can we talk about "gamergate"

The sequel

I am sick of the construction of women being abused online as flame wars.
One side uses violent threats and the press makes out it's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Just wanted to share this. Apparantly it's sexist and disgusting to point out that patriarchy can hurt men too.

If it's about ethics in games journalism, how come we never hear anything about the unethical man who wanted a game creator to sleep with him in exchange for a good review? (Well, first, it never happened, second, they're only going after women...)

Yes the only thing Anita has done is to continue with her work and speak out about the harassment and now terrorism against her.

If gamergate really is about journalistic ethics, how come nothing I've read about it mentions anything apart from the phrase 'journalistic ethics' and possibly to perpetuate the lie that Zoe Quinn slept with journalists for good reviews which was put about by her ex?

Are the 'journalistic ethics' gamergaters really that bad at getting their point across that I still don't really get what it is, or are they simply hiding attacks on women behind a poorly constructed 'reasonable' facade?

Gone are the good ole days when these men were just honest and said "we don't want women in our club". Now they have to be more devious and make up shit like journalistic ethics, focusing on the way things are said, on all manner of peripheral issues to discount what is being said by gaming feminists which is: women are treated like shit in the gaming industry.

I've followed AS right from the beginning and that is exactly what happened to her. She never fought back in what could be seen as an equal battle. The only technique she used was to expose the death and rape threats. That's really not the same as making those threats in the first place.

There arent really "sides" here anymore. Once people start threatening and harassing women like this simply for being women that becomes the overriding issue. What lit the touch paper becomes an irrelevance. The moment we start looking at this in terms of "sides" we look for compromises and middle ground.

Ultimately you either believe women should take up their rightful share of space, virtually or in real life, contribute their voices and thoughts equally and be able to do all that without threat or hindrance, or you don't. Sorting that out is the important issue here.

I am vehemently taking sides because I am a gamer, a feminist and a human being. It's not hard really.

"I'm not taking sides because I consider myself both a gamer and a feminist"

I am taking sides because I consider myself both a gamer and a feminist. This isn't a two sided flame war. I've seen a lot of evidence of GGers threatening women who oppose them (oddly not the men so much, why is that?) but none to suggest the threats are being reciprocated.

Exactly.

"I'm not taking sides because I consider myself both a gamer and a feminist"

Most of the women on the receiving end of threats considered themselves both gamers and feminists too don't they?

I came across this video of Anita Sarkeesian presenting at a TEDx event in 2012 which explains what happened to her in the promotion of her Feminist Frequency videos. It does have some very good insights as to how (at least some of) this has transpired.

No there are no specific examples of the GGers having any of that done to them by the women calling them out. None. Zip. Zero it's not a Flame War, it's a one sided pile of shite.

Like I said before, the main GG players only have to say that a woman has threatened them for the drones to get involved and regurgitate it. The whole thing is based on a lie, but it was a lie who's time had come. No amount of pointing out the truth means the lie will go away.

This really isn't an equal "flame war".

From the Guardian article:

"What developed was an unprecedented flame war. The two sides pulled out all the stops sock-puppeting (creating fake IDs to harass people), doxing (digging up people’s personal data and posting it online), and all the other techniques of online warfare. Of course, each side claims vigorously that the other side is worse, kind of like in the Spanish Civil War, the Russian Civil War, or any of the famous right-left battles of the 20th Century. "

I'm not taking sides because I consider myself both a gamer and a feminist and NOTHING good will come out of this.

MEOD, they claim it because enough of the drones believe it, they repeat it and shout it and eventually, even when there is no evidence, the simple minded believe it.

NONE of GG has ANYTHING to do with journalistic ethics. Anyone who suggests it is is either deluded or lying.

This is solely about the shouting down of women in gaming and anyone who supports them, because, well, mostly it seems, they can.

And yes NAMALT, but enough of them are for the FBI to be taking it seriously and investigating several of the really very credible threats to various women.

"Gamergate wasn't started by someone who cared about games, but a man who wanted to attack his ex."

I don't think that can be repeated too often.

This bollocks about journalistic integrity was tacked on later to give the 'movement' an air of legitimacy. At it's heart GG is about the hatred of women, and many of the main protagonists are not even gamers, they are MRAs who have jumped on the bandwagon to further their own agenda.

Games can influence but it's part of a whole, if a young man spends his time wanking to porn, playing videogames with crap portrayal of women, watching dudebro action movies, listening to misogynist music, hanging out with sexists male nerds online, obviously it's going to influence his thinking and behaviour.
If you aren't exposed to "women are humans with feelings and opinions and worth like me" but constant media with the opposite message, then it will easy to be led by the people who started gamergate.
I believe that the most viscious attackers are not just men who has consumed a lot of crappy media but people with personality disorders like sociopathy.
Gamergate wasn't started by someone who cared about games, but a man who wanted to attack his ex.