Radbot posted:

I used to like video games, then it became a "culture" with "master races" and costumes and stupid figurines and MRAs and I realized I was a man, not a child, and stopped playing them mostly.

Zeitgueist posted:

SJW's? You mean caricatures of social justice advocacy who diminish real social justice by constantly hijacking the language to advance personal fringe crusades like trans-dragons?

Because that's what guys complaining at about SJW's are always talking about or otherwise we might admit that's a shield for just whining about people might make you feel vaguely bad or guilty about your hobby as if social criticism meant you couldn't go play GTA5.

Cingulate posted:

Would you hire a, let's say black, ex-con convicted for e.g. a robbery when they were 19, a decade after the fact?

Would you hire a guy who was mad at internet feminists when he was 19?

Cingulate posted:

How so?

Broniki posted:

Why should people concede to something that is false and why would #GG have any reason to believe that a different movement wouldn't immediately be declared misogynist by the corrupt when that's exactly what happened the first time it was attempted.

Cingulate posted:

How so?

I assume you're not the single person in the history of the world who has faith in the US prison system.

Shadoer posted:

Except it did largely condemn them, repeatedly and constantly. Considering it's a leadershipless organization (which is pretty stupid) that's the best they could do and actually should count for something.

Shadoer posted:

Because they have opinions different than yours?

Shadoer posted:

You know, even for people that do actually believe this and other disgusting things like racism, I'm not sure how condemning them to a life of poverty and social deprivation will actually help anything.

Shadoer posted:

Or you know we could go through the normal process of debate and education which has worked really well in the past and didn't socially exile a large portion of the population or condemn them to poverty*.

Cingulate posted:

No, I'm not asking you that. I asked you why you think a 19yo internet misogynist is less likely to not be a useless dick 10 years after the fact than a robber, your answer may as well be "I read the innards of small animals and they tell me so", or possibly "offense committed from a position of privilege are an entirely different thing than offenses committed from a position of systematic economic disenfranchisement". Although I guess graphs would be nice too?

Shadoer posted:

I believe it's called freedom of speech, the mechanic that has also been used to defend homosexuality when they were consistently slandered as horrific child predators and convince the majority of the population it's wrong.

Shadoer posted:

Except that in the past, backing homosexuality would brand you as a despicable person, just as defending black people in the past would make you a race traitor, and so on. If everyone shared your attitude, pretty much the entire civil rights movement wouldn't have happened.

Cingulate posted:

Okay make it a white guy.

quote:

Also I'm much less optimistic about the US prison system than you still. From what I've seen of that place, the last thing it leads you to is introspection.

Germstore posted:

Anita's videos that I've watched are really bad. I've only watched a couple, the Hunger Games and the Beyond Good and Evil videos, because life is short.

Most of what she says is basically "Beyond Good and Evil the book report" which is uncontroversial because it's just Cliff's Notes. The one point she made that is worth discussion, a female character saving a male character is not the same as the opposite, is left as a given without further statement.

This makes me wonder if the people defending her videos have actually watched any because they are just bad.

Shadoer posted:

Except in order for those "right-thinking people" to make their point, they needed free speech to do it. Those people were always a minority, but because they could argue their case they were able to get their ideas across.


Well to the point of free speech, I think people should be able to express their opinions no matter how horrible they are. Yes some social censure is understandable, but not to the point of that their are condemned to poverty and effective exile because of it. My citing of past examples was to demonstrate that ideas at the time considered disgusting eventually won because of free speech, not that misogyny will be accepted or is right (it's not right). The thing is, in order to advance society you need to have an environment where people can express their ideas without having to worry it's the end of their lives.


See the above, and no I don't think misogyny is misunderstood. I do find value in the topic debated though, if only to put feminism through the crucible to tighten the what it is and what it isn't.

Who What Now posted:

Freedom of Speech protects you from government censorship, not social consequences, you complete dumbass.

InsanityIsCrazy posted:

Porn is for losers. What does this have to do with game journalism?

Lotophage posted:

Its probably not actually.

Zombywuf posted:

I think you're confusing old men with MMA experts.

Zombywuf posted:

Are you saying Sarkeesian has no political power?

Ape Fist posted:

Yeah she got to sit on stage beside Germaine Greer at a symposium in Sydney, and was hired as a consultant by Dice because she has no power or influence at all.

INH5 posted:

If she's a playable character, then you can easily make her into a passive recipient of violence by walking into the line of sight of enemies and then putting the controller down.

Maxwell Adams posted:

Oh look, Gamergate is making a documentary about itself.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTnXPujRTgA&t=84s

INH5 posted:

Except that, like in every Hitman game, everything about the way the gameplay is structured provides incentives for you to not attack civilians, even without bringing up the fact that it docks you points. The fact that she never brought this up weakens her argument and makes her look ignorant.

afeelgoodpoop posted:

Well I am a poor, and have been all my life. I've never had schooling out of high school so I'm very, very ignorant. I don't think getting weirded out about people pushing specific conclusions about events is dumb. Like I said when I first started posting today, a few posters early on said "it isn't censorship unless the government does it" but that is bullshit. EVERYONE knows its bullshit. it was started by anti ggers early on but for some reason people legitimately, all the way to the past few days in this thread felt they needed to push an empty, i can't even call it a half truth. it's like a quarter truth maybe.

