Jump to content
Roderick

Feminism

Recommended Posts

I want to engage in a discussion here but you'll have to elaborate more in your posts. Brevity is cool and all but after this back as forth I am not confident that we understand each other at all.

 

I was trying to say that it's a bad way to engage in a discussion. I don't want to derail a big thread over a minor point, but it rubbed me the wrong way and I said so in the least provocative way I could think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was trying to say that it's a bad way to engage in a discussion. I don't want to derail a big thread over a minor point, but it rubbed me the wrong way and I said so in the least provocative way I could think of.

Thank you for clarifying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty great. Jeffrey Yohalem (UbiSoft) and Neil Druckmann (Naughty Dog) have also said that anyone interested in games should watch Tropes vs Women. And Anthony Burch at Gearbox is a total SJW. And I literally can't believe that nobody at Telltale has said anything, so let's just throw them in.

 

So, that's no Far Cry, No Uncharted, no Last of Us, no Borderlands, no Walking Dead, no Game of Thrones, so far...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty great. Jeffrey Yohalem (UbiSoft) and Neil Druckmann (Naughty Dog) have also said that anyone interested in games should watch Tropes vs Women. And Anthony Burch at Gearbox is a total SJW. And I literally can't believe that nobody at Telltale has said anything, so let's just throw them in.

 

So, that's no Far Cry, No Uncharted, no Last of Us, no Borderlands, no Walking Dead, no Game of Thrones, so far...

Nick Breckon retweeted an Anita tweet, so there's your Telltale quota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is crazy how this keeps snowballing. I go away and tons of stuff happens. Someone needs to make an infographic or scorecard so i can keep track of which jerk is saying what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the problem we're discussing a class issue, or is it that "games dev and journalist peeps are tight"? It feels like you're just shotgunning a whole bunch of issues in every post. Just because things are related doesn't mean they're all equally relevant to the situation at hand. EVERYTHING is related somehow. But it's difficult to have any kind of meaningful conversation about everything at the same time.

 

I don't agree that there's anything particularly harmful going on because of the closeness of developers and journalists, at least not in the context of anything people are making accusations about, such as inflated review scores or whatever--those things have a totally different source in my opinion. If you have an argument to make about this, instead of just saying it's a problem, go for it. (Although that's probably outside the scope of this thread at that point.) Also, Kotaku did address the situation officially. The editor Stephen Totilo made a post about it fairly quickly. Before that point, there was no need for Kotaku to address anything because there was nothing to address. (There still isn't, but people decided to start acting as though there were.)

 

Looks like we've moved this stuff to another thread, so I'll reply over there

 

Frankly, it reads to me like someone trying to derail the thread through concern/noise trolling.

I'm trying to be honest and sincere here. I would hope you would give me the benifit of the doubt and actually engage with me on something instead of impugning my motives. The anonymity of the internet makes it very easy for people to be jerks to each other, and it makes it very easy to dismiss other people as faceless stormtroopers rather than as individual beings. I personally feel pretty conflicted about all this and I wish people weren't so quick to judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, speaking of quick to judge - Anita Sarkeesian has had to move out of her house after receiving a very detailed death threat including her home address. And Hollywood branch of the Tea Party Adam Baldwin has tweeted the initial creepy YouTube videos about Zoe Quinn to his million-plus gun-loving followers.

 

I find myself weirdly unconflicted about these actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just watched an episode of south park that deals with photo shopped images and it felt like a retelling of Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn and other prominent females' stories.  Wendy, The protagonist of the episode, is first ignored when bringing up the issue, then harassed and accused of being jealous, and finally blamed for the problem.  If the south park style of humor doesn't appeal to you then it probably isn't worth watching.  It's one of their episodes where the heart of the show really shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that fact she's a woman is the only reason for the backlash against her, although that is part of it for some of them obviously. People have legitimate (From my view, of course. Few here share it.) reasons to be, not vitriolic, but suspicious and critical of Zoey Quinn, and of course that doesn't means she deserves abuse, but she does deserve public scrutiny for her actions. I feel like the fact she is woman under attack by mean people in the internet (gasp!) is being used to shut by her and her supporters, knowingly or not, to shut down all criticism, not just the sexist assholes. Which ultimately just polarizes everything and harms the feminist cause. 

I basically agree with you. I also feel like I'm basically done with this Quinn stuff specifically because the things I find most disheartening about all this are really more in the realm of the personal. If she's not a nice person, she's not a nice person, and that's that. I do think there are some things that have been brought up by this issue that are worth discussing. 

