A you trying to make me a feminist?Follow

Yes, you.

Kavekkk is trolling you.

Until something else interesting happens. I haven't given up. I just don't feel like arguing.

I chuckled.

Funny cuz its true.

Way to kill a joke, jerk face!

I still haven't found out what this is all about.

Journalist wrote bad things about gamers; gamers responded with typical internet behavior? Is that it?

Someone makes horrible game, gets good reviews and awards, people dislike product, she and reviewers blame penises, lots of lashing and escalation from both sides, Gawker makes lots of money.

"Typical internet behavior" would be a big part of what it's about.

SpoilerFemale writers write pieces about the ways gamer spaces are really aggressive towards women, both in direct contact and the way gamers interact, and gamers get really pissed off at the accurate depiction of their culture.

In terms of direct contact, in basic terms, where the male gets one message telling him to kill himself, a woman gets two saying they're going to rape her.

In terms of group interaction, think about how standard things like rape are tossed around, how the very basic way gamers express victory is in terms of extreme masculinity (over femininity), etc.

Here's the thing. Gaming culture is VERY heavy on hyper-masculinity. It's heavy on trash talk, and the trash talk almost always focuses on emasculating your opponent. So when you add in rape jokes on top of that, rape being overwhelmingly an act of dominance of men over women, it gets really freaking disturbing.

And that's just the way gamers publicly interact with other male gamers. Their interactions with women further underscore the hypermasculinity. The "get back in the kitchen" and "go make a sandwich" jokes are a power play; they're a way of establishing dominance caged with the wrapping of a joke so they're socially acceptable. Because if a woman reacts badly to them, they're "overreacting" or "can't take a joke." And that's the better case scenario; the worse one is that the harassment intensifies.

But if they react well, or don't acknowledge them, they're supporting the messaging.

This isn't a problem limited to gaming culture by any means. But it's a particularly immense problem in gaming culture, because gaming culture primarily developed out of a population that felt somewhat emasculated by the patriarchal structure of our overall culture.

And I'd seriously argued that there's a really high correlation between the people perpetuating "typical internet behavior" and "gamers" across the board, because both of those are caused by the same patriarchy that has established one male power fantasy as the ideal, and polices everyone else in terms of how well they embody it. I spend a lot of time in different areas of the internet. The only places I typically see what you are calling "typical internet behavior," of the spaces I visit, are gaming ones and spaces where gamers would exist in large groups (like YouTube).

Now, Gamer Gate is essentially a reaction to the fact that gaming news sites are increasingly not focused on gamers, because "gamers" are an increasingly small population of the people who play video games and consume video game media. SpoilerSome specific articles (some opinion, some more journalistic) were a flash point that really pissed off the group by essentially calling them out for these behaviors.

So they like to pretend it's about journalistic integrity; that Gawker and other gaming news sites have an agenda against gamers in order to brand themselves.

In reality, these sites just recognize they have an expanding audience, aren't interested in being a part of the gamer circle jerk, and are actually staffed by writers who are excited by the prospect of what more diversity in games would mean for the quality of the products we receive.

But all it has ever been about was continuing that policing of women by completely ignoring what a widespread issue this is.

Also, I laughed.

Another.

That must be the sort of thing that's mainly funny to the already converted. I don't think it's offensive or upsetting or anything but the reaction was "Huh. Someone slapped a phrase on something."

But then my understanding is that gaming is a barren wasteland with nothing but Pikachu hats and stupid memes in lieu of culture

Hates aren't hats

Edited, Oct 27th 2014 9:59am by Jophiel

Eh.

Some people have acted somewhere on the spectrum between jackhole and sociopath. A good deal of others didn't directly do so in the form of harassment but supported the behavior.

Some people are legitimately interested in the journalism issues. Even if you think it's a dumb thing to be interested in, they're interested in it anyway and there's nothing really wrong with that or their desire to have a conversation.

Likewise, some people are legitimately interested in the harassment and mistreatment of women in gaming. Even if you think they're over-reacting, they're interested in it anyway and there's nothing wrong with wanting a conversation about that either.

Gamergate is probably a poor banner to rally under because of the first aspect. However, the feminist side (I'm calling them that for lack of an easier term) doesn't do it any favors by basically demanding some petulant "total surrender" -- "You have to admit that Gamergate is all about misogyny and harassment and hatred and..." I think the term itself was born primarily from harassment with a veneer of "ethics" added for credibility but I also think a good number of people started paying attention because they thought this was a point from which to start discussing their perceived legitimate issues. So people will wind up continuing to use the Gamergate name.

Realistically, people on the feminist side have zero interest in discussing any other aspect to the debate besides harassment. They're not looking for a debate or an understanding, they're just looking for a win. They started a self-congratulatory circle jerk "Gamers are Dead!" from the very beginning and they're not about to back down from that now. Discussions about it devolve to brush-off statements like "Little boys are mad about their games". They have a media engine driving them onward and profiting off the fight. It's difficult to think that a good faith attempt to discuss the journalism issue under a different name would get any traction or that it wouldn't just get lumped into Gamergate v2.0 the moment some idiot sends a death threat.

Gamergate folks need to do a better job in addressing the harassment. It's a legitimate issue and it cheapens the community if it's accepted as just part of it.

There's no gated communities on the internet. Painting with a broad brush using the nastiest color of paint isn't helpful or indicative of a sincere attempt at a conversation.

Some of that stuff is probably somewhat contradictory and doesn't string well into a narrative. Ultimately though, I've seen people (spreading all my internet haunts) who should know better skirt the line of condoning harassment and people who should know better reduced to just yelling "Harassment!" to shout people down. Neither side sounds particularly like people I'd want to associate with.

I'm open to suggestions beyond just quitting, tattooing "Harassment is wrong!" on my forehead, or having to say the same damn line over and over again(there's a point where it becomes nothing more than background noise). GGers have been looking into harassment where we can, reported it where it was found and called out those we could link to any. Aside from denouncing those who engage in it, or own or others that aren't ours(I've heard of two particular groups who have taken credit for some of it), what more can we do?

Sounds like average teenage talk to me. I'm still confused, though; are we debating language/tone on the internet or nepotism in the gaming industry?

Personally, I'm tired of people dissecting every sentence I write in an attempt to make it fit their preconceptions. I won't apologize for being a heterosexual man, and I won't apologize for utilizing my freedom of speech. If people disagree with me, they can tell me in an orderly fashion, and if their arguments are solid then I might just change my opinion on the matter. That's how we do things in this part of the world where things aren't black and white all the time.

And I don't really give a damn about nepotism in the gaming industry. There are larger issues in the world, and I really don't have enough time to care about every little thing. I don't buy games based on arbitrary scores given by possibly corrupt people who might not share my taste in games. Like most people, I buy games based on the amount of dollars spent on the trailer(s).

Note: I do not condone murder, rape, threats, or any combination of the three. I hate you people for making me have to write this, because it should be fucking obvious to anyone.

Edited, Oct 27th 2014 9:03pm by Mazra