SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Brianna Wu, head of the independent gaming studio Giant Spacekat, was the target of a series of tweets containing death threats on Friday; one published her home address (since redacted). The poster's Twitter account has been disabled.
Wu responded on Friday night with the tweet:
Brianna Wu @Spacekatgal
The police just came by. Husband and I are going somewhere safe.
Remember, #gamergate isn't about attacking women.
GamerGate supporters denounced the threats and "doxxing" against Wu and disavowed the poster. However, several suspected that the tweets were a false flag created by anti-GamerGate forces:
Sun Knight @SunKnightO
@Sen_Armstrong @Spacekatgal @chatterwhiteman It's clearly either a troll or false flag shame that people actually think its legit.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @02:54PM
The article couldn't be more one-sided. It's "the gamergate movement is a bunch of misogynist internet terrorists" repeated over a bunch of paragraphs.
Well, yeah, if the media retaliates to the criticism of allowing anti-ethical practices by calling critics misogynists, they will get angry at you too. That doesn't mean they lost focus, that means you are not doing your job properly of reporting news.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @03:08PM
Follow the reaction at one gamer site [nichegamer.net].
Yes, the threats were created by one individual, but there's an entire community in denial. And this has happened several times before
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @03:44PM
An "entire community" you say?
Hmm, you're right, all of those SJW are a community of denialists.
And this has happened before, someone should really tell them to STFU already.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:27PM
Ok, this fucking irritates me.
Why does this concern a "community" if we've identified one individual who is responsible?
Cut off his balls, inject him with estrogen, and be done with it. Yes, I am aware of how cruel that is. Do it. He deserves it.
I will not be held accountable for the actions of someone else. I am sick of being assigned the male gender and apparently being a borg collective.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:38PM
> Why does this concern a "community" if we've identified one individual who is responsible?
Because he's just an exemplar of the community of gamerassholes.
Your argument is like saying, we should all have respect and love for members of the KKK because only a couple of them have actually burned crosses on people's lawns, all the others in the KKK just fantasize about it and tell each other how those people totally deserved it, those guys are above criticism.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:41PM
You're a fucking idiot.
I didn't ask to be assigned the male gender.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:48PM
But you do seem to have decided that you want to be not just someone who plays games, but to be a member of the gamerassholes.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:51PM
I've decided that I am sick of being held accountable for the actions of others because of my assigned gender.
I just want to play Gran Turismo, Armored Core, and Civ. Why the fuck do I need to be held accountable for the actions of others?
If I had been assigned the female gender at birth or if this gods had allowed me to transition as a child, like the fucker in my house at the moment, there wouldn't be a problem.
In fact, if I were legally female, I'd probably be held up as an example of a woman gamer!
So fuck you and your cissexism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:50PM
> I've decided that I am sick of being held accountable for the actions of others because of my assigned gender.
The only one holding you accountable for that is YOU.
I never thought "professional victim" was a real thing until now.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:04PM
Haha, you've made me lol.
In order to be a professional, I'd need to have some profit motive. How do I profit by gamer-gate?
I am simply fucking sick and tired of sexism. This shit needs to stop.
I am an individual. I will not be held accountable for the actions of others.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:39PM
Its not, its only used as an ad hominem and strawman. Kinda like that whole "social justice warrior" label; there's no such thing, but its a useful way to collect and direct hate at everyone who disagrees with you.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:45PM
Not necessarily.
I hope that some day you come under fire on the basis of your assigned gender at birth. Then maybe you'll understand the irritation directed at SJWs.
Is social justice a good goal? Absolutely. However, the tactics of SJWs, mainly targeting individuals who are not causing the problem on the basis of sexism, are questionable.
When you find yourself attacked because of your assigned gender at birth, irrespective of any other biological or physical factors, you might understand.
And no, all of the sexism that was directed at me in the name of getting women into programmer, apparently has not resulted in more women programmers. However, my cisgendered female apprentice (who is a very impressive person!) might vouch that a non-sexist strategy is more functional.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:04AM
I don't see how, because the first sentence is unrelated to the second. You're just trying to demonize [wikipedia.org] everyone who says or does something you dislike by giving them a label [wikipedia.org] so its easier to collect and direct hate at them. Such a thing doesn't actually exist beyond a tiny minority, but using propaganda techniques is useful when trying to make something insignificant appear as something to be concerned about, isn't it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:10AM
That sounds just like the techniques that social justice warriors use. They demonize their opponents by labeling them as racist or sexist or homophobic or transphobic or misogynist or even just "privileged", so it's easier to collect and direct hate at them.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by cafebabe on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:55PM
If I may heavily paraphrase one of your earlier comments [soylentnews.org]: When you fire up a car driving game, you just want to drive a car. You don't want to engage in a session of gender politics or be subjected to a 30 second public service announcement about misogyny.
Indeed, it is offensive that some people think this is an appropriate venue for debate. It would be more appropriate for people to compete in a free market of ideas. Unfortunately, digging yourself out of the Turing tarpit [catb.org] is hard work and it is far easier to complain that [soylentnews.org] programming is a tool of the clandestine patriarchy [theregister.co.uk].
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:02PM
When you fire up a car driving game, you just want to drive a car. You don't want to engage in a session of gender politics or be subjected to a 30 second public service announcement about misogyny.
Because that's precisely what's going on here. Fight the good fight!
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:48PM
Let me expound on why you're a fucking idiot for comparing me to the KKK.
I will not be held accountable for the actions of others. I'm an individual.
I was assigned the male gender at birth despite several objections I raised early on, which were dismissed because of 1. transphobia 2. cisgender blindspot 3. some "bathroom rape" issue 4. the circular argument that I must be injected with testosterone because I'll make more money that way!
Fuck all those arguments. I refuse to be held accountable as the male gender.
So what are you telling me? I will never put my copy of Gran Turismo V and Civ IV away just because I'm assigned a certain gender against my will.
In short, fuck you and fuck all sexists, especially cissexists that are involved here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:48PM
> Let me expound on why you're a fucking idiot for comparing me to the KKK.
No, I compared gamergate to the KKK.
Are you claiming that you have voluntarily joined the group collectively known as gamergate?
If no, then quite your bitchin.
If yes, then birds of a feather.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:39PM
Ah, ok, point taken.
I simply will not be affected by whatever sexist policies come about because of gamer-gate. That's my position here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:18PM
> I was assigned the male gender at birth despite several objections I raised early on,
Holy shit! I just re-read your post. Now I know why you are soooo fucking brain-dead about this topic.
It has nothing to do with gamerasshole misogyny, you are just fucked in the head as a result of being a square peg stuffed into a round hole.
I won't argue with you any more, I will just cite your post going forward in case anyone else thinks your arguments come from a place of reason rather than mental distress.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:28PM
And you suffer from transphobia. You clearly need sensitivity classes.
I mean, what the fucking hell!?
Yes, I've admitted before that I'm mentally ill. The American Family Association (or someshit like that) has put forth evidence that being raised as a gender one is not can cause long-term mental illness. Despite their transphobic intentions, they're right!
The point you seem intent to ignore is that I am sick of being held accountable for the actions of others. Being held directly accountable for the actions of others is what's led me to post in this troll article. I do not want to be held accountable for the actions of others ever again, which is where gamer-gate is headed.
Do you not understand that?
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:31PM
And in fact, I will not be held accountable for the actions of others ever again. That's my decision.
If it means leaving this shit life I currently lead, so be it. Let the gods decide. I am fucking sick of sexists, to the point I'm willing to just leave. I am an individual .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:01AM
Or, ya know, you could, just continue on playing your video games and stop putting yourself out there as some sort of cause celebre. It would probably be a great relief for everyone. I know I'm getting a little tired of seeing you strut your martyr complex before the world. Just sayin'.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:36PM
> And you suffer from transphobia. You clearly need sensitivity classes.
You brought it up. Multiple times in a discussion where it is completely irrelevant.
I'm not particularly transphobic, in fact it is my personal experience with other transgender people who were transitioning, witnessing how societal pressure warped their outlook that makes it easy to see the symptoms in you. But you are an adult, you don't get a free pass to be irrational online just because of your personal trauma.
> Yes, I've admitted before that I'm mentally ill.
> The point you seem intent to ignore is that I am sick of being held accountable for the actions of others.
