Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Poll ended at 2014-11-12 05:11pm

Yes
53
60%
Maybe
5
6%
No
26
29%
Don't Know
5
6%
 
Total votes: 89

User avatar
Eleas
Jaina Dax
Posts: 4893
Joined: 2002-07-08 05:08am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Eleas » 2014-10-15 04:22am

Terralthra wrote:At the bottom of the article, below the part selectively screenshotted above, there's a part wherein further information is revealed of the claimed-transgendered person admitting that he is pretending to be female to gain an advantage online, and clarifies that he is totally a guy.
Funny how Spekkio missed that, isn't it?

Oh, and let's not forget that Zoe Quinn actually monitored part of the discussion where GamerGate dudebros felt they could drop their guards and be honest, shall we? Choice quotes:
best way to get this proven [..] is to have someone go deep undercover [..] acquire their confidence [..] then privately talk with Anita [..] and talk about "better" ways to false flag things
I mean, think about it. If the people are actively supporting launching a harassment campaign against them are ACTIVELY PROTECTING THEM AGAINST HARASSMENT... how would that look? [..] doesn't really matter though. The crazies are not our objective here [;] the objective is to cause infighting and doubt within SJW ranks[.]
Don't tell me you actually buy the corruption in journalism thing
Yeah, I know 4chan claims to have released the chat logs. Frankly, I wouldn't trust a single word from those motherfuckers without iron-clad corroboration.
"Travelers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves."
--Chinua Achebe

User avatar
salm
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 10296
Joined: 2002-09-09 08:25pm

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by salm » 2014-10-15 05:18am

Broomstick wrote:No argument there - but when have people ever been rational?

Also keep in mind that while men are more likely to be victims of violence in general, women are FAR more likely to be sexually assaulted, and even today sexual assault can have life-long negative repercussions to the victim.
So, if men are more likely to be assaulted are women being unreasonable for being scared or are men unreasonable for not being scared enough?
Or is the violence caused on men not as bad as violence caused on women. I mean, if you´ve ever been on the recieving end of a fist you probably know that it´s not really earth shattering in most cases. Being on the recieving end of knife or univited dick on the other hand is rather likely to be.
So perhaps most violence caused on men are just fist fights which tend to be rather undramatic.

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Thanas » 2014-10-15 05:24am

The Romulan Republic wrote:I think the threats to Utah State deserve a thread in News and Politics. Or perhaps its time for a general domestic terrorism in America thread like the one for North Korea given how much of this kind of shit happens.
Can we not use the phrase terrorism everytime some idiots decidee to act like idiots?
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 27003
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest
Contact:

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Broomstick » 2014-10-15 07:54am

salm wrote:
Broomstick wrote:No argument there - but when have people ever been rational?

Also keep in mind that while men are more likely to be victims of violence in general, women are FAR more likely to be sexually assaulted, and even today sexual assault can have life-long negative repercussions to the victim.
So, if men are more likely to be assaulted are women being unreasonable for being scared or are men unreasonable for not being scared enough?
Yes.
Or is the violence caused on men not as bad as violence caused on women.
I think man-on-man violence should be just as objectionable as any other form of violence. However, I think there are two issues regarding this that need to also be addressed. As usual, I'm full of words so if folks just want to skip over my dissertation I won't be offended.
I mean, if you´ve ever been on the recieving end of a fist you probably know that it´s not really earth shattering in most cases. Being on the recieving end of knife or univited dick on the other hand is rather likely to be.
So perhaps most violence caused on men are just fist fights which tend to be rather undramatic.
Human men are male mammals, which to some extent is DUH! but which is also important. Most male mammals do engage in dominance fights, which among other things are characterized by being (usually) less than lethal or maiming. One of the classic portrays of this are Hollywood fight-fights over a girl, or a girl's honor, or to get the girl, or protect the girl.... you get the idea. Back in the days when schoolyard scuffles were treated as such instead of as criminal assaults older boys/young men would, indeed, have fights in said schoolyard. The usual tactic was to observe, let the two involved have it out for a bit, and intervene if things got too serious. This is NOT bullying, several-on-one, and the like. There were problems with that "system", but it did let the young male apes get rid of some aggression.

The male human tendency for dominance battles is not as strong as between, say, deer or elephant seals but it's still there. Fortunately, it can be channeled. This is why men tend to be more competitive than women, compete more often than women, and tend to be more aggressive in competition. I hasten to add this is all on average - human males are also quite capable of non-aggressive behavior, and human females can be extremely competitive.

Anyhow - this is a reason that sports can be beneficial for young men. It gives them a safe outlet for their natural urges to compete against other young men. These urges can also be channeled intellectually, hence chess clubs and the appeal of FPS games for young men. With the world getting more crowded and personal weaponry (in some cases) becoming more dangerous/lethal encouraging young men to express these tendencies on line is rather than in actual physical conflict is, in my mind, a plus.