 

You realize that the inciting event for the so-called scrutiny of Quinn was an extremely long series of 4chan posts by an ex-boyfriend about her supposedly scandalous sex life, which involved "seducing" multiple male journalists for unspecified but nefarious purposes? Gradually, people have brought up what could potentially be considered legitimate issues against Quinn, but they are contained entirely within the preexisting rhetorical framework of an evil woman using her vagina to poison games journalism. Surely those people are aware that their comments will be associated with the current harassment and abuse? I don't know, TYFC could have made their complaints months ago, but they chose to do so now, exploiting the rage against Quinn in the less progressive areas of the internet for presumably selfish purposes. If it was really just poor timing that had them decide six months after the fact to make accusations, right when Quinn is going through hell because an angry ex whipped up an internet mob, then they have my most sincere condolences, but somehow I doubt that's the case.

 

Here's the thing. If you don't want to be associated with the bottom-feeders struggling to assassinate Quinn's character, just... I don't know, wait another month, then make your own post explaining the events in a reasonable manner? Surely, if Quinn's crimes have kept all this time, they can wait a few weeks more until she isn't the ongoing victim of a public terror campaign.

 

 

EDIT: And yeah, what tegan said. What harms the feminist cause is the failure to oppose misogynist terror tactics wherever they occur, not the failure to foster a perfectly open dialogue at all times. First, put out the burning house, then decide whether it was in danger of spreading.

Wasn't the inciting event a blog post, not 4chan posts? 

 

The connection between Zoe Quinn making critical tweets and Fine Young Capitalists ending their game jam is so tenuous and shouldn't warrant this extensive discussion. It's all hearsay championed by those are already inclined to think the worst of Zoe Quinn (And let's pause for a moment here and think about why people may be inclined to think the worst of ZQ. Hint: it starts with an M- and ends with an -society predisposes all of us to distrust women and be more critical of their ambitions than if they were men which is why we keep seeing these overblown accusations being tossed at ZQ).

 

The FYC guys seem not totally on the level to me and I don't like them, but I also really hate it when people just wholesale discount another person's opinion by labeling it as something else. That's a genetic fallacy. Saying "you believe that because you're a misogynist" or "you believe that because you're a communist" or "you believe that because you're a kid" are all scummy things to say because they are labeling and belittling people by their labels rather than engaging them and their opinions. It's bad rhetoric, and it's not very fair. 

 

 

Absolutely. Gaming sites are also in the ad-supported online media business. The games industry makes, markets and sells games. There's no shame in not being in the games industry, but it's unhealthy to think you are part of an industry because you say things about it, or because it sends you things or buys ad space (or indeed pays you to feature its games in your LP videos).

 

One difference, though, is that professional gaming sites generally refer to the SPJ or NUJ code of ethics (in English-speaking sites), and as such did not see the invasion into Zoe Quinn's privacy as a suitable topic. Many YouTubers explicitly reject a status as media, and thus the relevance of media ethics to their operations, and as such some YouTubers felt entitled to seek page views by discussing or capitalizing upon that invasion of privacy. #notallyoutubers, but that doesn't seem to me to be the first point of concern here; there's a structural question about media ethics, and what constitutes media.

 

I don't think it's allowable - although I absolutely understand why it might be desirable - for YTers to count as media when credibility is being considered, but as just some guys playing video games when ethics is under the spotlight.

 

Yeah, I certainly would have a hard time respecting any youtuber who took that ethical dodge. It's interesting seeing how ethical policies that used to be dictated by large publications are being fragmented by single-personality media outlets.

I mean I think this is really the fundamental issue. I went over this in my latest post to the journalistic integrity thread somewhat. I think that this Quinn stuff is really just another example of how media is changing and how we understand journalism and writing "ought to be". Old authoritative publications versus the free wheelin blogosphere. 

I don't see the point in looking down on LPers as "non creators" anymore than I feel that way about journalists. I don't personally like LP stuff, and I find the focus on consumerism a little creepy and fetishistic, but I also recognize that people can be creative not only in creating a new thing but also in their ability to comment and criticize a thing. I mean talking about video games on the internet, I'd much rather people actually make video games, but I also think that criticism and discussion has it's place.  

 

This kind of bothers me because it seems to come from a mentality that it's impossible to break into the industry, therefore indie developers are either a race of ubermenschen or have connections inside the industry. Besides the obvious distinctions in economic and genderbased privelidge, making something that is culturally resonant or enjoyable to an open minded audience isnt really something that is made by connections or "ins" anymore. Tools and education for games are free, easy and abundant, and you're only limited by your creativity and willingness to create. With outlets constantly looking for new experiences and aesthetics it's hard to go wrong with any single idea.

