Jump to content
Roderick

Feminism

Recommended Posts

Trial's still ongoing, I think, but there have been more allegations that have come to light. The army chief has said that he expects that, as he is demanding a cultural shift, that there's a long way to go and there'll likely be more incidents coming to light as that happens. I recall there were a couple of officer cadets charged this week, so it sounds like women might be more willing to make reports, and the brass more willing to take them seriously. The academy has a woman running it now, and it looks like all three defence forces are hitting their gender makeup targets for women.

 

Thanks!  That makes sense, I was worried that the lack of info I was finding last night was indicative of the actual investigation falling apart. 

 

 

If you want an ethics discussion, I'd say talk about the way that the major gaming sites continue to foster the toxic cesspool that is our greater community.  For some sites, their payroll depends on not alienating people who would do others in the community harm.  That's a hell of a lot more important than the sex life of any person in the industry. 

 

Self-quote FTW!  On this subject though, Fark banned misogyny yesterday.  New rules include no rape jokes, no gendered slurs and no victim blaming/shaming.  Sounds like that's just a beginning, they'll fine tune it to keep the rest of the site as anti-misogyny free as possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Nobody in this world is a saint, be it malicious, mistakes, or misunderstandings. But most of what makes that true is between those directly involved and nobody else's goddamn business.

 

True, we aren't Saints, none of us.  But when your private life intersects your public, and more importantly, your professional, it becomes part of your public and professional life.  If my wife was to come into my job and start screaming at me about something at the very least I would have to have a sit down meeting with two higher-ups about how I need to keep that out of the office.  This isn't even dating at the office either, this is people who directly have the power to further her career.  If this was an elected official or any other "public figure" the stand belief would be that they lose that right to privacy once they "take office".  She is nothing if not a public figure, giving talks and going various places to promote her games.  I believe that if there is even a concern that she did something unsavory to push herself forward in any manner it should be brought to light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't embed tweets on the forum, can we.

 

I wish. My #1 most wanted feature, I feel like I'm always screenshotting tweets and posting them here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As some people have already said, the ethical concerns are so thoroughly eclipsed by the savage persuction Quinn has been victim to that to even discuss them is kind of ridiculous. It's like complaining about the food when the restaurant is on fire. All I'll say is that being a public figure is not the same as being a public servant. How much we need to know about the private lives of politicians is a whole other rather thorny discussion, but it's an entirely separate matter than what we need to know about the private lives of people who just happen to be well-known (which is basically nothing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, we aren't Saints, none of us.  But when your private life intersects your public, and more importantly, your professional, it becomes part of your public and professional life.  If my wife was to come into my job and start screaming at me about something at the very least I would have to have a sit down meeting with two higher-ups about how I need to keep that out of the office.  This isn't even dating at the office either, this is people who directly have the power to further her career.  If this was an elected official or any other "public figure" the stand belief would be that they lose that right to privacy once they "take office".  She is nothing if not a public figure, giving talks and going various places to promote her games.  I believe that if there is even a concern that she did something unsavory to push herself forward in any manner it should be brought to light.

 

 

I don't generally get angry about what other posters put in this thread, because I think that's counter-productive and I don't generally want to discourage people from posting in here.  But your entire post is righteously fucked up.  So, sorry, but I'm going to be fucking blunt.  Stop.  Stop trying to draw these tenuous comparisons between this and other possible situations. This is concern trolling.  Trying to justify people harassing her and invading her private life by comparing her to an elected government official is misogynistic, because you're holding a person who makes free twine games up to the same standard as the people who make and enforce our laws.  What the fuck is wrong with you for thinking that?  It's bullshit.  It's borderline evil. 

 

1.  The Internet is not her office. 

2.  The Internet is not her boss who needs to sit down and have a talk with her.

3.  She's not an elected official.  She's not even a public figure.  She might be a limited purpose public figure, and that would probably be debatable.  It in no way justifies the scrutiny or attention she is receiving.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As some people have already said, the ethical concerns are so thoroughly eclipsed by the savage persuction Quinn has been victim to that to even discuss them is kind of ridiculous. It's like complaining about the food when the restaurant is on fire. All I'll say is that being a public figure is not the same as being a public servant. How much we need to know about the private lives of politicians is a whole other rather thorny discussion, but it's an entirely separate matter than what we need to know about the private lives of people who just happen to be well-known (which is basically nothing).