That's one sort of male violence and you're correct - being on the receiving end of a male mammal dominance fight is, in the greater universe of violence, not that big a deal. Yes, it hurts, you can wind up with bruises or worst-case a cracked rib but a body recovers fairly quickly.

Then there's the other form of violence. The one where there is real intent to harm or kill, where the goal isn't dominance but either taking resources or eliminating perceived enemies. The one where the knives and guns come out, where each side calls for buddies to come along in an attempt to get a numbers advantage, when you get ambush instead of face-to-face confrontation. It ranges from the mugger who knifes his victim to gang warfare with guns. This is the violence men should fear, and because men are more likely to be out and about in the world, are more likely to travel alone or at night, they are more frequent targets of this.

Women tend not to be out and about on their own so much, and for most of history were under the protection of men (husbands and relatives, mostly) which gave them a level of protection the men did not enjoy. When attacked, though women tend to be more vulnerable due to being less physically strong and usually unarmed, and in addition there's that whole raped-woman-as-damaged-goods thing that seems to crop up so often. Women are subjected to violence (outside the family - violence inside the family is a different matter) less often, but the consequences are often different. If a woman is raped and her society then treats her as an outcast she no longer has the protection of others and is thus more likely to be victimized again and again.

In short: There are, broadly speaking, two categories of violence. One is largely (but not entirely) for show and is our equivalent of the male dominance fights seen in other mammals. The other is the variety that causes maiming and death. It's definitely the latter one that's most important to avoid.

Sometimes, the male dominance stuff escalates into the deadlier violence. I think that's what we see sometimes, when some walking turd goes from feeling butt-hurt for not being acknowledged the way he desires to getting a gun and shooting a dozen or so people.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 08:40am

Terralthra wrote:
Spekio wrote:There were pics that were removed. You can search the doxx yourself if you doubt me.
At the bottom of the article, below the part selectively screenshotted above, there's a part wherein further information is revealed of the claimed-transgendered person admitting that he is pretending to be female to gain an advantage online, and clarifies that he is totally a guy.
Search the bottom of the article for the disclaimer. I did it just now. There are two people doxxxed.
An earlier version of this post contained a link to publicly viewable photographs (mirror selfies) of Ging287, which he uploaded to an image sharing site five years ago when a teenager. The link was removed upon request by a Twitter user.

Eleas wrote:Snip.
Oh, you are totally right to believe the know liar, harasser, doxxer and blackballer, instead of reading the logs yorself.

It's like you are so proud of your gullibleness that you decided to flaunt it. Need I bring the proofs of her fucking with the CHARITY FOR WOMEN The Fine Young Capitalists or that she faked a raid by a board of depressed 30 year olds?

And those "dudebros" funded said charity. Fucking monsters.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Eleas
Jaina Dax
Posts: 4893
Joined: 2002-07-08 05:08am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Eleas » 2014-10-15 09:24am

Spekio wrote:<snip>
Citation needed. Come back when you're past puberty, son.
"Travelers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves."
--Chinua Achebe

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 09:48am

Eleas wrote:
Spekio wrote:<snip>
Citation needed. Come back when you're past puberty, son.
I'd be happy to provide any screen shots of what you need.

User avatar
Eleas
Jaina Dax
Posts: 4893
Joined: 2002-07-08 05:08am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Eleas » 2014-10-15 10:09am

Spekio wrote:
Eleas wrote:
Spekio wrote:<snip>
Citation needed. Come back when you're past puberty, son.
I'd be happy to provide any screen shots of what you need.
All right. In the interests of not being a shitbird, I will apologize for that crack. I still require proof that Zoe Quinn would fabricate evidence, which is a pretty damn serious charge. Knowing gamer culture as I do, and knowing the complete travesty that was the attacks on Anita Sarkeesian, Jade Raymond, Brianna Wu, among countless other less well-known women, I'm going to need some more proof than the word of people who brought the term doxxing into the mainstream vocabulary.

Because the sentiments behind the attacks I described above? It hasn't gone away. Ignoring it does no-one any favors.
"Travelers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves."
--Chinua Achebe

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 10:46am

Eleas wrote:Snip.
Apology accepted. In the interest of polite discussion, let me say this: I know you don't know me (and I could claim be anyone on the Internet), and I'll be the first to admit gaming culture is toxic, for the most part a boy's club, and admit harassment and misogyny is happening. I would be the first to decry a campaign that was focused on simply harassing women.