Your illness prevents you from rationally evaluating the situation.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:03PM
It is very relevant. It's an example of someone assigned the male gender and held accountable for "rape" (to the point my genitals were mutilated to prevent cervical cancer in these theoretical women I was supposed to fuck).
It's an example that whatever sexist policy comes from this will do nothing to stop the problem.
And it is a problem, but targeting all assigned males will do nothing about it.
I want action to actually hold the fucker responsible… well, responsible. I don't want to be targeted because I was assigned the male gender against my will and because I like Gran Turismo.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Monday October 13 2014, @10:32AM
So, the argument for infant male genital mutilation is that, on the balance of probability, the patient is likely to identify as male and be heterosexual therefore any reduction in pleasure for the assumed self-identifying male will increases pleasure for zero or more females, has health benefits which may only benefit females and negative outcomes are of little consequence even if patients commit suicide [wikipedia.org]. Whereas, best practice, as followed in intersex cases, is to wait until the patient can make an informed choice.
1702845791×2
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:58PM
I would like to inject and note that it is circular argument to describe a transgendered person as mentally ill because the diagnosis appears in the American Psychiatric Association's DSM-5 [Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition] [wikipedia.org]. This controversial guide [newscientist.com] has input from discredited experts [wikipedia.org] and, in addition to pathologizing male heterosexual attraction to breasts [wikipedia.org], it is generally stuck in a medieval practice of diagnosing humors and impressions rather than following any evidence-based medical practice. As noted by one member of the Other Place [slashdot.org]:-
Homosexuality was a mental illness? Why, yes! Until 1980, openly gay people were also considered to be mentally ill [wikipedia.org]. By today's standards, this treatment of homosexuals is considered abhorrent and cruel. However, that's exactly the situation where transgendered people are today.
If we extrapolate forward, I'm concerned that if and when transgenderism gains parity with homosexuality, "professionals" will just move their money-making quackery onto the persecution of intersex people and other minorities using this well-practised but discredited methodology.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:15PM
> I would like to inject and note that it is circular argument to describe a transgendered person as mentally ill because the diagnosis appears in the DSM
I think you are arguing a completely unrelated point. Neither velex or myself are saying that being tg makes you ill, but society putting pressure on you to deny your gender can make you ill.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:40PM
I think we agree. This [soylentnews.org] and this [soylentnews.org] can be interpreted both ways. (Specifically, transgenderism is a mental illness and transgenderism leads to mental illness.
Bi-sexuality, homosexuality, transgenderism, intersexuality and other conditions are normal variations which should not be pathologized. However, some individuals endure considerable distress because they are penalized for not fitting into other people's simplistic, hetero-nomative, gender-binary model of the world.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:26PM
In exactly the same way that Osama bin Laden was an exemplar of the community of Muslims. Or Muslimassholes, if you prefer.
Oh, look, there's an asshole who identifies with a social, ethnic, or gender group: that can only mean all members of the group are assholes! Hang 'em all!
(Score: 1) by mojo chan on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:37PM
It was never about men, it's about the GamerGate community and other asshats. Even the original ciriticisms of the gamer community were about some specific issues related to the lazy way women were often portrayed (tropes).
The GamerGate community immediately weighed in and claimed it was a false flag operation. They would rather believe elaborate conspiracy theories than a woman. Publicly condemning these actions, both the original trolling and the reaction from the GamerGate guys, further marginalizes them and sends out the signal that it really isn't okay. That's how we deal with this stuff, that's how we make progress. The same way racism was made unacceptable by people calling it out.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:03PM
It was never about men, it's about the GamerGate community and other asshats.
If that's what it is all about, why is there not even a single link or word of explanation of what the hell Gamergate is all about?
I could easily see that someone so ensconced in their basement gaming cave might just assume this tempest in a teapot was common knowledge, and submit a half baked story about it. But why would the editors let it pass in such a disheveled state?
Yes, I know Google works, but FFS would its hardly a household term, and the quality of the article would have been improved 200% by a cut and paste of the first sentence of the Wiki Article. [wikipedia.org]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:11PM
>> It was never about men, it's about the GamerGate community and other asshats.
>
> If that's what it is all about, why is there not even a single link or word of explanation of what the hell Gamergate is all about?
Because it is a household name to the intended audience.
