|
Effectronica posted:I'm not going to tell you, because you believe in the Muslim Pope and the Atheist Pope and it's freaking me out. The leader of the Muslims is called the Caliph ever since the 7th century, and the current one is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, PBUH.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:25 |
|
Freakazoid_ posted:I don't think you understand the implications of leaderless movements. There are some parallels here with the Occupy movement. I don't believe that this is necessarily the case. Feminism, the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, etc. are all leaderless movements and have been so since their inception.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I don't believe that this is necessarily the case. Feminism, the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, etc. are all leaderless movements and have been so since their inception. You mean the leaders aren't Andrea Dworkin, Martin Luther King and Liberace?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:I don't think you understand the implications of leaderless movements. There are some parallels here with the Occupy movement. Anti-gg isn't a 'movement', and there aren't any implications to the fact that atheists don't have leaders, or that some religious are non-hierarchical. Also, leaderless movements have problems in direction, but they don't need to disassociate themselves from terrorist acts because, again, ordinary people can be assumed to not support them by default. quote:I believe there needs to be clear leaders on both sides if the gamergate debate is to have any merit. Especially when it comes to denouncing terror threats. Yes, it is deeply weird, including thinking there are two sides. If someone looks at GG and says "Wow, that's loving stupid", are they automatically on some 'side', and why? quote:
It doesn't matter. He's not an atheist leader. Atheism is a point of view, it doesn't need a leader. You have a really strange obsession with leaders. quote:Just to be clear: Those who supported the bombing against GG in DC, you believe they have to own up to it, too? Of course. Again: You don't need to ask this of normal people, and that you think you do is really weird. This is the same mentality that demands Muslims repudiate every act of Muslim violence. Edit: If nothing else this thread has been good at demonstrating weird poo poo people apparently believe. Obdicut fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:The leader of the Muslims is called the Caliph ever since the 7th century, and the current one is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, PBUH. Whoa, we've got someone denying the rightful succession of the Imamate here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Yeah, I meant the people saying, after they'd been exposed, that they shouldn't have been kicked out because they weren't really causing a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
If you are denounced or rejected by the Atheist Leader, do you suddenly become a theist? Does he also pick your new faith or do you spin a wheel? Long story made short? GG is a flimsy, dumb idea made infinitely worse by both opportunistic hacks (Milo Yannapoulos, Jack Freaking Thompson) and eager little bile stains that populate Reddit and 4chan. The fact that some of its targets might be jerks does not excuse their antics or viciousness in the least, and even the small grains of truth you could find among their grievances are not helped by their actions, or in fact, b their existence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Yes, it is deeply weird, including thinking there are two sides. If someone looks at GG and says "Wow, that's loving stupid", are they automatically on some 'side', and why? If all they said was that? No, they're not on a side. But if we're talking you, you've done more than that. You spent a lot of time deconstructing them, as if they were worth talking about. That arguably puts you on a side. All I'm arguing for is culpability. Leaders are good at that. Leaderless groups are not. You can keep calling it weird but that doesn't make it so. Sephyr posted:If you are denounced or rejected by the Atheist Leader, do you suddenly become a theist? Does he also pick your new faith or do you spin a wheel? I imagine they would become a different sect of atheist, much like there are different sects of other religions. Or just ignore them and move on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
How about we lay culpability at the hands of people doing bad stuff rather than some nebulous concept of a leader accepting the sins of their followers?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:If all they said was that? No, they're not on a side. Left wing groups with leaders in America get shot. Every time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:GG is idiotic, misogynistic and hurts people, so it's worth talking about. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe, JUST MAYBE, reducing actual rapes is more important than "integrity" in video games "journalism". Neurolimal posted:This is going to sound really depressing, but 18-30 year olds in America are more willing to engage feminism and womens' rights in the context of videogames, instead of actual real life situations. This is the only thing that makes sense to me. It just sucks we have to have what's essentially a discussion of feminism through this lens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:If all they said was that? No, they're not on a side. It really doesn't, except in your bizarre view. I have an opinion. There aren't two sides. Even if you want to assign me a 'side', you have to assign me a side that includes that I don't use twitter, that I think people slinging poo poo on twitter are dumb, and that I think people attempting to have serious conversations about topics via twitter are screwing up. Or you could put me on the 'side' of people who think that believing there are two sides are weird as hell. quote:All