta and madd0ct0r you're both assholes because an outsiders view of this board is that it's made up of assholes, and since neither of you appear to be doing anything to change board culture you must either cease to be a member of this board or accept that you will be referred to from now on as *blank* that asshole from SDN in 100% of my future posts involving you. If you don't like it that's too bad, you can either leave or change board culture.

[madd0ct0r]

This is, of course, bullshit.

Gaming is a pastime you voluntarily engage in and the gamer community is one which you are voluntarily part of.

Unlike all of those other things.

Because what I enjoy as a hobby is purely arbitrary and thus trivial to change? yes.You are aware that people tend to gravitate towards hobbies based on certain predetermined patterns of though and learned behaviors aren't you? Guess learned behaviours can't be unlearned, that must be why GG trolls are so keen on not changing behaviour which has been shown to be pretty nasty.You can't honestly believe that all hobbies are purely a matter of arbitrary choice, so this must be some attempt at trolling. If you honestly believe the above you should quit every hobby you currently partake in unless you devote some amount of time to improving the public perception and police the behaviors of the worst members of said communities world wide I do, and not just in my hobbbies, but in my proffesional life too.. After all it doesn't matter that nobody in your circle of influence is the cause of your groups bad public rep because you personally aren't crusading for change. They came for the jews, and I said nothing becuase yadda yadda yadda.

You choose to associate with a community which has a higher-than-normal asshole ratio, and you defend that community despite its assholes, and you claim to be powerless to correct the behaviour of assholes with whom you voluntarily associate which seems more to indicate an unwillingness to try.

I self identify as a gamer, choose because I define gamer as a person who plays and enjoys a multitude of games and spends a significant fraction of their time engaged in playing them and meet those criteria. My interactions with gaming culture are pretty much limited to playing a few online games with friends, I don't belong to a clan in any of them, some PnP games, these days mostly carried out via skype, and maybe getting out to a few tabletop war gaming sessions at my FLGS, and keeping up with gaming news through a few youtube sources who's opinions on which games I might like are usually accurate. Why should I have any responsibility to change gaming culture just because I play some games and desire to be able to call myself a gamer without getting strange looks and having to answer awkward questions? answer: becuase you desire to be able to call yourself a gamer without getting strange looks and having to answer awkward questions.

-----

On another note, Vendetta and madd0ct0r you're both assholes because an outsiders view of this board is that it's made up of assholes, and since neither of you appear to be doing anything to change board culture false you must either cease to be a member of this board or accept that you will be referred to from now on as *blank* that asshole from SDN in 100% of my future posts involving you. If you don't like it that's too bad, you can either leave or change board culture Or I can just carry on challenging people who defend misogynistic behaviour and trolls. It's not like you calling me only by asshole will really change our communication pattern much ..

I've answered within your post in bold pink:)

[Jub]

Because what I enjoy as a hobby is purely arbitrary and thus trivial to change? yes.

So madd0ct0r that asshole from SDN, does that mean you just suddenly and arbitrarily change hobbies with no added investment needed or lose of investment after suddenly and randomly losing interest in a current hobby? After all, one can just change what they do and don't enjoy on a total effortless whim according to you, so you must change what you enjoy and don't enjoy the same way most people change socks.

You are aware that people tend to gravitate towards hobbies based on certain predetermined patterns of though and learned behaviors aren't you? Guess learned behaviours can't be unlearned, that must be why GG trolls are so keen on not changing behaviour which has been shown to be pretty nasty.

Gaming is a harmless pastime that I generally enjoy socially, what benefit, do I gain by making an active choice to cease gaming?

You can't honestly believe that all hobbies are purely a matter of arbitrary choice, so this must be some attempt at trolling. If you honestly believe the above you should quit every hobby you currently partake in unless you devote some amount of time to improving the public perception and police the behaviors of the worst members of said communities world wide I do, and not just in my hobbbies, but in my proffesional life too..

I'm sure that you police and are loudly outspoken about those that engage in every activity you engage in and every group you self identify with and/or could be identified as belonging to by an outside observer. Hell even if you do meet those requirements almost nobody else in the entire world will so it's an utterly shit standard to hold others to.

After all it doesn't matter that nobody in your circle of influence is the cause of your groups bad public rep because you personally aren't crusading for change. They came for the jews, and I said nothing becuase yadda yadda yadda.

Yeah, because some harassment online by and against people I have only the barest of things in common with is really the hill I should be dying on. I think that both GG and some of the people targeted by it acted in bad faith and wish the issue would just die already so something better can replace it in the public consciousness.