But, lets turn that logic around. Not only are there no links to explain how men are collectively to blame here, the words "gamers," "men," "males," "boys" or any other synonyms aren't even used in the article itself.
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:38PM
I think the poster assumed everyone knew what GamerGate is, since it has had so much coverage lately. Okay, that was their mistake, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't an assault on men or anything like that.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:19PM
No he does not deserve that you fucking feminist.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:36PM
Me, a feminist?!
Feminism believes that every morning when I take my estrogen, I'm raping all women in some metaphysical bullshit.
Then again the MRM believes that despite my history of voting Libertarian, I'm a fucking communist.
Somebody mod parent funny.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @03:15PM
> Well, yeah, if the media retaliates to the criticism of allowing anti-ethical practices
To the best of my knowledge the "criticism" has been only two stupendously weak points:
(1) A woman slept with a bunch of gaming reporters for favorable press coverage -- completely debunked.
(2) A handful of stories covering all the commotion about (1) that were published in the same 3 day period happened to include, among their numerous other references, reference to some obscure feminist academic paper. Not all the gamergate stories published in those 3 days referenced that obscure paper, but some did - and never mind that people have been writing articles about the beyond crazy reaction to (1) for months and have continued to do so since.
Is there more?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @03:27PM
How was the 1st debunked? Kotaku already ran a piece acknowledging the relationship.
http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-times-about-a-pos-1624707346 [kotaku.com]
Which makes you a liar, and why should we listen to a liar?
You're likely just full of BS.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @04:21PM
They very article you linked to is what first informed me that it was debunked. The article says:
He has not written about her since. Nathan never reviewed Zoe Quinn's game Depression Quest, let alone gave it a favorable review.
...
Given the information available to us both from Nathan and all sources presented online, I have no reason to believe any further action need be taken.
The quality of your response seems to be the highest level of what passes as intellectual rigor among the gamergate crowd. So I find myself faced with choosing between you guys either being drooling morons or unrepentant misogynists. Or a combination of both.
As I said previously, if there is more to your crusade over "journalistic ethics" than those two non-issues, let us hear it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @04:42PM
So which part is debunked? Please explain it to us poor souls.
Are you saying she slept with them and they didn't give her favors in return?
Or that she slept with them for unrelated reasons?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @04:59PM
What part of "never reviewed" do you fail to understand?
The only thing relevant to "journalistic ethics" is whether or not she was given special treatment for whatever reason.
> Or that she slept with them for unrelated reasons?
Your thinking that such a question has any sort of relevancy confirms the accusations that gamergate is about misogyny.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:06PM
Well if you wrote clearly the first time no one would misunderstand.
I never claimed I was in gamergate, or a gamer at all.
But thanks for playing the "make up bullshit to support my point of view" game.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:14PM
> Well if you wrote clearly the first time no one would misunderstand.
How could you possibly think her sex life was at all relevant?
Really, what part of "ethics" do you think might possibly apply?
> I never claimed I was in gamergate, or a gamer at all.
Two can play that game. I never claimed you were in gamergate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:40PM
Being in gaming development and having any sort of personal relationship with games journalists is clearly an ethics violation. Why put ethics in quotes. It is not a scary word. It is not made up. It is the study of what is right and what is wrong. Conflicts of interest are thought of as wrong, therefore if someone's sex life and professional life overlap, then it is unethical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:55PM
> Being in gaming development and having any sort of personal relationship with games journalists is clearly an ethics violation.
How so? Seriously. I expect you to claim the extremist position that any relationship is defacto evidence of an "ethics" violation. Which is just bullshit. Ethics violations actually require a violation. Unless the reporter actually gives favorable coverage to the person they are involved with there is no "ethics" violation.
> Why put ethics in quotes.
I put it in quotes to make it evident that I think the definition people like you are using is absurd.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:58PM
Wrong. People can have relationships with whomever they want. Reviewing your partner's or ex-partner's work is an ethics violation, but that didn't happen here, so its irrelevant, nothing more than a red herring.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:11PM
How DARE you bring common sense and responsibility into this discussion!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:15PM
Responding to yourself is stupid and easy to spot. You can sock puppet all you want, but its pretty obvious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:19PM
I don't think it is a sockpuppet. I think there really is more than one person who thinks that logic is impeccable.
