The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
idiggory wrote:
Now, Gamer Gate is essentially a reaction to the fact that gaming news sites are increasingly not focused on gamers, because "gamers" are an increasingly small population of the people who play video games and consume video game media.
If Joph wants to go over the articles bit-by-bit again, that's all him. But I'm not gonna keep making the same arguments over and over.
Eh.
Some people have acted somewhere on the spectrum between jackhole and sociopath. A good deal of others didn't directly do so in the form of harassment but supported the behavior.
Some people are legitimately interested in the journalism issues. Even if you think it's a dumb thing to be interested in, they're interested in it anyway and there's nothing really wrong with that or their desire to have a conversation.
Likewise, some people are legitimately interested in the harassment and mistreatment of women in gaming. Even if you think they're over-reacting, they're interested in it anyway and there's nothing wrong with wanting a conversation about that either.
Gamergate is probably a poor banner to rally under because of the first aspect. However, the feminist side (I'm calling them that for lack of an easier term) doesn't do it any favors by basically demanding some petulant "total surrender" -- "You have to admit that Gamergate is all about misogyny and harassment and hatred and..." I think the term itself was born primarily from harassment with a veneer of "ethics" added for credibility but I also think a good number of people started paying attention because they thought this
was a point from which to start discussing their perceived legitimate issues. So people will wind up continuing to use the Gamergate name.
Realistically, people on the feminist side have zero interest in discussing any other aspect to the debate besides harassment. They're not looking for a debate or an understanding, they're just looking for a win. They started a self-congratulatory circle jerk "Gamers are Dead!" from the very beginning and they're not about to back down from that now. Discussions about it devolve to brush-off statements like "Little boys are mad about their games". They have a media engine driving them onward and profiting off the fight. It's difficult to think that a good faith attempt to discuss the journalism issue under a different name would get any traction or that it wouldn't just get lumped into Gamergate v2.0 the moment some idiot sends a death threat.
Gamergate folks need to do a better job in addressing the harassment. It's a legitimate issue and it cheapens the community if it's accepted as just part of it.
There's no gated communities on the internet. Painting with a broad brush using the nastiest color of paint isn't helpful or indicative of a sincere attempt at a conversation.
Some of that stuff is probably somewhat contradictory and doesn't string well into a narrative. Ultimately though, I've seen people (spreading all my internet haunts) who should know better skirt the line of condoning harassment and people who should know better reduced to just yelling "Harassment!" to shout people down. Neither side sounds particularly like people I'd want to associate with.