I self identify as a gamer, choose because I define gamer as a person who plays and enjoys a multitude of games and spends a significant fraction of their time engaged in playing them and meet those criteria. My interactions with gaming culture are pretty much limited to playing a few online games with friends, I don't belong to a clan in any of them, some PnP games, these days mostly carried out via skype, and maybe getting out to a few tabletop war gaming sessions at my FLGS, and keeping up with gaming news through a few youtube sources who's opinions on which games I might like are usually accurate. Why should I have any responsibility to change gaming culture just because I play some games and desire to be able to call myself a gamer without getting strange looks and having to answer awkward questions? answer: becuase you desire to be able to call yourself a gamer without getting strange looks and having to answer awkward questions.

Even if I had no desire to self identify as a gamer, my actions would make me one anyway, so again you suggest that in spite of my having little in common with people on either side of this debate I am equally responsible for changing both the behavior of the group and its public perception otherwise I deserve to be lumped in with the assholes? To that I say go fuck yourself, if GG is WWII I'm Portugal, just involved enough to claim membership to a group but not strongly allied with any faction

-----

On another note, Vendetta and madd0ct0r you're both assholes because an outsiders view of this board is that it's made up of assholes, and since neither of you appear to be doing anything to change board culture false

How's that been going for you, asshole?

I've answered within your post in bold pink:)

Nice font choice, I don't actually mind pink, but it is a tad hard to see in certain skins.

[Metahive]

If Juborade would only put one tenth of the outrage he reserves for people supposedly insulting his gamer-hood into speaking out against the many, many sociopathic manchildren that infest gaming...

[Jub]

If Juborade would only put one tenth of the outrage he reserves for people supposedly insulting his gamer-hood into speaking out against the many, many sociopathic manchildren that infest gaming...

Frankly the manchildren aren't a huge issue, they make up but a fraction of gamers as a whole and outside of a select few incidents they usually spend more time trolling each other than they do making life worse for anybody. Plus, as I've said even if I was inclined to make a fuss about them where would I do it?

This thread would be even more of an echo chamber and I could give a fuck less about scoring points for +1ing this issue; My FB friends already agree with me that GG is misguided at best and harmful at worst; I don't use twitter or other forms of social media; and really even if I suddenly started making rant videos on youtube I'd have no views and might as well waste my time in some more productive way. That and frankly my outrage over this is pretty much limited to posting here between calls at work so I don't fall asleep on the slow parts of a work from home tech support shift.

[Civil War Man]

Frankly the manchildren aren't a huge issue, they make up but a fraction of gamers as a whole and outside of a select few incidents they usually spend more time trolling each other than they do making life worse for anybody. Plus, as I've said even if I was inclined to make a fuss about them where would I do it?

The problem is that despite their low numbers they are a bigger problem than you claim. The stereotype of the gamer as a sociopathic neckbearded manchild came about because the manchildren are loud and obnoxious, completely drowning out the more normal gamers. It's a problem I see in a lot of nerd culture, not just in gaming. I have generally encountered two different kinds of nerd. Many are incredibly friendly, open, and accepting of others. Others are That Guy, who tend to be obnoxious maladjusted bullies (though typically more emotional rather than physical bullies) who are incredibly hostile towards anyone they perceive as an outsider. That Guy is basically a parasite when it gets introduced into an otherwise nice group. If the rest of the group is not quick to exile That Guy (which unfortunately happens too often, since nerd groups are often founded by people who feel socially excluded, who are as a result uncomfortable with excluding others), That Guy digs in, festers, and eventually drives others away.

I have no advice on where you might go to push back against them. Perhaps there is no place you can go, because the manchildren have poisoned the well and made gamer into a toxic word. I also play a lot of games, both video games and various tabletop games, but I do not consider myself to be a gamer. Part of it is that my gaming is not a core part of my identity, but it's also because gamer is such a loaded word with so much baggage that calling myself that would not be an accurate description of me. I am similarly hesitant to call myself an atheist, even though I do not believe in the existence of gods, without also taking the time to clarify that I am simply a "not religious" type of atheist as opposed to being a part of the evangelical "New Atheist" community.

[Flagg]

Jub: "I joined the KKK when it was just a college frat, before the racism, so I can call myself a Klan member and anyone who has a problem with that is an asshole!"

That's what you sound like you dumb dink.

[Joun_Lord]

That Guy.

I'm betting some would say Gamergate is essentially a gathering of such people. For the Gamergaters who fit the stereotype bandied about by every damnable gaming publication of the fat basement dwelling misogynistic perma-virgin loser tend to be the ones who use Gamergate as a cudgel to attack women. They don't give a damn about secret journo mailing lists, publishers paying for favorable reviews, relationships between game makers and journalists that create conflicts of interests, gaming journalists attacking gamers and people who game in general, game makers using their gender to (allegedly) stamp out any criticism of the crap, twisting of a fun past time into something considerably less fun by injecting politics and other crap into it, and douchebags named Phil Fish being a douchebag. They only care to attack them casuals and normals and worse of all women who dare in invade their sanctuary.