There are a whole bunch of them in gamergate. It's kind of a requirement to join.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:27PM
Nah, I'm pretty sure its all that one guy who thinks every AC poster is Tork. Even this post is by him, and yours definitely is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:41PM
That's just ridiculous. By that token, it seems like no two people in the same professional field should be allowed to communicate outside of job. Ethics, or at least publishing ethics, isn't about building impersonal walls between humans, it's about managing your relationships to avoid conflicts of interest.
Sleeping with the person who recommends your product, or who recommends you for promotion: conflict of interest. Recusing yourself from reviewing your girlfriend's product: ethical. Quitting your job because you're attracted to someone who works in the field: Hollywood melodrama.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:50PM
Maybe we're asking the wrong question.
How about, why did 5 game journalists sleep with her?
That way all of the blame is on the corrupt male game journalists.
Better?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:01PM
> Maybe we're asking the wrong question.
You are indeed.
> How about, why did 5 game journalists sleep with her?
Nope. Still the wrong question. But points for realizing that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
> That way all of the blame is on the corrupt male game journalists.
Except there was no corruption.
Any hypothetical motivation is irrelevant when there is no crime.
I keep waiting to see evidence of a crime and there has been none.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:08PM
If it looks like a duck...
Why did she choose to cheat/sleep with only those in the game Journal Industry?
I never said it was a crime, (that I know of anyways), I only wanted to know her motivation.
If they're "too sexy it hurts", then I'm not bothered by it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:11PM
> I only wanted to know her motivation.
None of your fucking business.
Really. Why do you think you are entitled to know why someone decides to sleep with anyone?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:17PM
Because it shines a light on a larger issue that should be addressed. Women in the gaming industry shouldn't have to sleep with game Journalists to promote their work.
Why did you think I cared?? Asshole.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:25PM
> Women in the gaming industry shouldn't have to sleep with game Journalists to promote their work.
Who says they have to?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:34PM
Um, we're trying to find out if that is what happened.
Except every time we ask a question we get a shitstorm of OMG sexists assholes!!!! as a response.
Which only makes us believe more in the likelihood of a coverup.
The slander articles and their "coordinated" timing seem suspicious as well.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Monday October 13 2014, @06:05AM
No-one should have to sleep with journalists to obtain favorable reviews. However, five journalists (who may or may not enjoyed sexual relations with one woman) gave dis-proportionately good reviews for a "game" which consists of stateless HTML wrapped with a full-screen web browser.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @06:16AM
"Good reviews exist for a game I personally thought was shit!" is not proof of anything, except that the reviewers apparently like visual novels. Visual novels are pretty big in Japan, and have a niche market here in the US; so what? Where are these five reviews along with the proof that the game's creator fucked them within a week - or hell, a month - of the review? Without that, all you have is proof that your tinfoil hat is on too tight.
(Score: 3, Informative) by cafebabe on Monday October 13 2014, @07:20AM
It would be an improvement if it was a visual novel.
I've done game testing professionally and I've seen the effort that goes into games that flop. I've also seen how developers react when a reviewer doesn't understand a feature in a game. And I would hope that it is generally understood that game reviews are critical in some area even when a game pushes boundaries in many areas. However, if someone publishes a few webpages, they can expect most influential Steam reviews to contain the following:-
You may imply that I am a conspiracist but this is not a game which obtained distribution through intrinsic merit.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:52PM
The 1st Amendment allows me to ask whatever I like. You can also run your mouth protecting sluts as much as you like too.
Why is this slut shaming anyway? Is she ashamed of sleeping with 5 game journalists?
I actually wish more women slept around, because you really need to get laid!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:58PM
Now imagine your wife slept with 5 mob bosses.
It's none of your business, she can sleep with whomever she likes.
So I won't advice you to flee the country, just stay put like the good little doggie you are.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:02PM
No, not better. That position doesn't fucking fix anything.
I don't give a shit who she's slept with. I've slept with a lot of guys! It's easy to do! What fucking difference does it make?
The problem here is that an entire demographic is being blamed for the actions of a few individuals. We know who they are! Cut off their balls and inject them with estrogen! Be done with it.