I'm arguing for is culpability. Leaders are good at that. Leaderless groups are not. You can keep calling it weird but that doesn't make it so. Culpability means the person was responsible for it. i'm not responsible for anything any other atheist does, ever. I'm not responsible for what anyone else who thinks GG is stupid does. We have no connection to each other. You could argue that, if someone uses some hashtag like #fuckgg and tweets a bomb threat, that other people using that tag should denounce that bomb threat and say 'gently caress that guy'. Someone who thinks that GG is poo poo but who isn't associated with those people otherwise, doesn't at all have to do anything. If a significant number of people using #fuckgg are saying horrible poo poo, then people using that hashtag are being idiots and should stop using it. quote:I imagine they would become a different sect of atheist, much like there are different sects of other religions. Or just ignore them and move on. Are you, like, super young? Radbot posted:
It sucks we have to have a discussion of feminism at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Radbot posted:I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe, JUST MAYBE, reducing actual rapes is more important than "integrity" in video games "journalism". Are you going to tell me about starving children in Africa now too?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Are you going to tell me about starving children in Africa now too? Are starving children in Africa relevant to a discussion about sexism and feminism? I'm sure there's a connection to be made there, but I'm gonna leave that one to you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Radbot posted:I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe, JUST MAYBE, reducing actual rapes is more important than "integrity" in video games "journalism". Yeah, and if we don't do something about climate change then this whole discussion will be for naught. What's your point?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Radbot posted:I'm going to go out on a limb and say that maybe, JUST MAYBE, reducing actual rapes is more important than "integrity" in video games "journalism". We can be concerned about both. I understand that you think this is an irrelevancy, but it's a discussion of a separate front in the culture war that has, so far, only avoided the causing of actual, physical harm through sheer dumb luck. Trying to angrily insist that it's irrelevant in the face of a separate, more severe problem doesn't really do much but make you look like you're trying to edit the discourse. Sephyr posted:Long story made short? GG is a flimsy, dumb idea made infinitely worse by both opportunistic hacks (Milo Yannapoulos, Jack Freaking Thompson) and eager little bile stains that populate Reddit and 4chan. The fact that some of its targets might be jerks does not excuse their antics or viciousness in the least, and even the small grains of truth you could find among their grievances are not helped by their actions, or in fact, b their existence. I have often thought about how it would be a warmer world on the whole if GG and its like were to pursue actual criminals with the fervor with which they go after a Brianna Wu or Randi Harper: if they turned the same amount of lunatic energy towards digging up information on corrupt bankers or abusers. It'd be vigilante justice, of course, but at least it would be an objectively more worthwhile target than obscure game developers who were mean on Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
I find the whole concept of 'AGG' as an organized front with leaders to be surreal at best, laughable the rest of the time. I've been opposed to Gamergate's antics since Day 0, back when it was just Creepy McCreeperson trying to use SA to raise a mob to stalk his ex for him. I opposed this because it was creepy, first and foremost, but secondly because the allegations didn't match up at all with what I knew of Zoe Quinn from coworkers that knew her personally. When it escalated, and all the creeps that had been going after Quinn were now claiming to be doing it in the name of Ethical Journalism, I stood against it. Because it was an obvious rebranding of one losers crusade against his ex. When they expanded to targeting more people (none of whom were journalists, and all of whom were women - big surprise) and trying to dismiss any criticism as an attack on minorities, I stood against it. I noticed other people did too. It didn't make me part of a group. I flew no banner, I made no image memes, I sure as gently caress didn't adopt a 4chan Green & Purple color scheme and start worshipping a fictional, perfect girl who just wants people to stop talking about things and play vidya. Every step of the way, Gamergate has gotten more organized. It has sites, it has infographics, it has leaders that refuse to call themselves leaders, but anyone they point at immediately finds themselves drowning in thousands of morons. And here I am. Just a guy - a nobody who wrote for a couple of little indie sites, but still got weird creepy pseudo-legal threats and no shortage of abuse - who wants to be left the gently caress alone, and for the people I care about to be left alone, too. I only stand opposed to Gamergate because I stand opposed to harassment, threats, creepery and MRA smear campaigns. It just happens that all of the above is happening under a singular banner. There is a Gamergate. Every step of the way they're reinforced that brand and given it an identity. This mysterious 'anti-gamergate' force just happens to be everyone else, by default.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Dominic White posted:I find the whole concept of 'AGG' as an organized front with leaders to be surreal at best, laughable the rest of the time. I've been opposed to Gamergate's antics since Day 0, back when it was just Creepy McCreeperson trying to use SA to raise a mob to stalk his ex for him. I opposed this because it was creepy, first and foremost, but secondly because the allegations didn't match up at all with what I knew of Zoe Quinn from coworkers that knew her personally.  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