I find the notion of "not wanting women to enter a male space" moronic and juvenile. Unlike hipsters, I want more people to be able to enjoy the things I enjoy. And there are plenty of woman that do, and that is great.

I'll admit that I don't like Anita Sarkeesian, and I think she is a con woman, but the harassment she is suffering for making criticism is barbaric. There are plenty of people offering a counterpoint (even some who identify as feminists), and that is the way I think criticism should be taken.

The internet has a serious problem with harassment, and sometimes I think some politics I opposed (As per parts of the Marco Civil in brazilian law) do have a purpose, but on the other hand there are people who are perfectly willing to use this as a way to propel their careers.

#GamerGate is a hashtag, and as such can be used by anyone. Most people whom are seen as figureheads are decrying harassment and reporting (and encouraging) other to report harassment.

Third parties and even some "victims" such as Brianna Wu (Whom created a sock puppet account to troll people, as per my post on the first page, and whom people suspect doxxxed herself) are also having a blast with this. I have screen shots of Wu even refusing to talk to reporters on e-mail who were not totally pro her side.

Still, my axe to grind is this: People were talking about a public figure (yes, a significant part of it about her sleeping arround) and her clique not only saw fit to quash discussion, also to publish articles decrying gamers as basically the he-man's woman hater club, ignoring all the shit she did in public.

Look at this. Don't you think there was discussion to be had about the blackballing of a chartable organization?


http://i.imgur.com/KhiPgHf.jpg

Then there is the e-mails where she tries to pass the blame to her publicist, Maya Kramer (legobutts, as per the screenshots).

There is also the problem of her clique bullying a alleged victim of her harassment (as per screenshot on one of my previous posts), and more.

People have a legitimate problem with Quinn and the journos beside her lady parts. Only, as it is a wide tent hashtag, it is easy for it to be hijacked, used, or co-opted by psychos, trolls, and people trying to further their careers .

I'll add the wizard chan thing later today.

EDIT: Image was too big, link to it now.

User avatar
Eleas
Jaina Dax
Posts: 4893
Joined: 2002-07-08 05:08am
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Eleas » 2014-10-15 11:12am

Allright, fair enough. A few points:
I'll admit that I don't like Anita Sarkeesian, and I think she is a con woman, but the harassment she is suffering for making criticism is barbaric.
The sentiment is good. Still, why would you think she's a con woman? It's not her fault that she was given more money than she demanded for the project. One could certainly feel that she's not stretching herself or that she should do more, but there's no duplicity there that I can see. And no, I can't see misreading the contents of a game as a "con"; if that's the charge, then frankly it is duplicitous. This is my problem: standards for female devs and gamer profiles are always harsher.
Third parties and even some "victims" such as Brianna Wu (Whom created a sock puppet account to troll people, as per my post on the first page, and whom people suspect doxxxed herself) are also having a blast with this. I have screen shots of Wu even refusing to talk to reporters on e-mail who were not totally pro her side.
The only thing I see on your post at the first page about Wu is an allegation that you think she's a professional victim. I also don't see why "people suspect" should be accepted: people also suspected that I invented my own ADHD, and that the girl raped in the Steubenville case was a lying whore, but that doesn't mean they should be given credit.

That picture is part and parcel of what I'm talking about. There are no links, no analysis, no attempt at providing context or verification, yet I'm supposed to condemn Quinn because of it?

And even so, it's not just a problem with harassment and misogyny as such: it's this clique-ish mentality and the chumminess with MRAs that grates, the idea that these guys ooze forth of them being underdogs and victims and that this space belongs to them. I know about it -- heck, I was a 'gamer' before true 3D games even existed, and it was far more low-status than it is today, enough that I expect women back then had a beastly time of it.

Yet we never palled along with MRAs. We never adopted separatist lingo like "redpills" and mocked people for being warriors for that great Satan called "social justice". When you consider that this was in 1992, then you'll probably appreciate just how retrograde "gaming" has become today.
"Travelers with closed minds can tell us little except about themselves."
--Chinua Achebe

User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Terralthra » 2014-10-15 11:38am

Brianna Wu created a satirical troll account on which she posts parody. Not anonymous troll accounts on which she posts targeted threats and people's home addresses. See the difference?

"Some people suspect she doxxed herself" is weasel-words bullshit. Who suspects that? Do you suspect she doxxed herself? Why? Why do you always refer to screenshots you have without posting links to them?

Zoe Quinn didn't blackball anyone, or even try to blackball someone. To blackball is to engage in a (normally widespread) conspiracy to ban someone from an industry or work or social group. She clearly didn't do that, because one person can't blackball an organization which has more power and money than she does.

So, please clarify, since she didn't "blackball" anyone, what did she do? Did she call on people to boycott TFYC (whoever they are)? If so, did she have good reason to do so? Is their model exploitative?