Except we won't. We'll go after every 3rd party who is assigned the male gender on a legal document who likes to play games. How the hell does that fix anything?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:13PM
You slut! Go die in a hole as filthy as you are! Oh wait, you're a guy, aren't you? High Five bro! ^5
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:09PM
Thank you for identifying a big issue of sexism.
Thank you also for identifying a big issue of cissexism that you white knights can't seem to get past.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:07PM
Who cares? Its got nothing to do with this, merely a red herring and strawman used as an excuse to justify slut shaming, an inherently misogynistic action.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:15PM
Oh for fucks sake, not this garbage again. Nathan Grayson mentioned her game in an article in Rock Paper Shotgun [archive.today] back in January, then he covered Zoe's "Game Jam" [kotaku.com] at the end of March after she was responsible for tanking the same project run by The Fine Young Capitalist (TFYC) to get women in to gaming.
This has been stated over and over and over and every time someone insisting it doesn't exist pops up, then when it's pointed out they come back with, "well that's not a review". Seriously just fuck off already.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:31PM
This has been stated over and over and over and every time someone insisting it doesn't exist pops up, then when it's pointed out they come back with, "well that's not a review". Seriously just fuck off already.
So, what I am getting from you is that you have a problem with reality. Not only is it "not a review" it isn't particularly favorable towards her or any of her work. If you think it is, perhaps you could quote the lines that actually endorse her rather than just describe how someone else was shitty towards her.
after she was responsible for tanking the same project run by The Fine Young Capitalist (TFYC) to get women in to gaming.
True or not, I don't see how that's relevant to the charge of journalistic corruption versus a complaint about her as an individual.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:59PM
It shows a pattern of shitty/unethical behavior.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:13PM
> It shows a pattern of shitty/unethical behavior.
Is she a journalist? No. Case fucking closed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:37PM
So because she's not a journalist she's incapable of unethical behavior?
Or do non-journalists have some type of diplomatic immunity to it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:22PM
So because she's not a journalist she's incapable of unethical behavior?
What part of "journalistic ethics" do you fail to understand?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:38PM
The "ethics" part. It does mean "everything done by somebody I like", making "ethical violation" mean "everything done by somebody I don't like", right?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:09AM
So journalistic ethics are the only kind of ethics?
And unethical behavior by journalists can only involve journalists?
Because if a non-journalist is evolved everyone is a sexist pig?
Am I doing it right?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:18PM
Only if you look at it with the intent to use it as proof of that, having already made your mind up and simply looking for anything to justify your pre-made conclusion.
In reality it shows nothing of the sort.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:57PM
Of course gamer-gate is about misogyny.
Why aren't we holding the individuals^H^H^H^H^Hassholes involved accountable?
I am sick of being dragged into this shit because of my assigned gender. I am sick of being held accountable for sexual harassment and date rape.
Get me my fucking Obamacare sex change or drop the issue.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:02PM
SJW logic...
You sound white, you must be a KKK member then.
Don't like being called a member of the KKK?
Fine you're a leader of the KKK and you rape children?
Don't like that? Well I guess it must be true then.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:11PM
Somebody mod parent insightful. I'd use one of my mod points, but I opened my fat mouth already.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:08PM
> I am sick of being dragged into this shit because of my assigned gender.
No one but you is dragging you into anything.
Seriously.
You can go about your life doing your own thing and not only will no one say anything to you about gamerassholes, no one will even know you are a male gamer.
The only time you get accused of being a gamerasshole is when you get all thin-skinned about somebody criticizing someone other than yourself and take it personally. Or you know, you decide that hey those gamerassholes have a point when they aren't yelling whore at people and think you should stick up for them. But that's you dragging yourself and not any sort of assignment.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:51PM
Nope, sorry, you lose.
I have been held accountable to my face by various sexist feminist bitches for the actions of others.
Yes, me personally.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:53PM
> I have been held accountable to my face by various sexist feminist bitches for the actions of others.
Held accountable for being a gamerasshole? No you weren't. You are lying.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:19PM
You've never been a target of sexism?
You think it's unpossible that an assigned male might be a target of sexism?
You think it's unpossible that women can be sexists?
You think ti's unpossible that an assigned male might have been a target of sexism on multiple occasions?
