Something I would ask is do you believe the Anti-Gamergate side is somehow just as destructive or even more so than the Pro-side? I hear all the time about how "Feminists are being just as destructive calling rape threats on men and doxxing them" without any proof of it. And whenever I ask for proof, they point out that those same feminists have somehow bribed or played victim in order to get support from the media.
On a similar tangent, have you developed any new feelings on Colbert or Anita Sarkessian after the Colbert Report interview? I've heard several Gamergaters (including my crazy brother) say that now he's untrustworthy or apart of the biased media because he didn't tear her a new one like other influential figures such as Sarah Palin. Most people didn't realize how Stephen was playing that role as a alpha male gamergater and how the "ethics in game journalism" model is valued by the general public. (It was laughed at)
I believe in creating an organization supporting long term goals of gamers. It shouldn't be Gamer Gate, and it shouldn't be called that either. Though it's about as difficult as convincing Feminists to call themselves something else.
Is there a major unstated assumption here? That feminists shouldn't call themselves feminists? Did I miss something obvious?
He seemed reasonable. However, his arguments were invalid and easily pointed out/quashed by Churba (because he is awesome.)
I feel a little bad, to be honest. I didn't mean to scare the dude off, I even went pretty easy on him. I've been harder on people here that I like, and I don't even know that dude.
Is there a major unstated assumption here? That feminists shouldn't call themselves feminists? Did I miss something obvious?
Isn't that just the standard MRA trope that if what feminists really stand for is equality and not subjugation of men then they shouldn't use the word "feminist" because the term implicitly references women?
Okay Rym, I got sick and don't like arguing while I'm sick.
+respect for sticking around.
I warn you, though; Churba may be formidable, but as far as arguing skills are concerned there are those on this forum who are capable of putting even Churba to shame.
Something I would ask is do you believe the Anti-Gamergate side is somehow just as destructive or even more so than the Pro-side? I hear all the time about how "Feminists are being just as destructive calling rape threats on men and doxxing them" without any proof of it.
There actually is a tumblr that collects all the threats and doxing perpetrated by anti-GGers. You could say, "Well they were obviously faked." But if that's true how many of the accounts from anti-GG were also faked? And of course there was the recent Men's Health Rally, that a bunch of feminists derailed to accuse the speaker of being a rape apologist. Also Shirt Gate.... Why is this a problem? A woman gave him the shirt.
On a similar tangent, have you developed any new feelings on Colbert or Anita Sarkessian after the Colbert Report interview?
I've never loved him or hated him really. I believe he acted how he did because of the Right wing support of GG. Politics shouldn't be involved with this discussion but it is.
Actually the Saraha Palin thing is because of a ThunderF00t Video that compares Sara Palin being made fun of by Colbert and Miss Sarkessian.
Soo If you're anti-GG it'd be smart to watch the kind of content GG is making so you can argue it better.
(It was laughed at)
Well more or less all gamers are laughed at by the general public. None of his humor was directed solely at GG, but to all gamers.
The part that was made up by the internet was that it was for review scores, which was the accusation that really put the match to tinder when it comes to Gamergate.
It was made up. It was what people want to believe. I can't argue that. But they were already angry. World War Gamer would have started regardless if Archduke Ferdinand was shot, or just one of the Cardboard cutouts from Mario 3D Land.
You might want to excise the word actually from your speech.
What word? I'm confused?
Don't start acting a fool now, when you're not doing badly all things considered. There's problems with her videos, sure, but talking about the patriarchy isn't it,
Well she never uses research to back up her claims. The one time she did it was an outdated study. Even Christina Sommers uses research.
The people who rebut her use lots of research and don't have any backing.
And hey, if that's her thing, so what? She's not vile and hateful for the most part, like some feminists I could name and certainly have previously.
I'd rather someone be mean and look stupid, than be 'nice' and give wrong information.
the fact she's doing it despite the undeniably harsh opposition she's faced and will face in future is worthy of respect.
It's terrible, people should be ignoring her not threatening her. If she didn't have all these threats against her maybe she could finally fade into obscurity.