There's a lot of people here who haven't read up on the issue very much, and are therefore perfectly qualified to comment on it. Some info. Honey Badgers being kicked out of the Comic-Con: The founder of the Honey Badgers is a comic artist (Xenospora). When she applied to the con it was both to promote her own work, and to have the Honey Badgers attend. She used her xenospora.com email to apply, but applied as the Honey Badgers. Officials would go on to claim the reason they were kicked out was because the Badgers "lied" about being there to promote Xenospora, which is weird, since the invitation and badgers were printed to say "Honey Badgers". As others have noted, there was clear ill will toward this group, and if the Con didn't want them there they shouldn't have approved the invite (or asked that only Xenospora be promoted, not the HB). They did not promote any hate, and the one time they spoke during a panel discussion is freely available online for your review. Representation in gaming: Feminist's own research shows this doesn't matter. Gamers do not "identify" with the player character in the way that feminist theory claims, so the argument is a non-starter. Sargon of Akkad did a series of videos listing the relevant research that is most often quoted by anti-GG / feminists / whomever, which shows clear statistical evidence that representation in gaming just does not work that way. A simple primer for anyone who doesn't follow: Guys play as girls all the time and vice versa, and nobody really cares. My Mass Effect character was a female, this did not result in massive changes to how I feel about females- not only because I'm not one, but it wouldn't matter if I was. Forcing companies to put (insert quota) into games doesn't help anyone. But shouldn't gaming be more diverse? Sure diversity is always nice, but GG largely believes in a market solution rather than a regulative one. This is not entirely vacuous, as GG has promoted charities to get women into game development, so they can make the titles that represent them. As pointed out in many places, women make up the bulk of "gamers", they just play different kinds of games. Male games appeal to men (Call of Duty, Halo) while girl games appeal to girls (from Peggle to insert Barbie analog to whatever). If women or trans people or whomever want more representation, they need to vote with their dollars and their work- which is absolutely being supported and encouraged by many independent groups- and not by demanding other people bend to their will. And what happens when anti-GG do get their way? What happens when they make a game by women, for women, with no patriarchal interference?  I dare you to look me in the fatrolls over my eyes and tell me this depiction of women would have been deemed okay by the very person who made it, if someone from GG had done the coding. And sure, it happens on both sides, I agree. Dominic White posted:When it escalated, and all the creeps that had been going after Quinn were now claiming to be doing it in the name of Ethical Journalism, I stood against it. Because it was an obvious rebranding of one losers crusade against his ex. World War 1 and Archduke Ferdinand. Something can be kicked off by an event, without being about that event. e: Derp didn't notice I fumbled a digit and hit 2 instead of 1. Sorry. revdrkevind fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:00
|
|
ME
|
revdrkevind posted:World War 2 and Archduke Ferdinand. Umm...
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:
Really?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Serf posted:Really? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:But shouldn't gaming be more diverse? Sure diversity is always nice, but GG largely believes in a market solution rather than a regulative one. See, don't I keep saying that it's the same old right wing nonsense but packaged to appeal to gamers? Also I like the implication here that the people opposing GG are somehow trying to legally regulate greater diversity in games. I must have missed the part where Zoe Quinn tried to pass a law mandating that publishers make more games with female protagonists. Maybe it was in that shady, Raytheon-funded meeting with that Congressman's interns. Hulk Krogan fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
You heard it here first folks, the hateful screed of a jilted ex-lover is comparable to the assassination of a national leader. Actually, now all that Gamergate re-purposed World War 2 propaganda and the drawings of Anita Sarkeesian as a jewish caricature suddenly make sense! It was all connected! Serf fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:World War 1 and Archduke Ferdinand. For this analogy to work, a full third of all the artillery fired in WW1 would have to have been aimed directly at Archduke Ferdinand's corpse. The rest at his immediate friends and family. Also, that analogy does not work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Dominic White posted:Again, when the SPLC flagged Gamergate as a hate movement For someone denying there even is AGG you sure repeat all the same talking points like that one And what do you know, it's not even true
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Hulk Krogan posted:See, don't I keep saying that it's the same old right wing nonsense but packaged to appeal to gamers? http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/03/australian-store-bans-grand-theft-auto-5-violence-against-women There are real-world examples of legislative actions being taken when games don't meet feminist standards. Has the same happened for pro-GG? Have games been banned from stores for being too inclusive? Serf posted:You heard it here first folks, the hateful screed of a jilted ex-lover is comparable to the assassination of a national leader. Oh so you're saying GG is comparable to WW1? Jesus Christ what a moron. Ahem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Serf posted:You heard it here first folks, the hateful screed of a jilted ex-lover is comparable to the assassination of a national leader. Also neither side vehemently insisted that Franz Ferdinand had it coming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:There's a lot of people here who haven't read up on the issue very much, and are therefore perfectly qualified to comment on it. Do you understand that Honey Badgers' show is put on by A Voice For Men, a hate group that lists women it claims have falsely claimed rape? And that the group who went to the con were largely actually members of AVFM? quote:My Mass Effect character was a female, this did not result in massive changes to how I feel about females- not only because I'm not one, but it wouldn't matter if I was. Forcing companies to put (insert quota) into games doesn't help anyone. Nobody is talking about forcing companies to do anything. Seriously, did you bother to read the thread? revdrkevind posted:
Can you list these examples, then, instead of putting up something that isn't an example of that? If you're in favor of market solutions, why are you objecting to a company responding to feedback from customers? Edit: I don't really need to say that the WWI comparison is stupid as gently caress, do I? Obdicut fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
That was world war 1, with the archduke.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/03/australian-store-bans-grand-theft-auto-5-violence-against-women hahahahaha quote:The Australian retail chain Target has removed the controversial video game Grand Theft Auto V from sale in its stores. When did Target declare itself a sovereign government? I guess I missed that too. How does one get elected to the Congress of Target? Is it bicameral, and does it have an Outer Ring chamber and an Inner Dot chamber? Hulk Krogan fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:Has the same happened for pro-GG? Have games been banned from stores for being too inclusive? I mean, Jack Thompson tried this with the game Bully cause it had gay content...
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Useful Distraction posted:I mean, Jack Thompson tried this with the game Bully cause it had gay content... Didn't some fundies also freak out because Mass Effect included same-sex romances? I don't remember if they actually tried to get anything banned though. I'll have to consult the Library of (Walmart's) Congress. Hulk Krogan fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Pyromancer posted:For someone denying there even is AGG you sure repeat all the same talking points like that one Ah, I'm sorry - correction: Gamergate was merely listed in one of SPLC's Hatewatch newsletters, rather than being fully focused on. Clearly because they're totally cool with it and want to high-five over all those ethics. The part about Stormfront rushing to their defence over such a clearly Jewish conspiracy? That's true though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Hulk Krogan posted:Didn't some fundies also freak out because Mass Effect included same-sex romances? I don't remember if they actually tried to get anything banned though. yes. some fundies acted like it was sex simulator. http://gamepolitics.com/2008/01/14/conservative-blogger-claims-mass-effect-offers-customizable-sodomy he got called out for it and appolgized at some point. http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/01/17/mass-effect-bashing-pundit-backs-off
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:World War 2 and Archduke Ferdinand. I don't post in these threads like ever because I can't really find it in me to care enough and other posters are doing a fine enough job, but holy moly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Dominic White posted:For this analogy to work, a full third of all the artillery fired in WW1 would have to have been aimed directly at Archduke Ferdinand's corpse. The rest at his immediate friends and family. Statistical analysis of Gamergate tweets proves this wrong. All sides have tried to spin this their own way, but claiming the negative comments are "one third" is outrageous. https://medium.com/@cainejw/an-actual-statistical-analysis-of-gamergate-dfd809858f68 Obdicut posted:Do you understand that Honey Badgers' show is put on by A Voice For Men, a hate group that lists women it claims have falsely claimed rape? And that the group who went to the con were largely actually members of AVFM? http://www.avoiceformen.com/allbulletins/statement-from-a-voice-for-men-honey-badger-brigade-is-not-our-property/ For the record I think the core people behind AVFM- particularly Paul Elam- really are loving awful woman-hating pricks, and I wouldn't waste words supporting the Badgers if I didn't see a clear line of demarcation. Hulk Krogan posted:hahahahaha Fair point. I meant that in a looser sense, as there have been real-world action taken to have games banned or etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:I don't post in these threads like ever because I can't really find it in me to care enough and other posters are doing a fine enough job, but holy moly. And yes I'm sorry I made a typo. I'll go back to my basement where I can have rape fantasies about the women I've obviously never had sex with and/or hate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:And yes I'm sorry I made a typo. I'll go back to my basement where I can have rape fantasies about the women I've obviously never had sex with and/or hate. If you think the issue is your comparison the the wrong world war you are really missing the point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:25 |
|
|
revdrkevind posted:Fair point. I meant that in a looser sense, as there have been real-world action taken to have games banned or etc. Ah yes, the dastardly feminist conspiracy to write letters to private corporations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 20:29
|
|