What did all that sexism accomplish? Clearly nothing, because here we have gamer-gate.
Feh, hell, I wonder if my home-ec teacher still hates me for being better at baking and sewing than the cisgendered girls in her class. That had to have been the most unwilling A I've ever received.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:24PM
> You think it's unpossible that an assigned male might be a target of sexism?
As I noted earlier, all your rage here has nothing to do with gamergate and everything to do with being an "assigned male."
I'm think your bitterness about being assigned a gender has made you see gamergate as being assigned to you personally.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:56PM
Again, you don't seem to understand that some brain-damaged sexist policy will likely come about because of this.
I've said before, we know who the individual is. Cut off his balls and inject him with estrogen.
Hell, you're right. My complaint is being legally male. Cut off my balls and inject me with estrogen! My liver might appreciate it.
Yet, my complaint at being legally male is valid. I am not a part of gamer-gate or whatever, but I am concerned that some brain-damaged sexist policy will be enacted.
I suppose the sentiments that I should shut up until such a policy does come through are valid. However, I'd rather protest loudly here than need to lawyer up later.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @07:59PM
> Again, you don't seem to understand that some brain-damaged sexist policy will likely come about because of this.
Ok, how about you explain what kind of brain-damaged sexist policy will likely come about because of this.
Make it good because what I expect to hear from you is something from a fever dream.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:21PM
Ok, you made me laugh.
What about propositions to limit one's avatar to one's legal gender?
Haha, I went to look for that referece, probably from 2003 or so, I think it was a Microsoft policy, but instead I found an actual implementation [blogs.com].
Of course, given the specifics, I have nothing to bitch about. I don't play that game and even if I did, I'd likely "pass" and get permission for a female avatar whether I was trying to or not. I worry about some friends who do not get gendered female as often as I do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:43PM
> What about propositions to limit one's avatar to one's legal gender?
That's funny, because I would expect the result to go the other way. That games which didn't let people play as other genders would be sanctioned. The entire point of the feminists is that gamergater dudebros don't know what its like to be a woman online.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:46PM
>gamergater dudebros
#NotYourSlur
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:03PM
Feminists are peculiar in this way.
They want to cut your balls off right up until they find out that you would like that. They want to put you in a dress right up until they find out you have several dresses you like to wear, then suddenly it's a matter of being a rapist because you get gendered female too often for their tastes.
If I'm remembering the brain-damage correctly, it was the same matter as it is with feminist transphobia. The feminists are horrified at the possibility that anybody who was assigned the male gender at birth might gain female privilege (or heaven help us sneak into the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival).
Feminism is all about chauvenism and cis-woman privilege. It's complete sexism.
Also, the feminists are afraid that somebody like me might be gendered by somebody else as female and learn what it's really like to be a woman. It makes it very difficult to believe their victim power bullshit after being extended female privilege both online and offline. They hate that there are people like me who know exactly what it's like to be a woman. Maybe they should just fucking drop their "bathroom rape" shit and let me be a woman full time. Then I wouldn't post angry shit when I'm looking forward to being forced to present as a male yet again and be accountable for the actions of these gamer-gate shitheads.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:13PM
Your definition of feminism is wrong.
I don't think you are able to hear any other definition.
It is kind of sad.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:28PM
That's why social justice warrior is a good term to have. It allows you to separate proactive feminists from whiny loser feminists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:35PM
> That's why social justice warrior is a good term to have. It allows you to separate proactive feminists from whiny loser feminists.
That's odd. I use it to identify whiny loser misogynists and racists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:38PM
> That's odd. I use it to identify whiny loser misogynists and racists.
That's ok. Everybody makes mistakes [reddit.com].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:30PM
She's describing the de facto definition of feminism. It's the only definition that actually matters.
Any dictionary/academic/de jure definition of feminism is irrelevant.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:32PM
> She's describing the de facto definition of feminism.
Nope. She's describing something she personally experienced once or twice and which has been reinforced by the gleeful howls of anti-progressives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:28PM
This woman knows what she's talking about! Mod her up!
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:39PM
Ok, AC, this is past the point of intellectual rigour.
This is clearly about holding an entire demographic accountable for the actions of one dickwad.
I'll say it again. Cut off his balls and inject him with estrogen. That's what this dickface deserves. Be done with it.
