Jump to content
JonCole

"Ethics and Journalistic Integrity"

Recommended Posts

Most earrings are made out of lightweight metals and therefore, do not hurt as such? 

 

Yes. My girlfriend has many similarly sized earrings which are surprisingly light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Counterargument: those earrings are gold colored so that means they're solid gold. They weigh a lot!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy god, I had no idea that something like that could explode into two pages. I tried to make it as clear as possible in my original post that it was not a judgement or a criticism of her appearance or anything like that, just a personal involuntary reaction to what looks like having your ears weighed down. Thinking about my ears being pulled down is, to me, like thinking about biting down on a popsicle stick. Both give me the involuntary willies real bad. I only said it because the earrings had already been mentioned, and did not mean any judgement or offense by it. For the record, my girlfriend stretches her ears and I have no problem with the aesthetic. Pretty sure that's irrelevant though, because even if I had a problem with the aesthetic, who the fuck cares they're her ears not mine. 

 

I get that anything said about Anita Sarkeesian is a thing that people will jump all over to interpret in any way that they can and is more likely than other things to blow up, but I thought that my aside was innocuous enough to not do that. In hindsight judging from the reaction, I guess that was a little tone deaf. Apologies for unintentional rudeness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I just thought it was a little awkward I wasn't calling anyone a hitler or anything.

 

I do think we could stand to give each other the benefit of the doubt a bit more and not blow a little random aside like that into a full blown issue though. Especially when it's a post coming from miffy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does someone saying it seems it's a bit awkward and tone deaf have to be a big issue though? There has to be room to say "hm that struck me a bit weird" without it feeling like an attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does someone saying it seems it's a bit awkward and tone deaf have to be a big issue though? There has to be room to say "hm that struck me a bit weird" without it feeling like an attack.

 

And likewise, there should be room for someone with a good reputation around here to be allowed to make a random, innocent observation without people trying to read between the lines and call them out. I don't see how it is in any way productive for us to have a page and a half of arguing about the deeper implications of a post like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm honestly kinda wondering if this thread should even exist anymore. I check in every so often nowadays, but I think that as a community we're pretty solidified on what we think about GG and it's aftermath, minus some nuances that get trumped up because conversation is propelled forward by the sheer existence of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's good that it exists so people have a safe place to vent, and I keep up with it. But I don't post because I don't think I have anything more meaningful to add. GG is a reactionary movment that I'm disgusted with and I try to do what I can where I can to help (which is probably not enough), but...mostly I keep up with GG now just to have a pulse to monitor when and where the worst parts of the internet will flare up next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BadHat's weird joke about some dude sitting in her earrings whispering things slyly to her (that's probably weirdest to me because I'm missing whatever context is supposed to make it funny).

 

The joke is that people think Jonathan McIntosh is pulling Anita's strings from behind the scenes and actually writes all of her work because obviously a woman couldn't come up with such salient criticism (even though... they think it's bad? I don't know either.) Never said it was a good joke.  :getmecoat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahk got it.

Also far out guys it wasn't all about Miffy's post there were four other posts after that which each talked about the value of a kind of critique that Miffy's post didn't even come super close to.

"Is this about a freaking sandwich!?" "Honey, it was never about the sandwich."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You see it a lot, groups parodying language of groups they hate. What annoys me as well is they completely ruined "sjw". It's a completely useless word now, whereas before it was used to describe everyone who isn't a gamergater, it was actually a useful word for talking about the extreme left, of which there are plenty.

 

I think it's particularily harmful, because there are a lot of members on the left who are just as harmful to the movements they say they're for as the people actively working against them. I'm talking about people full of hate who literally hates all white men because they are white men, and I mean literally, I don't mean the people jokingly saying stuff like "drinking white tears". I recognised that the source of a lot of problems come from white dudes, and I understand people who are angry with that, but there are plenty of people who actually vehemently hate all white dudes, or think people who draw porn should be in prison or whatever, and they need to be identified and seperated for any movement to progress healthily.

 

Uh, I'm not really convinced that "Social Justice Warrior" was ever a useful term or that there's a significant contingent of anti-white misandrist bogeymen out there.