I'd rather someone be mean and look stupid, than be 'nice' and give wrong information.
When I say vile, I'm not just piddling around with someone being a bit mean. Or even really mean. I'm talking open and proud bigotry against trans people, the endless condescending treatment of Sex Workers and the endless efforts to "save them from themselves", and even Lena Dunham, who is not only an admitted and proud rapist and child abuser, but a racist to boot. When I say vile, I really do mean it in the fullest possible sense. Just being a little bit mean - especially in the culture of the internet, which greatly values snarky commentary above a more measured tone - isn't even going to make a blip on the radar for me.
What word? I'm confused?
"Actually." That's the word I'm talking about. It's become the word that's launched a thousand jokes, so might want to minimize or avoid it for a while, even if you'll be mostly alright around here.
Well she never uses research to back up her claims.
No point. Her claims range from the broad, which range from literal textbook stuff to so throughly studied that you could hardly hurl a brick without hitting a long-box full of studies about it, to things so specific that no study exists, because nobody is going to spend the time doing a peer-reviewed study about if this one particular thing she used as an example of something sexist is sexist or not.
What do we want a study regarding? That sexism exists? That it's found in media in a multitude of forms, including those she's described? She might not mention it, but there's certainly plenty of research out there that indicates these things, it's just that it's commonly disregarded as trash because it doesn't come from a STEM field, which I'll be honest, the people who tend to criticize her also tend to hold up like some sort of Arc of the Covenant containing all the world's knowledge, power and advancement, despite the fact that 3/4 of the time, they just cherry-pick an excerpt from an abstract that sounds like it backs up their preexisting opinion.
The people who rebut her use lots of research and don't have any backing.
I'm yet to see one that was worth the time to watch it, and so close to 100% of the time that I don't want to bother typing out all the decimal places to be accurate, the research they present is either utter bullshit(Especially in the case of Ms Sommers - she's famous for it, in fact. To quote the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting group: "(Ms Sommers work is) filled with the same kind of errors, unsubstantiated charges and citations of 'advocacy research' that she claims to find in the work of the feminists she takes to task"), or doesn't actually prove what they claim it proves.
It's terrible, people should be ignoring her not threatening her. If she didn't have all these threats against her maybe she could finally fade into obscurity.
Literally never going to happen. People are not going to ignore her, and they never were, because A)She's asking for change, and the internet likes change about as much as Edward II likes red-hot pokers, and B)She's standing up and challenging the norms of something that millions if not billions of people love, which is not going to go down quietly, particularly if the person doing the criticizing is a Woman.
I warn you, though; Churba may be formidable, but as far as arguing skills are concerned there are those on this forum who are capable of putting even Churba to shame.
Yeah, that's a valid warning. I'm clever with words, and when it comes to giving a good monstering I learned from the best and the best ain't found around here, but I'm still kinda the village idiot of this forum.
When it comes to proper argumentation, Lackofcheese is being rather kind and gentle about it, but the honest truth is that I'm pretty close to the bottom of the ladder on this forum. He isn't going to say it himself, but if he and I got into an argument, it would be like a fight between a battleship, and two drunk dudes in a tinny whose offensive capabilities amount to harsh language.
I've never loved him or hated him really. I believe he acted how he did because of the Right wing support of GG. Politics shouldn't be involved with this discussion but it is.
Actually the Saraha Palin thing is because of a ThunderF00t Video that compares Sara Palin being made fun of by Colbert and Miss Sarkessian.
Soo If you're anti-GG it'd be smart to watch the kind of content GG is making so you can argue it better.
(It was laughed at)
Well more or less all gamers are laughed at by the general public. None of his humor was directed solely at GG, but to all gamers.
But you realize with Colbert's delivery and how the interview played out, he's showing how the public view gamers at this point, right? That's why we've turned "ethics in video game journalism" into a punchline at this point. Most people are looking at the event as female critics being threatened for talking about video games...that's going to affect the public opinion of gaming culture as a whole.
Watching that video was difficult. Oh no, they disabled their comments. Is that really a call for arms about feminism taking over? It's more likely because Anita actually has a point and addressed it in a refreshing way. If you attach her to any conversation, people will be ready with their torches to yell at her...more so than any popular female on the Internet right now.
Plus in terms of the pro-Gamergate Community, your biggest voices have a significantly bad habits. You have Thunderf00t (noted anti-feminist with a grudge against Anita Sarkeesian), Jordan Owen (ditto), Davis Aurini (ditto), Christina Hoff Summers (also anti-feminist), Milo Yiannopolis (anti-feminist and also, ironically, anti-gamer) and Mark Cernovich (MRA, anti-gamer and rape apologist). There are even more here. (https://medium.com/@poopsockholmes/the-bad-apples-of-gamergate-ba39f8fd485)
It's how #CancelColbert was shut down because of Suey Park's own bias. She stated in interviews "You're a white man, I don't expect you to understand what people of color and Asian women are thinking. White men definitely feel like they are entitled to talk over me and minimize all my experiences."
It's hard for people to persuade that the pro-side isn't about sexism when they assumed leaders are anti-feminists. You can say the pro-side isn't about that, but you all are not making an effort to prove otherwise.
Aw man, Milo Yiannopolis. He's a real scumbag, and it's been one of the more amusing things about gamergate. A movement that claims to be about ethics in journalism, and one of their big figures is someone who was taken to court for unpaid wages when he was running an outlet called "The Kernel", as well as being sued for back payments and damages by a photojournalist, because he used their work without permission or payment.
Cherry on top - The big story he broke, about the GameJournoPros list? About the only part of it that wasn't either heavily embellished or simply made up was that the list existed. The reason he works for Brietbart is because Andrew Brietbart is the only person who will take him seriously, everyone else thinks he's a joke.
A movement founded by gamers, ostensibly for gamers, takes up someone even more anti-gamer than Jack Thompson, as one of their champions. Here's some choice quotes:
"Personally, I don’t understand grown men wasting their lives playing computer games. It seems a bit sad to me."
"I’m more relaxed about violent video games than most, because it seems unlikely that they alone make people act out in real life. So what if they’re the last resort of the frustrated beta male? It’s not for me to legislate what weirdos in yellowing underpants get up to in their spare time."
(Oh, by the way - some time after the column where he wrote that, he also blamed video games for Eliot Rodger's spree killing)
"I can only conclude that the yellow underpants brigade – teens and man-children addicted to these immersive video games – aren’t getting enough stimulation in real life."
"But there’s something a bit tragic, isn’t there, about men in their thirties hunched over a controller whacking a helmeted extraterrestrial?"
"And yet there are so many of them – enough to support a multi-billion dollar video games industry. That’s an awful lot of unemployed saddos living in their parents’ basements."
"Is it that these games provide a bit of macho reinforcement to the terminally beta? It is hard to escape that conclusion."
Seriously, how can you not laugh at shit like this?
But you realize with Colbert's delivery and how the interview played out, he's showing how the public view gamers at this point, right? That's why we've turned "ethics in video game journalism"
Colbert ignored the "ethics in journalism" almost completely.
It's more likely because Anita actually has a point and addressed it in a refreshing way.
It's because she's above criticism. Being a victim has made all her arguments unquestionable.
Plus in terms of the pro-Gamergate Community, your biggest voices have a significantly bad habits. You have Thunderf00t
Actually he's a scientist. I like him, except that he treats religion like a disease.
Christina Hoff Summers (also anti-feminist),
Why is she Anti-feminist? Please don't let this be politically motivated.
So you have an enemy list how is this progressive?
It's how #CancelColbert was shut down because of Suey Park's own bias.
So your argument is "You should loose because there are bad guys with the same opinion as you."
It's hard for people to persuade that the pro-side isn't about sexism when they assumed leaders are anti-feminists.
I really only follow The Gaming Goose. He's really professional, friendly, and actually plays games. There are some other reasonable people too, it's sad you have to go looking for them though.
It's because [Anita Sarkeesian]'s above criticism. Being a victim has made all her arguments unquestionable.
Weird. I have criticized her in the past, so have a lot of other people. The difference is how and what you criticize about her videos, and whether you actually have a point.