Shadoer posted:

but alas people keep going back to debating if gamergate is a misogynist conspiracy or not.

afeelgoodpoop posted:

Where have you gotten this information from? littlegreenfootballs? the marysue?

Shadoer posted:

Except for the point that showing someone is a hypocrite doesn't make you misogynist, even if that hypocrisy is related to their feminist values.


I'd say censorship, ethics, and corruption are valid points to advance. You and other's keep pushing the conspiracy that every single gamergater's objective is to silence women because we don't like them in video games, despite all the counter evidence to the contrary. Like you are singling out an rear end in a top hat minority that infiltrates any movement they can find that is condemned, that would be like me claiming all Social Justice Warriors want to kill all men because a few of their numbers literally want to do that. However I have the rational to recognize that doesn't represent a majority.


Again I'd say that's a radical minority.

Shadoer posted:

How, again by the logic you guys are using I can say that the SJWs are a conspiracy to push men out of everything. This is a ridiculous claim, but if we use what you guys pass for logic it makes sense. Men are being harassed and doxxed, there are people in the SJWs who have outright stated that we need to eliminate all masculinity, by your guy's logic this would mean that's what the SJWs are about.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Yeah, but the anti Gamer Gate just goes "your sexist" and then offers no proof or very bad, misleading proof that often slides into "see THEY are the hypocritical ones". Like half the big "GamerGate is sexist" tweets are either from trolls legitimately making fun of both sides and stiring poo poo up (and say as much on twitter profiles and timelines) or like the confedrate flag thing recently contextualize their agrument for uncensored historical games for support of slavery.

It is nothing but poo poo flinging.

Zombywuf posted:

If I said "American culture is poo poo because rednecks" do you think people would be upset with me? Do you think it would be reasonable for people to be upset with me?

Neurolimal posted:

The fact that many americans believe that MLK and his followers singlehandedly ushered in complete equality through pure nonviolence is not support for milquetoast slacktivism, but instead an indictment of the american education system.

E:

Martin Luther King Jr. posted:

It is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard.

quote:

="Martin Luther King Jr."]I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

Sinnlos posted:

Why is it so important that every female character shows cleavage?

I legitimately want to know. To me, it seems like most revealing character designs are done for the sake of cheesecake. While cheesecake can be OK at times, having it all the time for every meal isn't exactly healthy. What do tan lines and a low cut dress add to the character? What purpose do they serve?

Sinnlos posted:

I'm pretty sure consistent exposure to sexualized female figures has ill effects with regard to perceptions of women.

ChazTurbo posted:

It's a game starring four bishounen (nip for pretty boys) and one of them has his shirt unbuttoned at all times. You're over thinking this duder.

The Aardvark posted:

ChazTurbo posted:

Shortening nipponjin is a racial slur? My apologies if it is. I'm not from the United States originally.

Effectronica posted:

I don't know why all these people posting here have such a deficient sense of empathy that they are unable to identify with fictional characters at all, but I wish they'd stop perverting their opinions by association.

Broniki posted:

I have several shelves displaying figurines of anime and video game women*, many of them titillating in nature. There is multiple layers of objectification here since they are objects (statues) of objects (fictional characters from games). It is unknown how many women I will go on to violate later in life, but the forecast seems grim. This misogynerd is beyond salvation.

*and men and robots but those are irrelevant

INH5 posted:

I thought we were talking about body image, not sexy clothes? For the record, the outfits seen at fashion shows often aren't particularly sexualized, and in fact the whole reason that fashion models are thin is because the fashion designers, who are overwhelmingly women and gay men, want people to focus their attention on the clothes they design instead of the people wearing them. So yes, it is very different in intent from sexy video game women.

Cingulate posted:

I think as a feminist, your privilege is you're allowed to be angry at other cultures (if they're sexist, but, haha, turns out they all are). I know, the coolest privilege, and white guys don't get it!?
Hate is such a strong word.

ChazTurbo posted:

Watch out. Some of those pixel characters might be sexy. (Ya'll American posters are a bunch of prudes, like for real, yo.)

NutritiousSnack posted:

A key thing the researchers went in thinking they'd find a link (like the decades of scientists before them) because that's what they thought and wanted to prove. In this case it's best to trust the data, which is the same as any other major media studies, that showing titties even anime titties doesn't affect person's view or treatment of women.

Also it's been the other GG apologist posters actually posting studies for the most part, not the other way around.

NutritiousSnack posted:

The study found no link to sexualized depictions of women to an increase of sexism.