 

Also, while I'm here - I mostly wanted to stay quiet during the last few pages or whatever, because who cares what I think - but I was thinking what Problem Machine posted before they posted it and I didn't find anything wrong with their tone or anything. I've rewritten this sentence a few times, which tells me something, to avoid pointing a finger at someone in particular - so I'll just say that for the most part I think everyone acted totally reasonably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before Gamergate, I have vague memories of Social Justice Warrior being used primarily as a sincere term of self-identification (and not from the kind of out-there radicals megaspel mentioned). Am I imagining that? Was it actually in use as a term to label radicals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My introduction to SJW as a term came from gamers in the Bioware forums and the old Joystiq commenters, and it was never used as a positive.  Not saying that it wasn't used that way somewhere, but my knowledge of it was certainly as a derogatory term used by the shitbags of the gaming internet. 

 

I rather enjoyed that it was gamergate that ended up getting us to reclaim it as a positive self-identifier.  Though I actually think it's a term that should probably be left to die anyways.  It's too meaningless in a lot of ways, or full of too much contradictory meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK SJW has always been a derogatory thing, but those people labelled as such attempted to embrace it and claim it as their own.

 

Basically what Bjorn said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My introduction to SJW as a term game from gamers in the Bioware forums and the old Joystiq commenters, and it was never used as a positive.  Not saying that it wasn't used that way somewhere, but my knowledge of it was certainly as a derogatory term used by the shitbags of the gaming internet.

 

My first contact with "Social Justice Warrior" was the beginning or middle of 2012, maybe the end of 2011, at which point it began to appear in the fringes of 4chan like /tg/ and /x/ where I still browsed at the time. By then, it had already started its metamorphosis from apparent origins as a positive term used occasionally but unironically in the same fashion as "ecowarrior" into a blunt pejorative used still occasionally against socially conscious people whose basic identification with their cause made "white knight" too nonsensical for the more grammatically and lexically obsessed members of 4chan. I think its rise as a pervasive phenomenon is linked with the incredible semantic attenuation of "white knight" as a meaningful commentary on out-group behavior in 4chan. There was a need for a new term to indicate the Other and it just happened that the segments of /b/ and /pol/ that were active on Twitter around that time had begun to coopt a self-applied term from activists to use ironically, and here we are.

 

Like Bjorn, I'm glad that it's being reclaimed, but I admit that it's partly because it means "Social Justice Warrior" has attenuated at many times the speed of "white knight" and soon both of those ugly, annoying terms will be functionally moribund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Bjorn, I'm glad that it's being reclaimed, but I admit that it's partly because it means "Social Justice Warrior" has attenuated at many times the speed of "white knight" and soon both of those ugly, annoying terms will be functionally moribund.

 

I don't think so. Gamergate giving up their #1 cardboard enemy concept? Not happening. The SJW is at the very heart of gamergate's 9/11 truther type conspiracy theories. It's been there from the very beginning, with three mentions in Totalbiscuit's kickoff pamphlet alone. In my experience, the SJW is just about the only concept that keeps the gamergate discussions going e.g. in German gaming communities – while on the whole, gamergate perspectives are rather bound to the U.S. political spectrum. The concept of the SJW carries as well as the Jew did in Nazism. In conversational intent, it is similar to the n-word: If people interested in the issues use it for themselves, it doesn't in any way reduce the insult it carries when others use it as a slur.

 

Besides, the whole idea of a Warrior plays into gamergate's war fantasies (literature and film have shown that no war is necessary when aficionados know their shit). That's why I'm using Bard in the meantime. And as to the entirely overused term social justice, it's a bit difficult for the people deceptively waving the flags of video game journalist ethics and free speech to claim that ANOTHER group would be all about the social issue outrage. :mellow:

 

The gamergaters, it bears repeating, are their own SJW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm never "reclaiming" SJW when it has always been used as a shitty shorthand way of talking about people who care about social justice, feminist does just fine. I don't feel like calling myself something ridiculous that people use to disparage others in that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm never "reclaiming" SJW when it has always been used as a shitty shorthand way of talking about people who care about social justice, feminist does just fine. I don't feel like calling myself something ridiculous that people use to disparage others in that way.

Obviously you don't have to do anything, but "reclaim" is probably a misnomer not just here but with respect to almost all the terms. "Faggot," for instance, wasn't "reclaimed," it was just claimed. SJW is in a similar position. So if you worry is just "the term has always had a disparaging connotation" then I wouldn't freak out too much, because lots of "reclaimed" terms only had a history of having been used offensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how I feel about comparing "sjw" to actual slurs. It'd be like trying to "reclaim" feminazi. Why would you want to? I don't think I've ever heard someone say sjw in person. Its a word used by dumb people on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×