The problem with Sarkeesian is that gamergate and the toxic gamer brigade has poisoned the well from the start when instead of engaging her in an intellectual level they started out with rape and death threats trying to bully her out. This of course had the reverse effect and now requires people to tread lightly in criticism of her and her videos.
I also think you should watch this episode of Jim Sterling's Jimquisition series:
It was made up. It was what people want to believe. I can't argue that. But they were already angry. World War Gamer would have started regardless if Archduke Ferdinand was shot, or just one of the Cardboard cutouts from Mario 3D Land.
What you just said is that it's completely OK to mobilize behind a known falsehood. If that was made up (as most all "gamergate" accusations have been to this point), then what isn't made up that's actually worth being angry over? What specifically? What specific things are you mad about that have actually happened?
I'd rather someone be mean and look stupid, than be 'nice' and give wrong information.
But you JUST said that it doesn't matter that the accusations were made up. Even then, you only did when pressed, even though you admit to knowing. Don't be a hypocrite.
Don't start acting a fool now, when you're not doing badly all things considered. There's problems with her videos, sure, but talking about the patriarchy isn't it,
Well she never uses research to back up her claims. You take issue with that word? With a lack of "research?" The word "patriarchy" is feminist jargon: anyone debating feminism had better at least know the terminology.
"The patriarchy" refers essentially to the longstanding social and political forces that have created and sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men.
Do you agree that there are indeed longstanding social and political forcers that have created sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men? If not, why?
More to the point, you decry a lack of research, yet you misunderstand or miss technical terms and jargon from the real discussion. Despite this, you keep referring to "gamers." I'm a gamer. I probably have saved games older than you. Gamergate doesn't speak for me or anything I'm concerned with. Yet Gamergate claims to speak for me as a gamer.
Well she never uses research to back up her claims.
No point. Her claims range from the broad, which range from literal textbook stuff to so throughly studied that you could hardly hurl a brick without hitting a long-box full of studies about it,
If they're so easy to spot why does she never use them? Sometimes she says things that are pretty strange and unprovable. Like the "The more you think you are not affected by sexism the more you're sexist." Sooo the more you believe you're not a rabbit, the more you are a rabbit.
What do we want a study regarding? That sexism exists? That it's found in media in a multitude of forms,
It would be nice to see evidence of her specific claims. Like in the newest video she claimed you could play with corpses of women in some games, men do. I'd like to see something backing that up cause I never preform offensive acts in these games.
it's just that it's commonly disregarded as trash because it doesn't come from a STEM field,
Well yea, people respect science and mathematics. There should be psychological research done on gaming. If these feminists have enough money and influence to make videos like this, then they should be funding sciences and encouraging young women to get into intellectual fields.
I'm yet to see one that was worth the time to watch it,
Well the Gaming Goose is fantastic at this.
Literally never going to happen. People are not going to ignore her, and they never were, because:
A)She says controversial things that often don't make any sense. Like look at that tweet she did saying school shootings were cause by "Male Machoism." Twitter is stupid.
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
"Not a coincidence it’s always men and boys committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of toxic masculinity in our culture."
No one can prove that! That's absurd.
I'm pretty close to the bottom of the ladder on this forum. He isn't going to say it himself, but if he and I got into an argument, it would be like a fight between a battleship, and two drunk dudes in a tinny whose offensive capabilities amount to harsh language.
Okay so I'll have to fight the 4 Generals of the Geek Army, and then move to the 7 Super Generals, and the 3 Kings of the Mountain Lair all before an entire season long Filler Arc.
She antagonizes her own attackers, often posting her death-threats online. Why would she do that unless she wasn't afraid of them? The FBI suggests you NEVER RESPOND to death threats.
I'm going to stop you right there. That's a fucked up thing to say. It's also something you GG types keep saying constantly.
I shouldn't need to tell you what's fucked up about what you just typed. If you think it's not fucked up, defend that statement. Otherwise, we're pretty much done here.
Okay I'll retract it. Miss Sarkeesian Doesn't even really belong in a Gamer Gate conversation because she came to the party so late.
I have an explanation, but I'd rather just avoid talking about her.
Then why do so many gamergaters talk so much about her and Zoe Quinn? Why does "feminism" come up in EVERY SINGLE ONE of these discussions that are ostensibly about "video game journalism ethics?"
Then why do so many gamergaters talk so much about her and Zoe Quinn? Why does "feminism" come up in EVERY SINGLE ONE of these discussions that are ostensibly about "video game journalism ethics?"
They're off message. I really don't understand the hate for Zoe Quin. As I stated before, her games aren't fun intentionally, and people are probably mad about that. Hideo Kojima said one time that games made not fun on purpose, could be art. Soo progressing the media towards art is a good thing.
They're off message. I really don't understand the hate for Zoe Quin.
Yet hate for Zoe and Anita is the majority message from gamergate. You're off-message from the majority of them, not the other way around.
Also, if feminism and Zoe and Anita aren't relevant to gamergate, why are they featured so prominently in this thread, let alone in every discussion of gamergate basically anywhere? Are you seriously going to tell me that feminism isn't a bogeyman for gamergate?
What you just said is that it's completely OK to mobilize behind a known falsehood.
I didn't say it was Okay, I just said it was bound to happen either way.
But you JUST said that it doesn't matter that the accusations were made up. Even then, you only did when pressed, even though you admit to knowing. Don't be a hypocrite.
It's not okay. The best thing now is to try to lead it in a positive direction rather than a negative one.
You take issue with that word? With a lack of "research?" The word "patriarchy" is feminist jargon: anyone debating feminism had better at least know the terminology.
You're saying I don't know the jargon? I'm lost... I don't know where I used it wrong.
Do you agree that there are indeed longstanding social and political forces that have created sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men?
Yes. I haven't argued that this isn't true. If more women entered these systems they could improve it from within. I support that, More women in the sciences ect. and more women making the games. That's how we can end misogyny.
I don't support people standing outside shouting at it.
Despite this, you keep referring to "gamers."
I haven't used the word gamer to describe all of GG. I typically only call them GG. And I don't call all anti-GG Feminists, I mostly call them andi-GG.
I'm a gamer. I probably have saved games older than you. Gamergate doesn't speak for me or anything I'm concerned with. Yet Gamergate claims to speak for me as a gamer.
As a content creator so closely related to gaming, you do have a responsibility. It's a perfect opportunity for you to lead your followers in a direction towards a better community.
I'd love if you did an episode on how YOU would improve Game Journalism. Set up guide for people to follow instead of the plans the hateful crowd have already laid down.
Do you agree that there are indeed longstanding social and political forces that have created sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men?
Yes. I haven't argued that this isn't true. If more women entered these systems they could improve it from within. I support that, More women in the sciences ect. and more women making the games. That's how we can end misogyny.
Again, you've said some fucked up things here.
More women in sciences etc...? You do realize that the systems in place actively discourage their entry, right?
I'd love if you did an episode on how YOU would improve Game Journalism. Set up guide for people to follow instead of the plans the hateful crowd have already laid down.
What exactly is wrong with "game journalism?"
Also, you seem to somehow think that reviews are the same as journalism. What's an example of something actually wrong?
Comments
On a similar tangent, have you developed any new feelings on Colbert or Anita Sarkessian after the Colbert Report interview? I've heard several Gamergaters (including my crazy brother) say that now he's untrustworthy or apart of the biased media because he didn't tear her a new one like other influential figures such as Sarah Palin. Most people didn't realize how Stephen was playing that role as a alpha male gamergater and how the "ethics in game journalism" model is valued by the general public. (It was laughed at)
I really feel like Meme generators don't help arguments.
I warn you, though; Churba may be formidable, but as far as arguing skills are concerned there are those on this forum who are capable of putting even Churba to shame.
Actually the Saraha Palin thing is because of a ThunderF00t Video that compares Sara Palin being made fun of by Colbert and Miss Sarkessian.
Soo If you're anti-GG it'd be smart to watch the kind of content GG is making so you can argue it better. Well more or less all gamers are laughed at by the general public. None of his humor was directed solely at GG, but to all gamers.