As you pointed out though such people aren't limited to gaming. Nerds have their share in general. The That Guys who throw a shit-fit if anything nerdy gets popular, attacks people who enjoy something like Star Wars or Trek casually but doesn't bury themselves completely into nerddom, and thinks the only way a woman should be at a con is as a booth babe.

When I used to airsoft there was That Guy who would rag on anyone who wasn't dressed to the nines in camo with a good gun that they spent a stupid amount of money on but would ironically be bumming this and that from everyone, would try and cheat and make a scene, be a cunt and a half anytime someone brought someone new, and switching between creepy ass perv and rude standoffish asshole anytime women were at a match.

Now most people who have met That Guy know he is pretty much always one or two guys out of a large group, a small (well small in number, not in size) minority. But they are a very visible, highly obnoxious minority like maybe orcs at a gathering of mer folk. Thus such groups tend to be all labeled as That Guy. All nerds are basement dwelling perma-virgins, all gamers are dude bro HeMan Woman Haters, all atheists are holier then though (heh) better then everyone else assholes, and so on. Normal people are pretty much a silent majority but labeled alongside the cunts as cunts.

Maybe Gamergate is the same? Don't know, going by this thread alone probably not. Though why some who aren't douchebags who hate women might be caught up this is they don't believe the stuff about GG being women haters. Gamers have for a while been "oppressed", people who game called violent sociopaths who will commit mass murder, games are the work of satan, Jack Freaking Thompson, and any of the other attacks of gaming by groups and politicians. It wouldn't be a stretch to think the anti-Gamergate is just more pro-anti-gaming, is just another attack on their beloved hobby. Opponents of Zoe Quinn and Sarkissian being compared to ISIS like the detractors of Karen Traviss and called misogynists for daring to speak out against them, again like Travissisty, even if they are attacking their works or character and not their gender.

Though this time is coming internally so its even worse, probably the reason for the sheer size of the Gamergate shitstorm that brewed. With gaming media being highly anti-GG and posting a collective hit piece against gamers, one cannot trust the narrative they try to paint anymore then one would trust the narrative Faux News tried to paint aboot Occupy Wall St.

Gamers have become "professional victims" to use a SJW parlance, ironically something many of the douchebag anti-women gamers revile. And such is probably why some gamers who aren't giant toolbags full of douchebags are so insular, so untrusting.

A picture to illin'strate why some may feel as such.



Anyway it goes it doesn't excuse attacking people en masse or harassing people, that goes for Gamergate or their opponents and is why I have no support for either side. That and I'm too much of a luddite old man to get into that Twitter and Facebook crap.

[Vendetta]

That Guy.

I'm betting some would say Gamergate is essentially a gathering of such people. For the Gamergaters who fit the stereotype bandied about by every damnable gaming publication of the fat basement dwelling misogynistic perma-virgin loser tend to be the ones who use Gamergate as a cudgel to attack women.

Those are the people who started GamerGate and who deliberately spread the falsehood that it was anything to do with "ethics" in order to trick idiots to join in, and who were always its most vocal members and most often followed and repeated by the idiots.

Turns out there are a lot of idiots.

There's a significant proportion of your "silent majority" that tacitly supports That Guy's behaviour as long as he sells them a bullshit line.

A picture to illin'strate why some may feel as such.

The picture is at least illustrative of the fact that GamerGate is predominantly ignorant white males who are so uncomfortable with having their cultural norms examined they'd rather sit in the basement playing videogames.

[madd0ct0r]

oh, the usual anti-gaming twerps have also hitched a ride on the shitstorm, espcially becuase they have some nasty behaviour to point at and denounce. There's no denying that, but they're pathetically easy to prove wrong when they start claiming games are bad or anything beyond 'some idiots on a hashtag are twats'.

I think where I might not be as clear as I could be:
I'm not expecting people who identify as gamers to have to prove themselves nice guys by starting a blog or chucking energy into the waste pit that is twitter. I don't think either of those things would be remotely productive. I would expect someone whose friend was ranting about 'stupid feminist bitches' to call them out so they are at least dimly aware their behaviour isn't socially acceptable. Something I've learnt over the years is that people will very rarely back down in an argument, but often will change their future behaviour without ever admitting they were wrong.
I would expect, if asked about gamergate, a noble gamer would shrug and say shitstorm and troll fest. It grew big so quickly because it some people acted badly, some websites saw it as a good traffic mobiliser and provoked further responses and it relit a long running and acrimonious discussion between different segments of the gamer community regarding representation and risk.

