can we talk about "gamergate"

[vrtra]

Wtf are they angry about
and why does it involve threatening to blow up Anita Sarkeesian?

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.

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.

"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?

Exactly.

"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.

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

Thanks for all the clear explanations - been away from WiFi all day so coming back and reading this has been enlightening to say the least.

How can these people have such little insight and self awareness as to think they actually have any valid argument whatsoever?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

The sequel

Briar -words fail me. I guess this type of deeply disturbed and psychologically unstable man was always out there, but prior to the internet we didn't get this appalling close up into the cess-pit that is the inside of their minds. (We did of course get to see the material results of their minds, in the form of rape, domestic violence, violence against other men, etc... but we didn't get this hideous insight into the delusions and sheer hatred that drives them).

for some reason my browser won't show the comments under telegraph articles. which i'm sure is excellent for my blood pressure

The comments section for that article is completely over run with people who are (for a telegraph audience) oddly well informed and sympathetic to the GG point of view.

I'm sure that is coincidental....

oddly well informed of* the GG point of view and sympathetic to it.

It's all about journalistic ethics, media conspiracy, feminist conspiracy, attacking gamers, SJWs etc.

Telegraph comments are often better than Guardian comments, weirdly.

Yes, MEOD, they do. Whole tin foil hat wearing blog posts about it.