Are you conceding that no one "doxxed" an underage transgender person, and your outrage over that was either ignorant (didn't read the whole page) or feigned (read the whole page and didn't want to admit it)?

User avatar
madd0ct0r
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6112
Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by madd0ct0r » 2014-10-15 12:46pm

Spekio wrote:
ignoring all the shit she did in public.

Look at this. Don't you think there was discussion to be had about the blackballing of a chartable organization?

http://i.imgur.com/KhiPgHf.jpg
that's the best they've got?
35 tweets, 3 of which are repeated and only 8 of which are directly critical of the charity. that was a waste of my time.
"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 01:12pm

Eleas wrote: The sentiment is good. Still, why would you think she's a con woman? It's not her fault that she was given more money than she demanded for the project. One could certainly feel that she's not stretching herself or that she should do more, but there's no duplicity there that I can see. And no, I can't see misreading the contents of a game as a "con"; if that's the charge, then frankly it is duplicitous. This is my problem: standards for female devs and gamer profiles are always harsher.
What I think it's completely subjective, and out of focus of this discussion. I could think she was literally Hitler, and would be still in my right to do so, due to the subjective nature of opinions. I still would not condone harassment to her.
The only thing I see on your post at the first page about Wu is an allegation that you think she's a professional victim. I also don't see why "people suspect" should be accepted: people also suspected that I invented my own ADHD, and that the girl raped in the Steubenville case was a lying whore, but that doesn't mean they should be given credit.
You are free to make your own conclusions. My only objection is for one side to be treated as saintly women being harassed by a hate mob. That she is a provocateur, however, is on her public twitter profile. That she blew on Radio Nero to go on MSNBC to claim it was an all out war it's still on her twitter, last I checked.

That her behavior is dubious is a fact, that she benefits from the press attention she receiving is a fact, and I'm sorry, I'm not willing to trust her implicitly just for the fact she is a woman.
That picture is part and parcel of what I'm talking about. There are no links, no analysis, no attempt at providing context or verification, yet I'm supposed to condemn Quinn because of it?
I am unaware of how to proceed here. Affirmanti non negandi imcubit probatio. If you are saying my screenshot is fake, it's up to you to prove I'm making shit up. You can't expect me to make the diabolical proof.

You could do your own research, instead of trusting me or Quinn, the affair was publicized by both sides.There are even leaked e-mails that zoe admit were hers but were misleading (https://storify.com/jbradfield/zoe-quinn-re-tfyc).

Still, the grand point is: Even if those were false, and I am being duped, there is no denying that people raised a subject of discussion, only for it to be deleted and the press in mass to paint "gamers", which you yourself agreed is a broad term as whiny sexually frustated white men, and refused to even adress that.

And lastly, even if gaming has become retrograde, to which I'll disagree, it does not excuse collusion on people whom are supposed to be consumer advocates. To dismiss legitimate concerns because "misogyny" is a deflection tatic.

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 01:20pm

Terralthra wrote:Are you conceding that no one "doxxed" an underage transgender person, and your outrage over that was either ignorant (didn't read the whole page) or feigned (read the whole page and didn't want to admit it)?

Nice moving of goalposts there. That there were screen shots of a trans teenager is listed at the disclaimer in the bottom of the page that I provided. There is an archive today of the original post, I'm not willing to signal boost that. Still, you asked fro proof Quinn doxxed someone, I provided it.
Terralthra wrote:Brianna Wu created a satirical troll account on which she posts parody. Not anonymous troll accounts on which she posts targeted threats and people's home addresses. See the difference?
Still an provocateur, just like I stated.
"Some people suspect she doxxed herself" is weasel-words bullshit. Who suspects that? Do you suspect she doxxed herself? Why? Why do you always refer to screenshots you have without posting links to them?
Do I think she is a professional victim and is using the limelight to promote herself? Yes. I already stated so.
Zoe Quinn didn't blackball anyone, or even try to blackball someone. To blackball is to engage in a (normally widespread) conspiracy to ban someone from an industry or work or social group. She clearly didn't do that, because one person can't blackball an organization which has more power and money than she does.

So, please clarify, since she didn't "blackball" anyone, what did she do? Did she call on people to boycott TFYC (whoever they are)? If so, did she have good reason to do so? Is their model exploitative?


Really? A person with connections can't blackball someone? Good god Therraltha, you outdid yourself.

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30117
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Simon_Jester » 2014-10-15 02:09pm

Darmalus wrote:
Broomstick wrote:
Jub wrote:Should I feel afraid every time a stranger gets close to me when I'm walking alone at night, or when a less than well kept person approaches me at a bus stop?
Well, if we ever needed proof Jub wasn't a woman (as if that was ever in doubt) there's proof.