Don't hold me accountable. I'm an individual. Don't tread on me.
Why aren't we holding this individual accountable and instead making it a matter of shitting on an entire demographic?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:12PM
If it's just one person then the entire SJW + Feminist "we hate all gamer males" looses steam!
Can't you see how important it is for the cause that every male everywhere is all GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:38AM
I must say I find it rather telling, in a sad sort of a way, that you apparently see "being turned into a women" essentially as punishment. I gather that you are in the process of transitioning to being a woman yourself. I realize that psychoanalyzing someone over the internet is fraught with peril but, wow!, you are throwing off some really weird vibes. I hope you are getting therapy for this, and I mean that sincerely.
To my eye, it would appear that the only ones in this "demographic" who are being "shit on" are those who would excuse, deny, or rationalize death threats and doxxing. You go ahead and play your video games if you like. No one is going to "tread" on you.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:16PM
Second, maybe he did plan to write said review and just by happenstance, the review went to some other journalist. Or maybe he never intended to honor any deal.
Or maybe the relationship had nothing to do with their day jobs. But what we do know there was a conflict of interest. And that Kotaku has said nothing in the above article about what it plans to do, if anything, about future conflicts of interest.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:23PM
For example, the game developer could have slept with the journalist in order to seal the deal and the journalist then passes a monetary bribe on from the game developer to the actual reviewer of the game. Or he might have gotten her game put in the review queue in the first place. In other words, just because he didn't actually write an article doesn't mean that he wasn't instrumental in getting a positive review written up.
Anything's possible. But if you have to make up a movie-plot to worry about, that should be a clue that you are on the lunatic fringe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:47PM
What we do know isn't the whole picture, but what we've seen so far doesn't look good.
I seriously wish she was a man and had used money instead of sex. All of this would be much easier to sort out.
Hell I'd settle for just the gender change in the story, it would at least be funny.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:10PM
> What we do know isn't the whole picture,
How do we "know" that? Sounds like wishful thinking.
> but what we've seen so far doesn't look good.
Yeah, it looks like a bunch of butthurt idiots making up shit.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:12PM
Yeah, it looks like a bunch of butthurt idiots making up shit.
Why should I care what it looks like to you? The conflict of interest is there no matter what it looks like to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:16PM
> Why should I care what it looks like to you? The conflict of interest is there no matter what it looks like to you.
Why should I care what it looks like to you? The evidence of conflict of interest is not there no matter what it looks like to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:34PM
Citation needed.
"A good review exists!" is not proof of anything. A list of other games greenlighted at the same time is not proof of anything. What else is there being touted as "proof of a conflict of interest"?
If "she could've fucked this guy who then bribed other people with money!"-type conspiracy theories are all you've got, then you're only proving that you're working backwards from a conclusion and desperately searching for evidence to support it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @12:21AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:14AM
Pardon the parsing, but that is basically what you're saying.
So she had sex with a journalist, so what? Its nobody's business who she has sex with. "A relationship exists" is not an ethics violation. [wikipedia.org] And how is it "obvious" that the only purpose behind the relationship was to get good press? How can you know anybody's motivations for anything? Are you a mind reader? No? Then you can't know and can only guess.
There are no facts to support your claims. Have some integrity for once in your life and stop trying to destroy innocent people's lives for no reason.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @09:32AM
Its nobody's business who she has sex with.
Because she had sex with a journalist who covers her industry, this matter becomes the business of the journalist's employer and any customers of the developer's game who are concerned that reviews of the game may be compromised by the above conflict of interest. When the relationship affects others in ways that can be very harmful, then it becomes their business.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:54AM
Well, he may be searching for evidence to back up his wild-eyed conspiracy theory but he is still failing quite miserably at actually finding any.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @09:35AM
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:11PM
But if you have to make up a movie-plot to worry about
"Movie-plot"? This sort of thing happens every day.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:20PM
> "Movie-plot"? This sort of thing happens every day.
In the movies.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @12:18AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:17AM
[Citation needed]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:21PM
Here's the citation [soylentnews.org] you asked for.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @03:31PM
Are you claiming she didn't sleep with them or that they didn't reciprocate?
Or that she did sleep with them, but for some different unknown reason?