So when something pops up overblowing the significance of the slight advantage of "knowing a dude at polygon" or worse drawing a line where people are and aren't game developers ("8% for your shitty idea after the REAL guys get paid, you fucking casual") isn't empowering or equalizing, it's quite the opposite

I have more experience in film industry stuff so maybe I'm speaking more from that perspective, but in my experience this is also a huge problem in the games industry and perhaps more so because it's a small industry. Tools are free and easy to find, but also there's such an overwhelming static that it takes a lot (IE a big marketing budget or good press coverage) for something to rise above it. This is a huge problem in film these days that's kind of coming to a head. You're either a gigantic mult-million dollar film, or a super super tiny film that gets lucky on Youtube. There's a really good, and free documentary talking about some of these problems in digital media called Press.Pause.Play, where people actively debate this issue back and forth. The doc is generally more optimistic on the issue but it does give a good scope of the issues that are being dealt with. There are less gatekeepers and the medium is more democratic but there's also the problem that individuals get lost in the fray and so the only people who can consistently break through all that noise are those who wield the power of multi-national corporations. In the 1980s 51 different companies owned 90% of all media in America. Now 6 do. On one hand things are getting more accessible, and on the other hand power is concentrating in fewer and fewer people's hands. And that's not an opinion either. That's an empirical statistic. Media conglomerates hold more sway than ever. And some of this is actually in part due to the lowered barriers to entry because with the people who are most able to take advantage of those innovations are also the people who already held power. (or alternatively one could theorize that the further concentration of power is the death throes of the Old Media Empire as it tries to wall itself up against the inevitable Indie Utopia, but I think we're just going to have to wait and see)

There are legitimate quandries that have to be dealt with in digital media, (and I'd argue society at large) and "It's now what you know, it's who you know" really does have an effect.  

 

 

Well, speaking of quick to judge - Anita Sarkeesian has had to move out of her house after receiving a very detailed death threat including her home address. And Hollywood branch of the Tea Party Adam Baldwin has tweeted the initial creepy YouTube videos about Zoe Quinn to his million-plus gun-loving followers.

 

I find myself weirdly unconflicted about these actions.

That's pretty fucked up. 

also I was speaking about him being quick to judge my internal motives. I think it's far too easy to just dismiss someone they disagree with as a troll, rather than actually engage with another human being on a difficult topic. 

Also just wanted to say I finished that Cliffy B post on Anita and that was pretty good. Actually sort of surprised he wrote that, but I don't know much about the guy and I find that I'm actually surprised by him more than not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a new mantra these guys have; not buying video games from any developers or publishers that speak in favor of anyone sane. So as they add more to the list they're going to pretty much boycott themselves out of playing video games and then everything will be okay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a new mantra these guys have; not buying video games from any developers or publishers that speak in favor of anyone sane. So as they add more to the list they're going to pretty much boycott themselves out of playing video games and then everything will be okay!

 

Is this something that is happening?  I assumed the images in the thread were sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this something that is happening?  I assumed the images in the thread were sarcastic.

I assume they're real to the person who made them and a dozen of their buddies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a new mantra these guys have; not buying video games from any developers or publishers that speak in favor of anyone sane. So as they add more to the list they're going to pretty much boycott themselves out of playing video games and then everything will be okay!

 

I can't decide between two snarky replies to these images, so I'll post em both.

 

1. When has a "games boycott" ever led to people not buying the game in question?

 

2. Like these clowns actually BUY the games they play.

 

**BONUS # 3**

 rT28LDI.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen, the end-game here is to get Gabe Newell to say something about this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't say anything, he's gonna find a legit way to monetize it on Steam and everyone will be on board.

 

BTW just as an aside, Poe's Law makes it hard to see legitimacy in this whole SNAFU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another constant mantra is that all the claims of harassment are fabricated. I ain't particularly a fan of the popo but seriously what do you have to do to get arrested around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen, the end-game here is to get Gabe Newell to say something about this

I emailed him about it yesterday! I doubt anything will come of it, but I sure hope so.

 

EDIT: Oh wait I forgot I already posted this in the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I emailed him about it yesterday! I doubt anything will come of it, but I sure hope so.

 

EDIT: Oh wait I forgot I already posted this in the thread.

 

But did you email him, Twig?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who did I email?

 

Oh! That reminds me! I emailed Gabe Newell yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Dawkins retweeted someone supporting Sarkeesian/linking to that polygon article about her death-threats. We live in a weird world. What is going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't say anything, he's gonna find a legit way to monetize it on Steam and everyone will be on board.

 

Oh man, a Steam sale of indie/SJW-cabal games? The trolls would lose their minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Dawkins retweeted someone supporting Sarkeesian/linking to that polygon article about her death-threats. We live in a weird world. What is going on.

It looks like he deleted that retweet.

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

×