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

[RossW]

I'm sure Google are shitting themselves that maybe 300 people might start using Bing instead

[Graham S]

Yvette Cooper included a fairly lengthy section on GG in her speech to the Labour Wonen's Conference.

And we have to campaign on new frontiers

To confront the old prejudice and discrimination that is appearing in new places.

The culture of abuse and harassment that seems to be growing again

And some of the misogyny we have seen online.

Gamergate look it up, its appalling women hounded out of the online gaming industry, silenced by rape threats and bullying

Women who campaign for something as simple as getting Jane Austen on a bank note targeted with rape threats

Women in law or business bombarded with misogyny and abuse on twitter or on Facebook because they challenge sexism at work

Mary Beard, Caroline Criado-Perez, Charlotte Proudman, Brianna Wu and Zoe Quinn targeted by those who want to silence them

And those are the high profile women we know about

Far more worrying are the teenagers targeted on Facebook or twitter called feminazis, targeted with homophobic abuse because yes they are feminists, yes they use the f word, who end up feeling silenced instead

And weve seen some of that abuse, harassment, bullying and misogyny in politics, in the Scottish referendum campaign, in the General Election campaign and even on the margins of our own party in this leadership election campaign too.

This isnt about senior politicians like Harriet, me, Liz, Stella, Angela, Caroline - we're never going to be silenced by the high tech equivalent of angry letters written in green ink that politicians have received for centuries.

But what about those speaking out for the first time. Those in all walks of life who suddenly find themselves subject to a torrent of abuse for speaking out and who end up being put off or staying quiet.

We dont stand for it on the street, why should we tolerate it online?

Unless misogyny on the internet is challenged, more womens voices will be silenced, and more women will be oppressed or feel prevented from speaking out just as if we'd gone back to the Victorian age.

The internet is our new public space. We cant allow women to be silenced, just as we cant allow women to be silenced on the streets and in our towns

Women in all walks of life have to stand together on this - in politics, in the media and in business. And the Labour Party needs to lead the way, set the example.

We must not stand on the sidelines as womens voices are drowned out by vitriol and hate

[Anne Summers]

Awesome.

[rafaqat]

I would like it if any of the GG-sympathising members we might have here would come in and try to explain their their views. I wonder if we have none at all (seems unlikely) or if its just that they know they wouldn't change our minds on anything so wouldn't bother. Whatever it is I hope it isn't that they are here, but are ashamed of their views and don't want to go rllmuk-public with them.

We've had them come in and try to explain their views, then leave spitting with rage that we don't agree with them.

To be honest I think there's quite a few things said by the likes of Anita S and others that are cobblers but that they also do have a point overall. What makes me want to poke my own eyes out is the utter cretins on both sides that make any sort of discussion on the matter have a high chance of just turning into a slanging match. Recognising that neither side will really listen to the other because there's too many idiots on both sides makes me not want to bother engaging and instead watch this thread every once in a while. If I didn't see this thread I wouldn't even know about this whole GG thing.

This thread definitely gives off a pretty one sided echo chamber vibe. This is coming from someone who occasionally checks the thread and who broadly agrees with the whole thing Anita and co are after.

[Mentazm]

The problem is you say anything against Anita and the beta white knight SJWs that fill rllmuk pelt you with negs. Then they wonder why the thread is a right-on echo chamber. /awaits negs to prove me right

[earlymodernsteve]

Insert castle.gif ...

[SMD]

beta white knight SJWs

are you alpha then? How are people on here white knights if these women are defending themselves and articulating their arguments in the face of abuse?

[Shoes]

/awaits negs to prove me right

If that's written at the end of a post, the post is guaranteed to be total horse shit.

[therearerules]

The problem is you say anything against Anita and the beta white knight SJWs that fill rllmuk pelt you with negs. Then they wonder why the thread is a right-on echo chamber. /awaits negs to prove me right

For someone who has repeatedly posted in this thread that people should say what they want on the internet, online abuse isn't real abuse, and you even wished aids upon someone for something, you sure do whine about negs.

[Mentazm]

I'm hardly alpha myself but compared to the majority of rllmuk I'm macho as fuck.

You can still be a white knight and defend someone who doesn't need defending if you feel you will score SJW brownie points in your chosen community.

It's valid to await negs when it's the answer to the topic being discussed. Why is this thread an echo chamber? Because of rllmuks rep system.

[Mentazm]

For someone who has repeatedly posted in this thread that people should say what they want on the internet, online abuse isn't real abuse, and you even wished aids upon someone for something, you sure do whine about negs.

I'm not whining about negs, I'm pointing out the fact that's the reason you don't get anyone going against the rllmuk consensus in this thread. I originally said in here that both sides are as rubbish as each other, and that somehow made me a pro GG guy apparently.

[Nate Dogg III]

beta white knight SJWs

House!

[Festoon]

My biggest issue is that it's almost impossible to critique the Fem Freq videos thanks to the moronic Gamergaters as everyone gets lumped in with their ridiculous shit.

I wasn't happy with their attitude towards Fair Use, for example. I also find that, though I think the tropes of women in videogames are well identified, that perhaps the well is running a little dry in the last few vids. Some of the criticism aimed at violence in games that leaks in occasionally is also academically groundless - there is simply no proof that it is bad for people.

I do see McIntosh stating anti-game violence comments on Twitter all the time and it reminds me of the video nasty moral panics of the 80s.

[Benny]

These days, if you say something bad about Anita Sarkeesian, you get arrested and thrown in jail.

[Shoes]

I'm not whining about negs, I'm pointing out the fact that's the reason you don't get anyone going against the rllmuk consensus in this thread. I originally said in here that both sides are as rubbish as each other, and that somehow made me a pro GG guy apparently.

Saying 'beta white knight SJWs' might give that impression.

[SMD]

There's absolutely no reason you can't critique them, if anything the GG nutjobs give a good contrast to show you're actually debating the points. They want discussion and discourse. It's not happening if you call people beta white knight SJWs though.

[Mentazm]

Saying 'beta white knight SJWs' might give that impression.

Why? Those phrases existed long before GG.

[Wiper]

That's true, calling people 'beta white knight sjws' doesn't mark you as a gamergate supporter, just as a collosal prick.

[metallicfrodo]

Why? Those phrases existed long before GG.

But it's a completely pejorative term isn't it. Basically you are saying everyone in here is a muppet, and they are trying to win brownie points with women. It's hardly likely to put people in the right mood to take anything you say in good faith or bother to converse with you.

[squirtle]

You can comment and criticise whatever you like, as long as it's informed, reasonable, concise and coherent and doesn't resort to silly labels and name calling. A few people in here, including me, have disagreed with some of the stuff in the videos without getting negged. You just have to be sensible with your criticisms and open to debate on them.

[Mr Cochese]

It's not like GG supporters have a habit of pretending to be neutral for a bit before coming out with a load of completely whack job Taliban sexual politics.

[metallicfrodo]

Slightly off topic but what it is with the terms Social Justice and White Knight I mean on the face of it they are at the worst neutral terms but generally considered to be positive. I mean who in their right mind doesn't think we should live in a just society? Additionally isn't the White Knight always the good guy in the stories? And yet these are the terms that certain people decide to co-opt to make pejorative.

Kind of reminds me of this Mitchell and Webb sketch (obviously I am falling foul of Godwin's law here, but I do love this sketch!)

[ZOK]

If that's written at the end of a post, the post is guaranteed to be total horse shit.

I think that stratagem has become known as 'doing a Duncan'.

[Alex W.]

Wouldn't "beta male" make me, like, the second highest ranked member of my social group? That seems like an upgrade to me.

[Benny]

Wouldn't "beta male" make me, like, the second highest ranked member of my social group? That seems like an upgrade to me.

I like to think of myself as more of an Omega Male.

[Harsin]

I'm a Delta Tau Chi male.

TOGAAAAAAAAA!

[Gambit]

I still don't get the negative connotation of calling someone an "SJW". Surely being a warrior for justice is a good thing? Like Batman.

[deerokus]

Plenty of us have criticised Sarkeesian in this thread, if anything there's a consensus that her stuff can be rather weak and facile. Not sure where the idea you can't without being insulted is coming from.

[Dig Dug]

I still don't get the negative connotation of calling someone an "SJW". Surely being a warrior for justice is a good thing? Like Batman.

When people use the term they mean it in the same context as calling someone a keyboard warrior, in other words they are trying to say that people who are "social justice warriors" are people who moan about trivial small things for the sake of moaning which of course is a contradiction because social justice is not a small trivial thing. It sounds ridiculous but hey I did previously live with two people who believed in this kind of stuff so as far as I am concerned people do think like this.

[SqueakyG]

The problem is you say anything against Anita and the beta white knight SJWs that fill rllmuk pelt you with negs. Then they wonder why the thread is a right-on echo chamber. /awaits negs to prove me right

I think this type of language reduces the debate to a childish level. Insults and black-and-white extremes... smart people shouldn't fall for those attempts to reduce a debate down to its lowest mud-slinging level. What I've observed about this thread is that people here are sensible enough not to fall for the black-and-white extremes.

"If you say anything against Anita you'll get negs" -- is that really true? I think this thread has been a space where it has been possible to say her videos aren't perfect. Perhaps on other forums - where the insults and the black-and-white extremes are the norm - your observation might be true. Those are battlefields I wouldn't bother setting foot on.

I support the overall purpose of Sarkeesian's videos, and I think around 90% of her videos are just basic human common sense. Her brand of pop feminism is actually very straightforward -- I'm surprised it rattles anybody. She has revealed a lot of scenes and moments in games that are shockingly sexist, and I agree with every broad stroke of her feminist principles. However, she gets about 10% wrong. She occasionally misunderstands and misrepresents a game. She occasionally speaks a subjective statement as a fact (a wikipedia-style "citation needed" pops into my mind).