I'm sorry it fractures your veneer, Jub, but that is EXACTLY the world for the majority of women. Fear of every stranger. Fear of many acquaintances.

Maybe that has an effect on how they view threats, hm?
Which is weird, since according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, men are twice as likely to be a victim of violence from strangers, but women are four times as likely to be victimized by an "intimate partner". So a woman should be less afraid of strangers (than a man) but more afraid of her friends and family.
Another issue is that a woman is more likely to feel physically helpless, unable to escape from a bad situation, than a man. If the average man decides to grab the average woman and won't let go, she is not going to be able to get away without his permission... or without putting in one hell of an effort and getting lucky.

That position of physical weakness affects how people view a situation.
Block wrote:I'm not disputing that it was illegal or stupid. I'm saying that calling it domestic terrorism is a pretty big stretch. More like criminal harassment.
If it wasn't done by foreigners it was domestic. If it was harassment with a political agenda (such as silencing someone's freedom of speech), then it was terrorism. QED.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Thanas » 2014-10-15 02:19pm

Simon_Jester wrote:
Block wrote:I'm not disputing that it was illegal or stupid. I'm saying that calling it domestic terrorism is a pretty big stretch. More like criminal harassment.
If it wasn't done by foreigners it was domestic. If it was harassment with a political agenda (such as silencing someone's freedom of speech), then it was terrorism. QED.
FFS by that standard both policital parties in the USA are domestic terrorists. :banghead:
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Terralthra » 2014-10-15 02:45pm

Spekio wrote:
Terralthra wrote:Are you conceding that no one "doxxed" an underage transgender person, and your outrage over that was either ignorant (didn't read the whole page) or feigned (read the whole page and didn't want to admit it)?

Nice moving of goalposts there. That there were screen shots of a trans teenager is listed at the disclaimer in the bottom of the page that I provided. There is an archive today of the original post, I'm not willing to signal boost that. Still, you asked fro proof Quinn doxxed someone, I provided it.
No, you didn't. There were no screenshots of a trans teenager because there wasn't a trans teenager. The claimed trans teenager was in fact not trans, and was claiming to be trans in order to gain some ephemeral moral authority on feminism (to promote an MRA agenda). It's amazing how you can claim to be reading these articles, but not actually read them. There was no address or phone number posted, and once again, Zoe Quinn didn't actually post it. Zoe linked to an article wherein someone's politically-motivated lies about their own identity were exposed. That's not "doxxing."
Spekio wrote:
Terralthra wrote:Brianna Wu created a satirical troll account on which she posts parody. Not anonymous troll accounts on which she posts targeted threats and people's home addresses. See the difference?
Still an provocateur, just like I stated.
False equivalence much? "Provocateur" is not the same as "posting addresses and phone numbers of family members along with murder/rape threats". Seriously, let's look at some tweets here.

Brololz (Brianna's satirical twitter): HAVE A FUCKING MURDERBONER about #gamergate. But, FUCK. What if women have perspective on their lives that’s impossible for me to grasp?

Yeah, man, wow, that's just like posting someone's home address and threatening rape and death.

Spekio wrote:
"Some people suspect she doxxed herself" is weasel-words bullshit. Who suspects that? Do you suspect she doxxed herself? Why? Why do you always refer to screenshots you have without posting links to them?
Do I think she is a professional victim and is using the limelight to promote herself? Yes. I already stated so.
Stop fucking weaselling. What is a "professional victim"? Do you think she posted her own address and invented death threats against herself? Based on what?
Spekio wrote:
Zoe Quinn didn't blackball anyone, or even try to blackball someone. To blackball is to engage in a (normally widespread) conspiracy to ban someone from an industry or work or social group. She clearly didn't do that, because one person can't blackball an organization which has more power and money than she does.

So, please clarify, since she didn't "blackball" anyone, what did she do? Did she call on people to boycott TFYC (whoever they are)? If so, did she have good reason to do so? Is their model exploitative?


Really? A person with connections can't blackball someone? Good god Therraltha, you outdid yourself.
So, I'm going to mark this down in the concession pile as well, then.
Thanas wrote:FFS by that standard both policital parties in the USA are domestic terrorists. :banghead:
I must've missed the DNC threatening to go on a shooting spree if Dick Cheney gave a speech.

