Justin Leego Posted October 30, 2014 It's fun to see people react to that with "I used to respect Colbert" and such. I saw a similar thing this morning when VG247's EIC, Matt Martin, described the Colbert skit as "a segment that will no doubt further enrage supporters of the #gamergate hate movement," causing one commenter to lament the loss of ex-Dep Ed, Dave Cook. But maybe I'm misunderstanding this tweet? (edit: I guess that many who are strongly pro-GG assume that notable personalities who refrain from commenting on the situation are "silently pro-GG," while those who strongly disapprove of the movement's perceived goals tend to assume that unengaged industry figures tend to maintain silence out of cowardice, misunderstanding, or fear. Would that be a fair assessment?) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SecretAsianMan Posted October 30, 2014 It's fun to see people react to that with "I used to respect Colbert" and such. They're clearly not interested in a debate or hearing another side out, etc; they just want to shut down a feminist voice and anyone that enables it is an enemy. It's sad and pathetic. I mean, they are. Anita being on Colbert is goddamn amazing-awesome and I'm looking forward to it. I saw a lot of that as well which is usually evidence that no, they didn't really respect him and just though he was funny. If you actually have respect for a figure, you'd be willing to listen to what they're saying even if it doesn't align with your own views. Dismissing it without even hearing what they have to say is a distinct LACK of respect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henroid Posted October 30, 2014 I saw a lot of that as well which is usually evidence that no, they didn't really respect him and just though he was funny. If you actually have respect for a figure, you'd be willing to listen to what they're saying even if it doesn't align with your own views. Dismissing it without even hearing what they have to say is a distinct LACK of respect. That's a good point. I mean Bill O'Reilly going on The Daily Show doesn't result in me going, "Ugh, I hate Jon Stewart." Bill is so toxic and aggressive on his own show that it takes him being on someone else's for me to be able to listen to what he's saying. There's been a time or two where I at least understood where he came from on things (but this was like 8 years ago, can't remember the specifics). He's an oddball and I still don't like him overall, but I'm not going to let his very presence ruin something. Especially over one appearance. This anti-feminist campaign is so ridiculous in how it handles bridge burning. They're truly making themselves to be an island, all alone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted October 30, 2014 This anti-feminist campaign is so ridiculous in how it handles bridge burning. They're truly making themselves to be an island, all alone. Clyde's original solution was to just give them their own island with a gaming monastery they could live in, free from the evils of the real world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted October 30, 2014 (edit: I guess that many who are strongly pro-GG assume that notable personalities who refrain from commenting on the situation are "silently pro-GG," while those who strongly disapprove of the movement's perceived goals tend to assume that unengaged industry figures tend to maintain silence out of cowardice, misunderstanding, or fear. Would that be a fair assessment?) Yeah, I was about to post exactly that. Basically, both #GamerGate and its opponents rightly assume that most industry figures are remaining silent because of fear, but the experience of those industry figures finally speaking out shows that it's always fear of #GamerGate, which is usually overcome by the realization that #GamerGate interprets silence as support. In their minds, they represent the six billion people who've not taken a stance on the issue but are oppressed daily by the feminist Illuminati. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SecretAsianMan Posted October 30, 2014 Clyde's original solution was to just give them their own island with a gaming monastery they could live in, free from the evils of the real world. We call it Bromansland Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henroid Posted October 30, 2014 We call it Bromansland Isn't that where Far Cry 3 takes place? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted October 30, 2014 Something completely different!On why we should be considering an all or mostly female crew for a Mars mission: It makes the most sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperBiasedMan Posted October 30, 2014 Something completely different! On why we should be considering an all or mostly female crew for a Mars mission: It makes the most sense. I read that article before, it was a horrible thing to read and first realise the biased inertia that meant the default male archetype were chosen as pilots mostly because the alternative was not considered* and then to realise I myself never really questioned why male astronauts were chosen. * And politics about an airforce affiliation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Problem Machine Posted October 30, 2014 I'm bothered by anything that selects people based on their average attributes as a broad class rather than their specific attributes as human beings. That said, if all of the best low-weight low-caloric intake candidates are women, then by all means. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyborg771 Posted October 31, 2014 That's a good point. I mean Bill O'Reilly going on The Daily Show doesn't result in me going, "Ugh, I hate Jon Stewart." Bill is so toxic and aggressive on his own show that it takes him being on someone else's for me to be able to listen to what he's saying. There's been a time or two where I at least understood where he came from on things (but this was like 8 years ago, can't remember the specifics). He's an oddball and I still don't like him overall, but I'm not going to let his very presence ruin something. Especially over one appearance. This anti-feminist campaign is so ridiculous in how it handles bridge burning. They're truly making themselves to be an island, all alone. Well to be fair, when O'Reilly goes on Stewart you know that, even if he isn't actively making fun, Stewart agrees with you that O'Reilly is a nutjob. The reason Gaters are mad at Colbert is because in their mind he's drunk the kool-aid. A more apt comparison would be if Stewart invited some MRA and supported his position that men need protection from feminists. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
osmosisch Posted October 31, 2014 You're absolutely right. Also, Reddit and 8chan love to go on and on about the Streisand Effect that their critics are apparently invoking when they attack them, but I know I have found so many new, interesting, and different voices in the games industry due to the publicity that comes from attempts by #GamerGate to silence them. It makes me feel like they read the Wikipedia article but didn't stop to understand how it could apply equally to them.Man, you aren't kidding. My twitter feed has become so much more interesting since this whole thing started. I'm also a bit poorer every month due to some Patreons, but I'll gladly tkae that exchange. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Henroid Posted November 1, 2014 Dunno how many folks follow Sarkeesian on Twitter, but she just posted this. Apparently it's from a Call of Duty trailer. I always thought that game had a "gritty 'realism' " thing going on as far as its appeal / target audience. This is the most arbitrary-as-fuck sex-appeal play I've seen ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted November 1, 2014 What?! I thought CoD games were about nothing but shooting terrorists and explosions.... now that it has gratuitous eye candy, it's basically a Michael Bay film? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erkki Posted November 1, 2014 WTF is going on in that shot? Is the G-Man involved? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dibs Posted November 1, 2014 What?! I thought CoD games were about nothing but shooting terrorists and explosions.... now that it has gratuitous eye candy, it's basically a Michael Bay film? I dunno, maybe you get to shoot her?!?!?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patrick R Posted November 1, 2014 I saw this ad in front of a YouTube video. Basically the whole ad is in first person and at one point the protagonist gets knocked woozy from jumping from a high ledge, and sees that lady. Then his partner runs into view and says "We don't kiss goats" and the protagonist looks back and the girl is actually just a goat. Hilarious stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SecretAsianMan Posted November 1, 2014 My first thought when I saw the tweet was that it was Tifa cosplay. The fact that I can't distinguish the two without being explicitly told says something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tegan Posted November 2, 2014 "Play Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare now, milord." Unrelated: Manga and light novel publisher Vertical has been having an ongoing argument via tumblr with what I'm 90% sure is a straw feminist troll account. The tell for me is the part where they try to accuse Vertical of only aiming for white dudes when literally nothing Vertical has ever published was written with a white audience in mind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tanukitsune Posted November 2, 2014 To be honest, I'm not entirely sure I grasp the concept of "strawmen", is it faking an attack to make your argument look more valid? Or claiming a counter argument is invalid because you feel attacked? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted November 2, 2014 To be honest, I'm not entirely sure I grasp the concept of "strawmen", is it faking an attack to make your argument look more valid? Or claiming a counter argument is invalid because you feel attacked? A strawman is a simplified, often fallacious version of an argument created by the opposing side to caricature a real position and make them easier to refute. For instance, a feminist strawman is a feminist who wants to kill all men and take away their money. Obviously, that's not what any feminist believes, but it bears enough resemblance to superficial traits of feminism that some people might confuse it for the actual position and therefore be convinced when an anti-feminist destroys it in an argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted November 3, 2014 To put it in simpler terms, it's when you make up your opponent's argument and then show how stupid it is. Of course it's stupid, you made it so it was stupid. The metaphor to keep in mind is making a crude opponent out of straw and then being pleased when you punch the stuffing out of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ben X Posted November 3, 2014 I think the tactic Tegan is suspecting might better be referred to as a false flag or sock-puppet or a false-flag-sock-puppet? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CollegeBaby Posted November 3, 2014 Using a sock puppet - masquerading as a straw man - to create a false flag? It sounds like children's school play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted November 3, 2014 Well, that's a concern troll. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites