Jump to content

Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

Unofficial Who

Recommended Posts

Jimmy Wales is a libertarian and Objectivist, so I’m not that surprised that he’d be interested in GG, or that he’d be considered by GG to be a fellow traveller. The thing about that response is that it seems like proper next-level concern trolling, in that his response says that he thinks that actually it IS about ethics in games journalism, but that the message has been perverted by a small (less than 10%) minority of nutters. So that the underlying premise is that there is extant corruption in games journalism, and a new organisation should be made to expose it.

That could also just be tinfoil-hat paranoia as well. Maybe Jimmy Wales just thinks GG is a pile of shit, but is trying to be polite.

There is a problem with ethics in games journalism (and all journalism). There's problems with ethics in everything to be honest from banking to how charities are run, so you can't expect journalists to be entirely exempt from criticism. A lot of it is purely down to most gaming journos being amateurs and a bit shit/lazy though.

Then there's the Youtube/AAA collusion, which I am sure goes on, but I nor anyone else knows a single thing about, because sadly there is no movement/organisation dedicated to investigating ethics in video games journalism :(

Jimmy is probably intelligent enough to realise this. So when he (or whoever) says what he does in that email, I read it more as "If there are ethic issues, go and find them" , rather than "I think you're onto something - just try and tone down the abuse/death threats a bit, son".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come to think of it the only place I ever see "ethical" gamergaters is when they're rushing to dismiss articles on the unethical ones. What else do they do with their time? Knit?

They spend lots of time making collages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the Jimmy Wales thing on the previous page - I think it's genuine, and I don't think he's particularly sympathetic, but he definitely wants to give off an air of impartiality. Ages ago there was apparently a lengthy email exchange between him and a typically wordy but idiotic gator which appears to be genuine (you can see on Wales' twitter that he invited the guy to an email conversation). If it is him, he shows a surprisingly deep knowledge of the whole sorry mess. If it isn't, it's an extraordinary elaborate fantasy. Either way, it's worth a read. Of course the gator made a bigger cunt out of himself by posting the mails that Wales asked him to keep private, but there's no surprise there.

There's five emails, and they're fucking LONG. I've quoted the best bit below, elsewhere he goes on about editing wikipedia loads and dealing with all sorts of other pedantic nonsense from the gator dope.


Email 1 Email 2 Email 3 Email 4 Email 5

> 17.
> If any of my #gamergate friends are reading this: I urge you to
> also give Jimmy Wales the benefit of the doubt and get involved as
> well. We can't go on attacking everybody who gets their news about
> the world from the New York Post and Gamasutra. It's not their
> fault they don't know any better. We have to give more people the
> chance to learn the truth. We need more voices and more compassion,
> even when SJWs and the press attack us from every side with violence
> and smear campaigns, dehumanizing us to deny us compassion, we need
> to stand proud and tell the truth.
I would recommend in your interactions with the outside world that you
drop the term "SJWs". It gives off a militant and combative "us versus
them" vibe that causes people to rightly doubt the objectivity of what
you are saying. I think it does you a major disservice in terms of
trying to get the message out to the wider world. (New York Times, etc.)
There is a view, not correct but not entirely without foundation, that
there is a massive huge community of virulently reactionary dimwits who
want games with hapless damsels with cartoon-hot bodies and all the
rest, who get upset with any criticism or commentary about the problems
with that and lash out at "feminazis", "SJWs", etc. You and I both know
that this is not the majority of the gaming world by a long shot, but it
is a group that absolutely does exist and have been doing a lot of harm
to the reputation of games and the gaming industry and the gaming community.
It may be a convenient shorthand for internal discussions, but even
there I think it's dangerous. Labeling people makes it harder to make
distinctions among them. We see this in the unfortunately dismal state
of political discourse in the US all the time. "liberal" and
"conservative" are thrown out as epithets in a way that completely
blinds people to real policy issues. It becomes a... video game where
you shoot the bad guys and save the good guys. Not helpful to real
progress in society.
Here's a great example from recent times. Congressman Cory Gardner is
running for Senate in Colorado as a Republican. I don't support or
oppose him. I'm just observing the discourse.
The Democrats trotted out the usual playbook that he's a crazed right
winger who wants to ban birth control. Problem is, he's in favor of
wide access to contraception and even proposes that the birth control
pill be made available without a prescription.
I'm sure there's plenty to love or hate about the guy but the point is
the *label* of "right wing Republican" caused the debate to deteriorate
into nonsense.
Similarly, labeling people as "SJWs" is not conducive to serious respect
and consideration of a variety of viewpoints of people who have varying
degrees of concern and criticism of gaming culture.
(I've removed the long and mostly speculative discussion of who fucked
who and when because I don't think the blow by blow is relevant -
particularly not when pieced together from various blog posts - again,
high quality reliable third party sources are key.)
> These appearances of impropriety exist. No neutral person can claim
> otherwise.
I think that's the main valid point in what you are saying but the point
and should be made without sounding like a personal digging into some
woman's sex life. Let me explain further.
The problems with corruption in the magazine industry are rampant. Let
me give a completely separate example so as to make this less emotional.
I like boats. I have a small family speedboat (19 footer) and I'm
fortunate in my life to know a lot of super wealthy people and sometimes
get invited to visit on really big boats. So I read boat magazines.
Mainly I read ones relevant to me, i.e. about normal family boats -
maybe I'll move up to a 24 footer next year!)
But the one thing I know for sure is that when I'm reading boat
magazines I'm not reading independent hard hitting journalism with
quality reviews. I'm reading advertiser-supported industry-friendly
borderline-pr puffery. Part of that is just natural: the people who go
into journalism at boat magazines love boats too! So they are naturally
positive. But part of that is just that the whole industry is "in bed"
I mean that in every way. Loaner boats. Weekend jaunts. They know
each other - attend the same boat shows, build relationships. It's
party unavoidable but partly it's a fertile ground for corruption.
That's true of a lot of "subculture" journalism.
NOW. Let's switch back to gaming. There's a massive problem here as
well. But the problem is not with some relatively unimportant indy game
developer and who she slept with, the problem is with massive issues
with major game magazines being industry-compromised.
So the problem as I see it is that lots of people in #gamergate claim to
be about that corruption bit, but instead are massively obsessed with
Zoe Quinn's sex life.
So, is there an appearance of impropriety? Sure and the details don't
matter. An ex boyfriend with little honor decided to go public in a
vicious way about a sad breakup and a firestorm ensued. But it isn't
really IMPORTANT in the way that massive corruption in the magazine
industry is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever I feel brave enough to dive into comments on Gamergate-related stories one thing that GG supporters keep bringing up is that there's no evidence that anyone in GG engages in harassment & that there is evidence of corruption & collusion amongst GG's opponents.