[Jub]

Coming back to this topic after a good nights sleep and some time to think, I've actually come to the conclusion that I'm not so powerless as I thought when it comes to changing gaming's image. I'm not likely to ever be a celebrity of any sort, but I have introduced new players to gaming/nerd culture and some of the people who've actually seen me running a game of D&D have remarked that it's nothing like they thought it would be. I also do my part to pass along word of developers with anti-consumer agendas and generally if somebody (gamer of otherwise) in my circle of influence is being an ass they'll hear about it from me.

I guess I'm already doing some small part to change things and really just came to this thread to vent a bit.

[madd0ct0r]

that, and who dosen't enjoy a bit of mental judo?

[Jub]

that, and who dosen't enjoy a bit of mental judo?

Indeed, thanks for indulging me.

[Joun_Lord]

That Guy.

I'm betting some would say Gamergate is essentially a gathering of such people. For the Gamergaters who fit the stereotype bandied about by every damnable gaming publication of the fat basement dwelling misogynistic perma-virgin loser tend to be the ones who use Gamergate as a cudgel to attack women.

Those are the people who started GamerGate and who deliberately spread the falsehood that it was anything to do with "ethics" in order to trick idiots to join in, and who were always its most vocal members and most often followed and repeated by the idiots.

Turns out there are a lot of idiots.

There's a significant proportion of your "silent majority" that tacitly supports That Guy's behaviour as long as he sells them a bullshit line.

I don't disagree with you really but the fact the idiot bait lines worked means some of the dooky about ethics and junk the vocalists of GG are dribbling actually resonate with gamers as a whole. I'd dare say that most of the support from main stream gamers came because of those lines.

Its a problem if that support continued when the gamers dig into the "movement" (a movement like the corniest lumpy number 2 I've made move and I rarely eat corn so its weird that I continue to have corny stool) and see its origins as an attack on Zoe Quinn by her cuckolded boyfriend and continue to support Gamergate. Though I suppose they can employ mental gymnastics and say they've co-opted Gamergate (which would be dumb considering its tarnished name, it would be failure even if they could eject its founding failures) or that they only support the ethics part of Gamergate and the anti-women side is just trolls.

The fact Gamergate is speaking about some problems long brewing in the gaming community well before Zoe Quinn ever waltzed onto the scene means it will get support of some gamers looking to latch onto whatever they can to express their frustrations of un-ethical gaming journalism and perverting of a past time into something terrible for all.

A picture to illin'strate why some may feel as such.

The picture is at least illustrative of the fact that GamerGate is predominantly ignorant white males who are so uncomfortable with having their cultural norms examined they'd rather sit in the basement playing videogames.[/quote]

Or it illustrates how people who enjoy games are tired at being preached at by preachers and Fish and demonized from all sides for some time. They are relatively normal people (as normal as someone can be who wears a beanie) don't like being told they are bad people who will do bad things because they enjoy what amounts to some stupid time waster or how the stupid time waster is filled with bad things they should be ashamed of enjoying. They occupy the position formerly held by rock music, Elvis's pelvis, Dungeons and Dragons, violent movies, comic books, and anything else people rail against as evil and are none to pleased about that.

Also it illustrates our gaming controllers haven't cords anymore. I miss cords.

Of course however someone feels already abut gaming and gamers will see it differently. Your interpretation of it is telling, its show you've already made your mind up about gamers and any thing to do with them will be filtered through your mental pictures of "stupid ignorant white guy basement dweller".

Its akin to the jockbro douchebags who make up their minds about all nerds being dorky basement dwelling white perma-virgins with a massive disconnect with reality and the only vagina they've seen has a .jpg attached to it. I can naturally assume you atleast have some nerdish tendencies or you wouldn't be chatting on a internet site dedicated to how terribly horrible Star Wars would cream Star Trek like a team of linebackers vs a toddler. A particularly foolish toddler who thought it would be a smart idea to go against a team of hulking steroid filled human gorillas.

Do you fit that stereotype of a nerd? Do you find it somewhat offensive that someone would slap a rather unflattering label or stereotype onto you?

[Simon_Jester]

Thing is, there is a very significant difference between having your games criticized because of:
1) A dearth of plausible female characters, and a plethora of bosomy damsel-as-wish-fulfillment characters.
2) The fanbase having rapidly escalated to stalkerish and misogynistic tactics when they feel threatened.

...and having your games criticized because of:
1) Portrayals of violence will make people into serial killers, and
2) The fanbase is being subverted by Satanic messages!

Whoever made up that cartoon Joun linked to, I must assume, doesn't know the difference. Which tends to reinforce the "massive disconnect with reality" aspect of the gamer stereotype.

It is a common mental malfunction for people to assume that everyone who isn't on their side is on an equivalent (low) moral footing. But when anyone who criticizes your movement runs into the situation described here... there is something wrong with your movement. Something that was NOT wrong when you were just defending yourselves against Jack Thompson.