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Thanas » 2014-10-15 02:47pm

If it was harassment with a political agenda (such as silencing someone's freedom of speech), then it was terrorism.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3881
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Jub » 2014-10-15 02:50pm

Elheru Aran wrote:You do realize that psychological harm is a thing, right? There's a reason 'assault' is a category of violence even though it doesn't always lead to 'battery'. Whether or not a person is actually physically harmed isn't really the point, although that's a mitigating factor. The point is that it's wrong to stalk, harass, and textually or verbally abuse a person. That includes threats.
No shit, but if this was happening to Joe Noname and not attached to a news story it would be at best a local fluff piece. Instead, because it's happening to women, it's an internet gong show with the victims going out of their way to milk it for publicity.
It's not a 'non-event' and if you think it is, then you're wrong. Harassing people in a game is one thing, if rude and impolite. Taking it to the real world is quite another thing. Regardless of their stated motives, what these people will do to perceived enemies is wrong. It's not a 'war' on 4chan or whatever, although those sites do give assholes a place to congregate. If all they do is talk shit and keep it to themselves, that's their prerogative, but once they start inflicting creepy shit on people-- and I'm not talking just some random gamer girls who they arbitrarily decide are on the payola, they've harassed police, reporters, even individuals who have had the poor luck to piss them off for some reason or other-- then that needs to be halted.

Certainly there's a line that has to be crossed. But once they go over that line, there have to be consequences for their actions. Otherwise you are enabling what they do.
Have you seen how the average police force handles harassment where a person is physically coming to your property? They show up, ask him/her to leave, and then bugger off again. If the person comes back they might do this a few more times and they could even hold the person for a day or so. After that they kind of stop wanting to dedicate resources to further calls about the issue and suggest you start taking steps to stop the issue.
You seem to be missing that these are happening in real life. Someone left a dead animal in her mailbox. People call not just her, but her extended family, and threaten them, and tell them how horrible their daughter/cousin/etc. is. And not for nothing, but they also waste huge amounts of other people's time and money calling in food deliveries to the targets' houses. This isn't just "stop reading Twitter."
And how is making all of this public knowledge helping to de-escalate things so they go back to normal? If these people didn't go out of their way to let the people doing this to them know it was working it would have slowed down and been a non-story by now. It sucks that this is the best option for them, but them fighting a large horde of people with a wide variety of reasons for targeting them (not least of which is the LULZ of it) publicly is a dumb idea.
Broomstick wrote:
Jub wrote:Should I feel afraid every time a stranger gets close to me when I'm walking alone at night, or when a less than well kept person approaches me at a bus stop?
Well, if we ever needed proof Jub wasn't a woman (as if that was ever in doubt) there's proof.

I'm sorry it fractures your veneer, Jub, but that is EXACTLY the world for the majority of women. Fear of every stranger. Fear of many acquaintances.

Maybe that has an effect on how they view threats, hm?
That's sad, but the reality is I have more to fear on a daily basis than a women does and added to that as a male I'm expected to step in and stop fights between parties I don't even know. If you walked past a man beating on a women with out physically stepping in people would call you smart, if I did it I'd be called a coward. Women aren't the only ones that have low percentage but still dangerous shit to worry about.
Also keep in mind that while men are more likely to be victims of violence in general, women are FAR more likely to be sexually assaulted, and even today sexual assault can have life-long negative repercussions to the victim.
This part is true, but in the event that I get dragged into a fight I'd (as a larger than average male) have a hell of a time convincing the cops I was just defending myself. I gets even worse if in striking back I injure the other person. Plus police see me as a big guy and are less likely to come to my aid if I do call about a disturbance outside my home.

-----

If I missed anybody I apologize.
Last edited by Jub on 2014-10-15 02:54pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20963
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2014-10-15 02:51pm

Thanas wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:
Block wrote:I'm not disputing that it was illegal or stupid. I'm saying that calling it domestic terrorism is a pretty big stretch. More like criminal harassment.
If it wasn't done by foreigners it was domestic. If it was harassment with a political agenda (such as silencing someone's freedom of speech), then it was terrorism. QED.
FFS by that standard both policital parties in the USA are domestic terrorists. :banghead:
I don't think calling all politically motivated harassment terrorism is reasonable.

Explicit, detailed threats of a massacre which are politically motivated, on the other hand, seem like something that can be reasonably considered terrorism.

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 03:17pm

Terralthra wrote:No, you didn't. There were no screenshots of a trans teenager because there wasn't a trans teenager. The claimed trans teenager was in fact not trans, and was claiming to be trans in order to gain some ephemeral moral authority on feminism (to promote an MRA agenda). It's amazing how you can claim to be reading these articles, but not actually read them. There was no address or phone number posted, and once again, Zoe Quinn didn't actually post it. Zoe linked to an article wherein someone's politically-motivated lies about their own identity were exposed. That's not "doxxing."
Are we seriously judging what is a trans person here? Good to fucking know it's the doxxers who decide it.