The people who rebut her use lots of research and don't have any backing. I'd rather someone be mean and look stupid, than be 'nice' and give wrong information. It's terrible, people should be ignoring her not threatening her. If she didn't have all these threats against her maybe she could finally fade into obscurity.
What do we want a study regarding? That sexism exists? That it's found in media in a multitude of forms, including those she's described? She might not mention it, but there's certainly plenty of research out there that indicates these things, it's just that it's commonly disregarded as trash because it doesn't come from a STEM field, which I'll be honest, the people who tend to criticize her also tend to hold up like some sort of Arc of the Covenant containing all the world's knowledge, power and advancement, despite the fact that 3/4 of the time, they just cherry-pick an excerpt from an abstract that sounds like it backs up their preexisting opinion. I'm yet to see one that was worth the time to watch it, and so close to 100% of the time that I don't want to bother typing out all the decimal places to be accurate, the research they present is either utter bullshit(Especially in the case of Ms Sommers - she's famous for it, in fact. To quote the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting group: "(Ms Sommers work is) filled with the same kind of errors, unsubstantiated charges and citations of 'advocacy research' that she claims to find in the work of the feminists she takes to task"), or doesn't actually prove what they claim it proves. Literally never going to happen. People are not going to ignore her, and they never were, because A)She's asking for change, and the internet likes change about as much as Edward II likes red-hot pokers, and B)She's standing up and challenging the norms of something that millions if not billions of people love, which is not going to go down quietly, particularly if the person doing the criticizing is a Woman. Yeah, that's a valid warning. I'm clever with words, and when it comes to giving a good monstering I learned from the best and the best ain't found around here, but I'm still kinda the village idiot of this forum.
When it comes to proper argumentation, Lackofcheese is being rather kind and gentle about it, but the honest truth is that I'm pretty close to the bottom of the ladder on this forum. He isn't going to say it himself, but if he and I got into an argument, it would be like a fight between a battleship, and two drunk dudes in a tinny whose offensive capabilities amount to harsh language.
But you realize with Colbert's delivery and how the interview played out, he's showing how the public view gamers at this point, right? That's why we've turned "ethics in video game journalism" into a punchline at this point. Most people are looking at the event as female critics being threatened for talking about video games...that's going to affect the public opinion of gaming culture as a whole.
Watching that video was difficult. Oh no, they disabled their comments. Is that really a call for arms about feminism taking over? It's more likely because Anita actually has a point and addressed it in a refreshing way. If you attach her to any conversation, people will be ready with their torches to yell at her...more so than any popular female on the Internet right now.
Plus in terms of the pro-Gamergate Community, your biggest voices have a significantly bad habits. You have Thunderf00t (noted anti-feminist with a grudge against Anita Sarkeesian), Jordan Owen (ditto), Davis Aurini (ditto), Christina Hoff Summers (also anti-feminist), Milo Yiannopolis (anti-feminist and also, ironically, anti-gamer) and Mark Cernovich (MRA, anti-gamer and rape apologist). There are even more here. (https://medium.com/@poopsockholmes/the-bad-apples-of-gamergate-ba39f8fd485)
It's how #CancelColbert was shut down because of Suey Park's own bias. She stated in interviews "You're a white man, I don't expect you to understand what people of color and Asian women are thinking. White men definitely feel like they are entitled to talk over me and minimize all my experiences."
It's hard for people to persuade that the pro-side isn't about sexism when they assumed leaders are anti-feminists. You can say the pro-side isn't about that, but you all are not making an effort to prove otherwise.
Cherry on top - The big story he broke, about the GameJournoPros list? About the only part of it that wasn't either heavily embellished or simply made up was that the list existed. The reason he works for Brietbart is because Andrew Brietbart is the only person who will take him seriously, everyone else thinks he's a joke.
A movement founded by gamers, ostensibly for gamers, takes up someone even more anti-gamer than Jack Thompson, as one of their champions. Here's some choice quotes:
"Personally, I don’t understand grown men wasting their lives playing computer games. It seems a bit sad to me."