On the first point, I thought GG just kept dismissing anyone who engaged in harassing behaviour as not part of GG (the 'no true scotsman' argument) & on the second, it was just that people in the industry knew each other.

Is there actual evidence for either of these things though? Being able to back up your statements with proof is something both sides should engage in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A_man_in_black recently discussed how Patreon is culpable for the monetization of the disturbing material distributed on 8chan: https://storify.com/a_man_in_black/patreon-and-common-carrier-sociopathy

(If you follow the link to Plumpette's Storifys near the bottom of that page, you probably don't want to click on the "#STOP8CHAN (collection)" Storify - it's a collection of censored screengrabs from 8chan's paedophile boards. :()

Patreon's guidelines were subsequently updated, to allow people to raise money to make NSFW art, but not for pornography; and to ban people who have been involved in doxxing, hate speech, or "credible violent threats":


(I'm curious to compare these to whatever guidelines they had before. Archive.org only has copies of the the /guidelines page from today.)

Bullying, Harassment, Threats and Hate Speech:

Patreon should feel like a safe place for normal people. We dont allow bullying or harassment on Patreon. At the same time, we want people to be able to express themselves, be critical, and discuss controversial issues. We recognize that discussing celebrities, media or other public figures can sometimes involve harsh criticism, and we believe that is an appropriate part of free debate. That said, there is no room on Patreon for hate speech or serious threats of violence. For us, hate speech includes serious attacks on people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability or serious medical condition.

Nudity and Pornography:

Patreon is not for pornography, but some of the worlds most beautiful and historically significant art often depicts nudity and sexual expression. Because of that, we allow nudity and suggestive imagery, as long as it is marked NSFW. Think of the policy as allowing R Rated movies... but not porn. In keeping with our strong commitment to safety, we have zero tolerance for content that sexualizes children in any way.

Facilitating Harmful or Dangerous Activity:

We dont allow funds to be collected for organizations that promote, forums that distribute, or anything else that primarily facilitates harmful or dangerous activities. For example, an organization that promotes sexual abuse, intellectual property violations, weapons, commercial spamming, self harm, drug manufacturing techniques, or property crimes would be prohibited from receiving funds through Patreon.

People Who Cant Use Patreon:

Because Patreon empowers people financially, we impose restrictions not only on the types of media and projects that can be funded on Patreon, but also on which people can and cannot receive funds through Patreon. After creating a Patreon page, any creator caught in the act or convicted of making credible violent threats, committing violent crimes, malicious doxing, coordinating nonviolent harm such as fraud, or encouraging others to do the aforementioned harmful activities may be banned from using Patreon.