 

I believe that elected officials personal lives should be an open book.  It is their job to represent us.  In that manner you should know what you can about the person who is supposed to speak for you.

 

I don't generally get angry about what other posters put in this thread, because I think that's counter-productive and I don't generally want to discourage people from posting in here.  But your entire post is righteously fucked up.  So, sorry, but I'm going to be fucking blunt.  Stop.  Stop trying to draw these tenuous comparisons between this and other possible situations. This is concern trolling.  Trying to justify people harassing her and invading her private life by comparing her to an elected government official is misogynistic, because you're holding a person who makes free twine games up to the same standard as the people who make and enforce our laws.  What the fuck is wrong with you for thinking that?  It's bullshit.  It's borderline evil. 

 

1.  The Internet is not her office. 

2.  The Internet is not her boss who needs to sit down and have a talk with her.

3.  She's not an elected official.  She's not even a public figure.  She might be a limited purpose public figure, and that would probably be debatable.  It in no way justifies the scrutiny or attention she is receiving.   

 

1. The internet is her office.  For someone who publishes and promotes games exclusively on it it is the area that probably takes up most of her time.

2. She has a boss. She currently works at Loveshack Entertainment making Framed.  

3. Limited purpose public figure is still a public figure, one of which she completely fits the definition of. 

 

I used the public official as an example, but we can also talk about people in bands if you like, or actors, or any one else that would fit into a small market that would raise flags if the same thing happened.  If this was a singer going for coverage in a magazine people would be covering it and concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How exactly is 

 

2. She has a boss. She currently works at Loveshack Entertainment making Framed. 

 

at all related to

 

2.  The Internet is not her boss who needs to sit down and have a talk with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody made that claim. He was saying the internet is not her boss, so she's not accountable to strangers just because they feel like they are allowed to judge her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody made that claim. He was saying the internet is not her boss, so she's not accountable to strangers just because they feel like they are allowed to judge her.

 

If that is the case then I was in the wrong with that and I apologize.  

 

Also, I don't care either way about her, honestly.  I care about what Kotaku did.  She is seemingly a lightening rod for this because it may have gone farther than we know, and it was exposed on her end.  This makes me angry about the way games are covered in general.  Things need to change. If this is true it is not ok in the slightest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually you do care about her.

 

I believe that if there is even a concern that she did something unsavory to push herself forward in any manner it should be brought to light.

 

Or in other words, she deserves to be "exposed" for something she may or may not have done. Guilty until... well, never proven innocent because it's not in her personal interest to prove herself innocent as it just eggs on the trolls who want to ruin her life. Also, there's not much proof to be found in he-said and she-said. So basically just if there's a concern, that person is guilty. Gotcha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually you do care about her.

 

 

Or in other words, she deserves to be "exposed" for something she may or may not have done. Guilty until... well, never proven innocent because it's not in her personal interest to prove herself innocent as it just eggs on the trolls who want to ruin her life. Also, there's not much proof to be found in he-said and she-said. So basically just if there's a concern, that person is guilty. Gotcha.

 

So are we supposed to just forget that any of this happen?

 

I care about her so far as it extends to games journalism.  The previous statement was probably too dismissive in its entirety.  

 

If she had a relationship with someone from the media they should have excused themselves from covering her game. End of story.Tons of sites have done that in the past. That didn't happen. The fact that it didn't is concerning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What she did or did not do, feels almost irrelevant to me.

If her ex genuinely thought this was a scandal that needed to be brought to light, contacting the editorial teams of the publishers concerned would have been the way to go about it. Not this lynch mob.

I mean as un-religious as I am my immediate though was basically that old bible quote,

'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'

The worlds too full of faux righteousness, everyone's had sometime in their life which if they look back on they wouldn't be proud of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, as a man, and possibly (likely in certain fields) of a certain class, you enjoy certain inherent privileges that are not accessible to women (or all) developers. Calling out Zoe for this is misogyny.

 

Nobody is going to get humiliated in public for having grown up with upper/middle class and having all their upper/middle class friends pull strings to get them jobs. It's how MOST business is done. 

 

Nobody is humiliating men for being "taken more seriously" etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, there is literally no proof of anything you're talking about. The "proof" I saw that she hooked up with Grayson is a Vine of her hanging out with him. Seriously?

 

If I created a one-time use blog, claimed to be an ex-girlfriend of Brian Crescente and made an unfounded allegation that he slept with PR women for improved coverage, would he then be instantly open season for people doxing him? Hacking all of his friends email accounts to turn up evidence?

 

This is insane. I seriously have no idea why the scumbags that orchestrated this deserve any degree of legitimacy just because they claim to be doing something for ethical reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to justify people harassing her and invading her private lifeng.

 

Out of curiosity, since I tried to follow the whole thing a bit and there are apparently legitimate concerns that she might have pulled the harassing and invasion of privacy out of her ass, is there a source or anything that would address concerns like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, since I tried to follow the whole thing a bit and there are apparently legitimate concerns that she might have pulled the harassing and invasion of privacy out of her ass, is there a source or anything that would address concerns like that?

 

The harassment is readily apparent if you look at the replies to literally any tweet of hers. Or on the Steam page for Depression Quest. In terms of invasion of privacy, there were 4chan threads (maybe not anymore) and pastebin articles listing her personal details and Mega links to caches of pictures and information about her.

 

I think the language "apparently legitimate concerns" needs to be observed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, as a man, and possibly (likely in certain fields) of a certain class, you enjoy certain inherent privileges that are not accessible to women (or all) developers. Calling out Zoe for this is misogyny.

 

Nobody is going to get humiliated in public for having grown up with upper/middle class and having all their upper/middle class friends pull strings to get them jobs. It's how MOST business is done. 

 

Nobody is humiliating men for being "taken more seriously" etc....

 

Trust me on this, I grew up far from middle class.  I had no friends to pull strings.  As far as I have seen in my life this is NOT how business is done, regardless of how movies want us to think.

 

Also, I would call anyone out for this.  I don't see how calling Zoe out is misogyny at all.  Wouldn't letting it go because she was a woman be misogyny?  If this was a guy sleeping with someone for press coverage shouldn't we all freak out the same way?  How about instead of saying we should take any one section of people more seriously we just do that and say that this was wrong.

 

Once again, not how business is done.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are we supposed to just forget that any of this happen?

 

I care about her so far as it extends to games journalism.  The previous statement was probably too dismissive in its entirety.  

 

If she had a relationship with someone from the media they should have excused themselves from covering her game. End of story.Tons of sites have done that in the past. That didn't happen. The fact that it didn't is concerning.

 

No, continuing to harp on this issue shows that you care about her WAY MORE than she is relevant to games journalism. This story is a tiny fucking footnote given the outsized influence that the massive publishers' marketing and PR departments wield in the industry.

 

Even assuming, for sake of argument, that the worst things assumed about the situation are true, that she's some craven manipulator specifically trying to garner unfair coverage, the story is still tiny. This is for a tiny text adventure that received hardly any coverage even compared to other indie games. Trying to make this story a serious component in a broader problem within games journalism is transparently ludicrous. Even assuming it's all true (no particular reason to do so), the takeaway should be: ok, journalists should be careful about conflicts of interest, now onto much more serious issues of genuine quid pro quo arrangements that publishers make with youtubers, endemic ads on games press sites, stories like this from Robert Ashley, when he used to freelance in the industry, etc., etc., ad infinitum: 

 

You want press corruption: @RockstarGames once blacklisted me for writing a negative story in the NY Daily News about one of their games.

When I wrote a further story about their heavy-handed PR tactics, they sued my former-PR source for thousands of dollars.

But you know, these indie game developers are out of control with their journalist fucking.

 

Edit: adding more Robert:

You don't have to fuck your way onto the front page of Kotaku. You can just bake a cake that looks like Pac Man.

But you know, tune into the next live media event full of unfiltered marketing garbage, you savvy media consumer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never seen a game developer raked over the coals for manipulating video game journalists (who aren't actually journalists but that's another issue) like Zoe has been. This isn't about fighting for integrity. It's about beating up a woman from across the net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, there is literally no proof of anything you're talking about. The "proof" I saw that she hooked up with Grayson is a Vine of her hanging out with him. Seriously?

Afaik it's addressed in the ex's tl;dr post.

The harassment is readily apparent if you look at the replies to literally any tweet of hers. Or on the Steam page for Depression Quest. In terms of invasion of privacy, there were 4chan threads (maybe not anymore) and pastebin articles listing her personal details and Mega links to caches of pictures and information about her.

I think the language "apparently legitimate concerns" needs to be observed.

I will have a look at some tweets then, the steam page back then struck me as a similar situation to Gone Home, I'll check if something changed. Thanks for the info!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×