Distributing people's info IS doxxing. The fact that she wasn't the one that dug the info, only broadcasted it does not make it any less doxxing.
Terralthra wrote:Brianna Wu created a satirical troll account on which she posts parody. Not anonymous troll accounts on which she posts targeted threats and people's home addresses. See the difference?
Tell me when did I say she was threathening someone? I said, and I'll repeat: she is a provocateur.
Stop fucking weaselling. What is a "professional victim"? Do you think she posted her own address and invented death threats against herself? Based on what?
Exactly what the name implies.
So, I'm going to mark this down in the concession pile as well, then.
Here is the interview with TFYC.

Make your own conclusions.

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12878
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Elheru Aran » 2014-10-15 03:40pm

Jub wrote:
Elheru Aran wrote:You do realize that psychological harm is a thing, right? There's a reason 'assault' is a category of violence even though it doesn't always lead to 'battery'. Whether or not a person is actually physically harmed isn't really the point, although that's a mitigating factor. The point is that it's wrong to stalk, harass, and textually or verbally abuse a person. That includes threats.
No shit, but if this was happening to Joe Noname and not attached to a news story it would be at best a local fluff piece. Instead, because it's happening to women, it's an internet gong show with the victims going out of their way to milk it for publicity.
It doesn't matter. Whether it happens to Joe Noname or to an Internet personality, it's still wrong. Who a person is, has no relevance to the law in an ideal situation. The fact that it's become highly publicized in this specific case merely means there's more people aware of it, and that's still irrelevant as far as consequences go other than the debate it's causing.
Have you seen how the average police force handles harassment where a person is physically coming to your property? They show up, ask him/her to leave, and then bugger off again. If the person comes back they might do this a few more times and they could even hold the person for a day or so. After that they kind of stop wanting to dedicate resources to further calls about the issue and suggest you start taking steps to stop the issue.
Sure, the police doesn't handle it well sometimes. Nevertheless there are still legal procedures that can be followed in cases of harassment, such as taking out a restraining order. There isn't really any such procedure for the Internet, which is part of the problem here.
And how is making all of this public knowledge helping to de-escalate things so they go back to normal? If these people didn't go out of their way to let the people doing this to them know it was working it would have slowed down and been a non-story by now. It sucks that this is the best option for them, but them fighting a large horde of people with a wide variety of reasons for targeting them (not least of which is the LULZ of it) publicly is a dumb idea.
If it's not publicized... maybe the harassment will go away eventually, but outside of those involved, nobody will know. The same principle applies to, for example, rape. If nobody speaks up if they get raped, are there ever going to be consequences for the rapists? It's not a matter of sitting down and shutting up and hoping that it goes away. Being proactive is the only option that will get results.
Jub wrote: That's sad, but the reality is I have more to fear on a daily basis than a women does and added to that as a male I'm expected to step in and stop fights between parties I don't even know. If you walked past a man beating on a women with out physically stepping in people would call you smart, if I did it I'd be called a coward. Women aren't the only ones that have low percentage but still dangerous shit to worry about.
Yeah, there are different social expectations, but that's not really the point. Your statement indicates a general lack of empathy, which is the problem that posters are having here.
Also keep in mind that while men are more likely to be victims of violence in general, women are FAR more likely to be sexually assaulted, and even today sexual assault can have life-long negative repercussions to the victim.
This part is true, but in the event that I get dragged into a fight I'd (as a larger than average male) have a hell of a time convincing the cops I was just defending myself. I gets even worse if in striking back I injure the other person. Plus police see me as a big guy and are less likely to come to my aid if I do call about a disturbance outside my home.
So random police know that you're a "big guy"? Must be a small town you live in. Never mind that you're basically ignoring the statement that you quoted. Again with the lack of empathy. Anyway, to respond to your non-response, self-defense is a valid argument. Cops aren't (generally) dumb, will question witnesses and collect evidence, which should exonerate you if it was honest self-defense (i.e., you didn't start it but you finished it). If you hurt the other person, you might get fined, but they're likely to get worse. Consequences for one's actions, justified or not, are something one has to accept when one tangles with the law.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
Terralthra
Requiescat in Pace
Posts: 4741
Joined: 2007-10-05 09:55pm
Location: San Francisco, California, United States

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Terralthra » 2014-10-15 03:51pm

Spekio wrote:
Terralthra wrote:No, you didn't. There were no screenshots of a trans teenager because there wasn't a trans teenager. The claimed trans teenager was in fact not trans, and was claiming to be trans in order to gain some ephemeral moral authority on feminism (to promote an MRA agenda). It's amazing how you can claim to be reading these articles, but not actually read them. There was no address or phone number posted, and once again, Zoe Quinn didn't actually post it. Zoe linked to an article wherein someone's politically-motivated lies about their own identity were exposed. That's not "doxxing."
Are we seriously judging what is a trans person here? Good to fucking know it's the doxxers who decide it.