8chan's founder Frederick Brennan ("Hotwheels") says that Patreon sent him this message:



We understand your dedication to free speech in principle, but 8chan is currently being used for a number of activities that violate our new community guidelines. Because weve read your interviews and done significant research on 8chans story and philosophy, we are aware that you, yourself, dont verbally support a lot of the activities on 8chan. It sounds like free speech is a core value for you, and youre willing to prioritize that principle above all else.

While we understand your commitment to free speech, we will not allow 8chan to continue using Patreon, as several boards facilitate the distribution of harmful content and activity, such as illustrated child exploitation imagery. Other violations include facilitating the promotion and/or encouragement to commit self harm, and facilitating the promotion and/or encouragement of pedophilia practices. While we are aware that illustrated child exploitation imagery is not illegal in the United States, we take a strict stance, regardless of the law, on the usage of Patreon to fund or facilitate its distribution.

Because 8chan, in its current state, violates our community guidelines, we will be removing your page from Patreon at the end of the month, after the next payments cycle. If you feel like our decision was based on false information, if youd like to change 8Chans content policies, or if you have further questions, please feel free to email us back.

-The Patreon Team

So he changed his Patreon to make out that he's not raising money to fund 8chan at all! No, he's raising money to help look after, and make videos of, his cat! http://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2q1iaq/in_response_to_patreons_rule_changes_hotwheels/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amusingly, to avoid the conclusion that Gamergate're supporting child pornography by proxy of funding 8chans Patreon, they're urging their members to report any CP on 8chan to the FBI.

Of course, that usually involves the FBI seizing the server, so they haven't really thought this through.

It hasn't stopped them from attacking a bunch of women who've had nothing to do with it though, including Mattie Brice, who they can't come up with any reasons or "unethical" stuff for (her entry in the list literally lists ???), but must have done something by dint of having a vagina or whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does seem that the more dedicated Gamergate supporters are still searching for opponents to fight, desperately trying to stay relevant.

Once everyone gets bored of their insanity & realises how useless rational argument is with them that's when it will truly die.

The question then is what those dedicated supporters will do next. At least with Gamergate you know what they're up to, when it's gone what will they turn their energy to next?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ones that actually want it to be about ethics in games journalism will hopefully go off and actually do things about ethics in games journalism, while the ones for whom it's an excuse to attack things they don't like will keep attacking things they don't like under the Gamergate banner.

Haters gonna hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Dan Olsen AKA Foldablehuman, the guy who did that gamergate video that I linked a bit back, decided to tackle the claim that 8chan does not allow some of the more seriously dodgy stuff on its site, seeing as people had been saying it was hosting child porn on there for ages, which was always met with the response of "no, it gets taken down straight away, its very much not allowed", and found that there were a lot of rather dubious examples which he presented in a blog, but blurring the pictures. He found there were pics and threads on there that were months old, and some very dodgy topics of conversation were allowed. It seemed like there was no outright child porn, but there were some highly sexualised pictures of young girls, with people discussing them sexually, and plenty of drawings of young girls sexually. Of course, 8chan being one of their spiritual homes, a number of anti gamergate people spread it around to say "look, this is the place you're defending and making excuses for". The gamergaters reactions? To call Olsen and the others supporting him peadophiles, and accuse them of advertising or spreading child pornography, and claim they are contacting the FBI to investigate them. While at the same time, not saying a thing about the fucking source of the childporn except to make excuses about free speech and shit or claim it's not actually child porn. Yes, some of them are actually claiming there is no child porn there while at the same time claiming someone is advertising child porn from a source they claim has no child porn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they have gone into a really insane full-on 'what's wrong with non-pornographic paedophilia?' meltdown over the last day or two. Because actually it's about ethics in child pornography.

This is a nice post on the latest lunacy you mentioned.


Also, here is a gobbledegooker being downvoted by his brethren for calling their paedoy stuff disgusting. http://gyazo.com/5278055e63a47f177b2e027e20a91399

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO this 8Chan CP thing is an another example of Gamergate's blinkered 'All Game Journalists are corrupt & unethical' thinking.

Because they believe it, then it doesn't matter what the Journalist is actually doing or writing about, they're corrupt & unethical, therefore whatever they're doing must be bad. How destructive such thinking is though is highlighted when you find yourself on the side of the argument that is arguing against the bringing to light of CP with the weak excuse of the journalist 'distributing' it, & is another reason why Gamergate needs to die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.