I want to have a open discussion on Gamer Gate, the moment that claims to be for gaming ethics in journalism and also a know'd sparking a lot of controversy and all sorts of terrible behavior (mostly a lot misogynism towards woman). What are your thoughts on gamer gate? What effect does it make on the gaming culture as a whole? Do you think it should continue to exist or fade away into obscurity? I know is a touchy subject, but I want this to be a discussion for understanding, and I'm really interested to hear your thoughts and experiences on Gamer Gate.
There are trolls and extremists on both sides. I don't really subscribe to either side, but I tend to agree with the GamerGate side, mainly because most of what I see from anti-GG is unfounded accusations of misogyny and an astounding level of blind hate and rage, and misinformation. Also Anita Sarkeesian is an awful person.
Unfounded? How are hundreds of threats of rape and other forms of violence directed at Zoe Quinn, brought about by a tearful and pathetic rant by her mysoginistic ******* of an ex-boyfriend, leading to her being driven from her home the grounds for an unfounded defence? I'm sorry, but the hardcore of the pro gamergate movement represent all that's wrong with internet culture and humanity as a whole; they are just the worst people. Other than that, there is no scandal, so we should just drop this turd and move on.
I am very much in agreement with the two gentlemen here. Trolling, blindness rage, ignorance, misinformation on both sides. Please, let it be buried and rest in peace.
I think there are vocal minorities on both sides, but unfortunately both sides are capable of making a valid point. If I may... The people pushing against Gamergate (oh boy do I ever hate that name) tend to be correct about the misogyny in the gaming community, even if I think they're incorrect about why it's there. It's there, I think, not because of video games, but because it exists in our society at large and the internet gives anonymity to jerks. The people pushing for Gamergate are right about corruption in video games journalism, even if they can be wrong about why it's there. It has nothing to do women or sex or anything of the sort, but rather with the closeness of games journalists with companies. The self-congratulatory nature of video games journalists tends to be aimed more at helping corporations than consumers, which is the opposite of the purpose of journalism, in my opinion. So, on the whole, I think both sides are capable of making competent points, but they keep letting extremists direct their movements.
Some good points well made. I think the main problem is that it's become 'gamergate' (along with all the things associated with that word), as opposed to just a discussion about corruption in videogame journalism.
When I say unfounded, I mean accusations of misogyny for doing nothing more than supporting GG. As in the assumption that one automatically hates women for wanting to shed light on unethical behavior in video game journalism. I'm not talking about the trolls. Besides, there have been just as many death threats and insults coming form the anti-GG side. I agree that there is no scandal, though, and this just kinda needs to die. Ironically, the only reason GG became as big as it did is because a bunch of video game journalism websites conspired together to write several articles within a few days of each other (now known as Gamers Are Dead) decrying the GG platform against VG journalism corruption, making straw man arguments of the movement being about sexism when it wasn't, which is how this whole thing became the quagmire that it is now. Here's an interesting article I read about both sides of the issue: http://mangotron.com/pro-vs-anti-gamergate-two-interviews/
It's an interesting article. To be honest, I've been kind off deliberately avoiding the whole issue since it's inception because the initial event (the whole Zoe Quinn fiasco) was so ridiculous and unpleasant. But if the Pro-GG advocate in that article is as genuine as she seems, then it would seem that at least part of the movement is trying to make important changes in a rational manner; the problem is that, in referring to themselves as GamerGate, they are aligning themselves with a very unpleasant element, (the genuine trolls, misogynists and other hate-filled people that started this mess) which will only result in damaging their cause.
The same goes with literally any movement: extremists undermining the true purpose of the movement. Feminism is a great example of that. The thing that's hard to do is separate the movement from the toxic, haste-filled parts, since most attempts to do so result in a lot of "no true Scotsman" fallacies.
I know, but it's more that, with this particular movement, it seems like it was started by the extremists, and the extremists aren't even really pushing in the same direction as the more reasonable folk who turned up later; exaggerated example, but it's like someone calling themselves pro 1984 because they like the idea of a centralised government.
It wasn't started by extremists, I don't think. It's been around since before the Zoe Quinn thing, pushing for journalistic integrity.
Well as near as I can tell, the whole thing started because Quinn dumped her boyfriend, Eron Gjoni, who then wrote an 8000 word essay on how evil she was. The only people willing to read that crap were those who were just looking for a reason to hate on women; especially a woman game designer, who they presumably felt was encroaching on THEIR medium, or something, and these were the people who started taking it too far, threatening her and such, under the banner of being against corruption in gaming journalism. For them it was just an excuse for their actions, for people who were drawn in later it was a genuine concern.
I think one of the biggest problems with gamer gate, it's it lack of organization. The third party trolls are using the gamer gate banner to mask their true intentions, making the whole movement look like a breeding ground for misogyny and bigotry. I'm not saying that Gamer Gate breeds that type of behavior, but I guess they should have picked a better web site, I don't think twitter was the best choice to start the movement, anyone can use a hash-tag, its impossible to moderate it or keep it under control. Another thing I don't understand about gamer gate is why do they focus so much on individual people and not tackle some of the more broader problems in the industry. Like when review copies of a big budget game are being held for ransom in exchange for a good review. Or when a large publisher forces a small development company to make unnecessary changes to their game and when it turns out to be a total failure, the publisher then blames it all on the developers (looking at you EA).
I'm 100% Pro-GamerGate. Yes I admit there has been some level of misogyny from people on my side, as has there been misandry from the other. That is not why I am on this side. The movement started because of corruption in Games Journalism and as a gamer, I CANNOT let that stand. I want companies who give me news to try to be as objective as possible, and not have any personal connection with the games they talk about. Am I pro misogyny? Of course not. As a woman, that would make very little sense. And like I said, there are misogynists out there. But the movement is not about that, and quite frankly the Feminists have done nothing but use (Buzzword incoming!) Professional Victimhood Routines, right down to Briana Wu sending herself hatemail.