"I’m more relaxed about violent video games than most, because it seems unlikely that they alone make people act out in real life. So what if they’re the last resort of the frustrated beta male? It’s not for me to legislate what weirdos in yellowing underpants get up to in their spare time."
(Oh, by the way - some time after the column where he wrote that, he also blamed video games for Eliot Rodger's spree killing)
"I can only conclude that the yellow underpants brigade – teens and man-children addicted to these immersive video games – aren’t getting enough stimulation in real life."
"But there’s something a bit tragic, isn’t there, about men in their thirties hunched over a controller whacking a helmeted extraterrestrial?"
"And yet there are so many of them – enough to support a multi-billion dollar video games industry. That’s an awful lot of unemployed saddos living in their parents’ basements."
"Is it that these games provide a bit of macho reinforcement to the terminally beta? It is hard to escape that conclusion."
Seriously, how can you not laugh at shit like this?
He's really professional, friendly, and actually plays games.
There are some other reasonable people too, it's sad you have to go looking for them though.
The problem with Sarkeesian is that gamergate and the toxic gamer brigade has poisoned the well from the start when instead of engaging her in an intellectual level they started out with rape and death threats trying to bully her out. This of course had the reverse effect and now requires people to tread lightly in criticism of her and her videos.
I also think you should watch this episode of Jim Sterling's Jimquisition series:
Well she never uses research to back up her claims. You take issue with that word? With a lack of "research?" The word "patriarchy" is feminist jargon: anyone debating feminism had better at least know the terminology.
"The patriarchy" refers essentially to the longstanding social and political forces that have created and sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men.
Do you agree that there are indeed longstanding social and political forcers that have created sustained social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men? If not, why?
More to the point, you decry a lack of research, yet you misunderstand or miss technical terms and jargon from the real discussion. Despite this, you keep referring to "gamers." I'm a gamer. I probably have saved games older than you. Gamergate doesn't speak for me or anything I'm concerned with. Yet Gamergate claims to speak for me as a gamer.
So.
What is a gamer? Define that term.
What is a game? Define that term.
"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."
"Not a coincidence it’s always men and boys committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of toxic masculinity in our culture."
No one can prove that! That's absurd. Okay so I'll have to fight the 4 Generals of the Geek Army, and then move to the 7 Super Generals, and the 3 Kings of the Mountain Lair all before an entire season long Filler Arc.
I shouldn't need to tell you what's fucked up about what you just typed. If you think it's not fucked up, defend that statement. Otherwise, we're pretty much done here.
I have an explanation, but I'd rather just avoid talking about her.
They're off message. I really don't understand the hate for Zoe Quin. As I stated before, her games aren't fun intentionally, and people are probably mad about that. Hideo Kojima said one time that games made not fun on purpose, could be art. Soo progressing the media towards art is a good thing.
Also, if feminism and Zoe and Anita aren't relevant to gamergate, why are they featured so prominently in this thread, let alone in every discussion of gamergate basically anywhere? Are you seriously going to tell me that feminism isn't a bogeyman for gamergate?
You're saying I don't know the jargon? I'm lost... I don't know where I used it wrong. Yes. I haven't argued that this isn't true. If more women entered these systems they could improve it from within. I support that, More women in the sciences ect. and more women making the games. That's how we can end misogyny.
I don't support people standing outside shouting at it. I haven't used the word gamer to describe all of GG. I typically only call them GG. And I don't call all anti-GG Feminists, I mostly call them andi-GG. As a content creator so closely related to gaming, you do have a responsibility. It's a perfect opportunity for you to lead your followers in a direction towards a better community.
I'd love if you did an episode on how YOU would improve Game Journalism. Set up guide for people to follow instead of the plans the hateful crowd have already laid down.
Again, you've said some fucked up things here.
More women in sciences etc...? You do realize that the systems in place actively discourage their entry, right? Your first principles here are bullshit. You're basically saying that "non-gamers" have no right to criticize games.
So once again, what is the definition of a "gamer?"
What exactly is wrong with "game journalism?"
Also, you seem to somehow think that reviews are the same as journalism. What's an example of something actually wrong?