Distributing people's info IS doxxing. The fact that she wasn't the one that dug the info, only broadcasted it does not make it any less doxxing.
We're judging based on what the person in question actually said. "I'm a guy, by the way." "I pretend to be a woman online because it makes it easier to hack people." Are you saying the person in question shouldn't be believed about their own gender identity, because you know better than they do?
Spekio wrote:
Terralthra wrote:Stop fucking weaselling. What is a "professional victim"? Do you think she posted her own address and invented death threats against herself? Based on what?
Exactly what the name implies.
You may think dodging direct questions makes you clever. It doesn't. It is, however, against the debate rules for this forum.
Spekio wrote:
Terralthra wrote:So, I'm going to mark this down in the concession pile as well, then.
Here is the interview with TFYC.

Make your own conclusions.
Vague insinuations with a refusal to actually articulate what you think she did and what was wrong about it. Why am I not surprised?

User avatar
Spekio
Jedi Knight
Posts: 762
Joined: 2009-09-15 12:34pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Spekio » 2014-10-15 04:18pm

Terralthra wrote:We're judging based on what the person in question actually said. "I'm a guy, by the way." "I pretend to be a woman online because it makes it easier to hack people." Are you saying the person in question shouldn't be believed about their own gender identity, because you know better than they do?
When should their assertion being taken as true? I'll refrain from discussing their gender identity. But, most importantly: Still doxxing.

Terralthra wrote:You may think dodging direct questions makes you clever. It doesn't. It is, however, against the debate rules for this forum.
You keep asking me the same thing, and I adressed it. Someone who (usually falsely) claims victimization any time things don't go their way.

Aside for the shenanigans I previously stated, she also insulted people and claimed her twitter was hacked.

Do I know she doxxed herself? No.

Do I think its beneath her? No.
Terralthra wrote:Vague insinuations with a refusal to actually articulate what you think she did and what was wrong about it. Why am I not surprised?

From merriam-webster dictionary:

Full Definition of BLACKBALL
transitive verb
1
: to vote against; especially : to exclude from membership by casting a negative vote
2
a : to exclude socially : ostracize
b : boycott


Do you have reading comprehension problems?

User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3881
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Is #GamerGate misogyny posing as concern for ethics?

Post by Jub » 2014-10-15 04:22pm

Elheru Aran wrote:No shit, but if this was happening to Joe Noname and not attached to a news story it would be at best a local fluff piece. Instead, because it's happening to women, it's an internet gong show with the victims going out of their way to milk it for publicity.

It doesn't matter. Whether it happens to Joe Noname or to an Internet personality, it's still wrong. Who a person is, has no relevance to the law in an ideal situation. The fact that it's become highly publicized in this specific case merely means there's more people aware of it, and that's still irrelevant as far as consequences go other than the debate it's causing.
It does matter that it's happening to a public figure, just like slander and libel are different for public figures. This is continuing to happen because, rightly or wrongly, people see them as dishonestly milking this and are jumping on the bandwagon to help get rid of them. Their celebrity is the entire cause of this event.
Sure, the police doesn't handle it well sometimes. Nevertheless there are still legal procedures that can be followed in cases of harassment, such as taking out a restraining order. There isn't really any such procedure for the Internet, which is part of the problem here.
The main advice the police give tends to be stop antagonizing them and they give this advice for a reason. Even IRL with a person physically harassing you or peeping on you the police can only do so much. Online they have even less tools to stop such issues and thus the advice goes double. Stop pissing these people off and they'll leave you alone.
If it's not publicized... maybe the harassment will go away eventually, but outside of those involved, nobody will know. The same principle applies to, for example, rape. If nobody speaks up if they get raped, are there ever going to be consequences for the rapists? It's not a matter of sitting down and shutting up and hoping that it goes away. Being proactive is the only option that will get results.
Don't equate being harassed to being raped. Being proactive can solve harassment, but when it doesn't going to ground for a bit usually does. It's the exact same as if they were doing this IRL and the police had exhausted their resources in dealing with an annoying but otherwise not serious crime.
Yeah, there are different social expectations, but that's not really the point. Your statement indicates a general lack of empathy, which is the problem that posters are having here.
I empathize with the fact that these people are in an awkward position. I simply feel that they are over reacting to it and not taking the best steps to resolve the issue. Freaking out isn't the quickest nor the least messy way to resolve this and fighting it isn't likely to have the desired result because, and this might be a shock, nobody off the internet cares about the issue. Laws aren't going to be changed and Zoe Quinn isn't going to be the next Rosa Parks because of this internet war.

Post Reply