A gay, bi-racial's take on this whole mess

[Dango]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

Did she seriously include a fucking Shellshock game on that list? God damn Anita you really know how not to help your cause.

As well, I think it's a good representation of how silly this debate is that stating you're gay and bi-racial means you're taken more seriously and given more credit by some people.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm bisexual, biracial, and I'm also trans. Do I win? Does my support for the so-called "social justice warriors" negate your criticisms? I'm just wondering what you sexuality and racial background have to do with this.

Good arguments are good arguments regardless of what equipment you rock, who you fancy, and how much melanin you have in your skin.

Which I think is the problem. Is there really mainstream support for more "Gone Homes?" Mostly, people seem to want to play as a chick or a person of a different skin tone in Assassin's Creed and stuff like that. I'm yet to see how Saints Row has been harmed by letting you play a gay trans black person. And yet, this is the larger sticking point.

And you know what? I'm glad. I am fucking G-L-A-D when straight white dudes actually show some support and empathy for people who aren't them.

Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Thunderf00t is a fake game guy because he clearly doesn't understand how the series works!

...Yeah, I feel dirty saying that even in jest, but still. Has anyone ever been put off by penalties in Hitman games unless they're specifically going for a score or stealth run?

His criticism wouldn't exist except he has a major hate boner for feminism. And they certainly wouldn't meet his own standards.

I'm not seeing that. And almost everyone complains about things they will never fix or aid in fixing, look at anyone with strong political opinions but doesn't vote or get politically active as an example. The "make their own games" argument doesn't help. When GG was happening, some asked why they didn't make their own forum and they said things like expenses and maintenance and such and games are much the same for excuses. Even if a kikstarter was made, news would have to spread, and wouldn't you think people would complain that sites like this were promoting an "SJW" game? You wouldn't think people wouldn't try to stop it or send some kind of threats to the developers or anyone trying to spread it?

It's funny how that works, isn't it? How suddenly it wasn't so simple to just "make your own." How people hated having that specious logic turned around on them.

Honestly, it should be easier to make your own GG website than to produce the kind of video games people want, too. Double standard?

I'd love to make a game, but my programming is terrible and I have no visual art skills whatsoever. This is why I stick to doing things in text format.

 

[Something Amyss]

Did she seriously include a fucking Shellshock game on that list? God damn Anita you really know how not to help your cause.

Care to elaborate? I'm not saying you're wrong, but every time someone picks a nit with her list I find that it doesn't impact the base criticism.

 

[pjfmullini]

The protagonist from Assassin creed vita game didn't get as much press as the Protagonist from the next assassin creed game.

 

[Dango]

Did she seriously include a fucking Shellshock game on that list? God damn Anita you really know how not to help your cause.

Care to elaborate? I'm not saying you're wrong, but every time someone picks a nit with her list I find that it doesn't impact the base criticism.

That was more of a joke, the Shellshock games are universally considered absolutely abysmal. I just find it funny that she's trying to use a game absolutely no one likes to prove her point. And I guess, in a way, her using it can be an example of her lack of awareness and familiarity with the gaming community and culture as a whole.

 

[Something Amyss]

The protagonist from Assassin creed vita game didn't get as much press as the Protagonist from the next assassin creed game.

It also didn't get the promotion of one of their console games or come with inane excuses.

That was more of a joke, the Shellshock games are universally considered absolutely abysmal. I just find it funny that she's trying to use a game absolutely no one likes to prove her point. And I guess, in a way, her using it can be an example of her lack of awareness and familiarity with the gaming community and culture as a whole.

So did she say that it was a AAA game or something? That it was a popular game? I'm confused, because without any context, none of this particularly indicates a lack of familiarity or even a problem with her use of it.

 

[Vault101]

. I believe games should be for the good of all and not to represent minorities. I will only play games that appeal to me, a white straight man.
.

so they should only represent straight white guys?

 

[Zhukov]

It boggled my mind for a long time as to why the people complaining about how sexist and gross and full of white straight male power fantasies games where didn?t just?I don?t know?make their own games that didn?t have those things, or at the very least support kickstarters for games that promised to be different. But that's when I really grabbed the root of the problem here: they don't really care about solving the problem, so much as building up their image complaining about it (and lying or fudging the truth where needed to do so).

Why the fuck is this considered a valid argument in this context and nowhere else?

Here, let me turn that one around on you.

Don't like the state of games journalism? Well, you should stop complaining and go start up a games news website of your own. Since you haven't done that, I shall now conclude that you are really just complaining in order to build up your image.

Don't like Sarkeesian videos? Well, you should stop complaining and go make some better ones yourself. But you haven't, have you? Because you don't really care, you're just complaining in order to build up your image.

See how this bullshit works?

 

[Skatologist]

I'm bisexual, biracial, and I'm also trans. Do I win? Does my support for the so-called "social justice warriors" negate your criticisms? I'm just wondering what you sexuality and racial background have to do with this. Good arguments are good arguments regardless of what equipment you rock, who you fancy, and how much melanin you have in your skin.

Well, people think by bringing it up, it validates their opinion because apparently that's what they think we think and us now saying we don't think that kind of argument is applicable to all of us is now a seen as a cop out or something. I've seen racist white people point to black leaders also saying interracial sex and relationships were bad too and should be looked down upon and basically said "You must feel they're right because they're black, hur hur" No, they're as much as an ignorant jerk as you are and I disagree with both of you.

And you know what? I'm glad. I am fucking G-L-A-D when straight white dudes actually show some support and empathy for people who aren't them.

Boy, same here. I may not have many heroes, real or imagined, but I view at least some of the swm "SJW"s as something analogous to Atticus Finch or William Lloyd Garrison, at least if they're active in real life and apparently not the trolls they seem presented as.

It's funny how that works, isn't it? How suddenly it wasn't so simple to just "make your own." How people hated having that specious logic turned around on them.

Honestly, it should be easier to make your own GG website than to produce the kind of video games people want, too. Double standard?

Double standard yes. We'd need a studio of what, 50+ people to make a game on a multi million dollar budget with millions more spent on ads to have a game express a progressive viewpoint and be consumed by mainstream audiences to compete with let's just say subtle -isms and -phobias in a lot games.[footnote] I won't say most. I'd say most are a either a mixed bag, don't do anything really, or are probably not that harmful, but I'm all for someone calling something out as long as you got good argumentation on your side and don't get too malicious. [/footnote] But apparently people think we can do it, and that seems promising.

 

[Something Amyss]

Well, people think by bringing it up, it validates their opinion because apparently that's what they think we think and us now saying we don't think that kind of argument is applicable to all of us is now a cop out or something. I've seen racist white people point to black people saying interracial sex and relationships was bad too and basically said "You must feel he is right because he's black, hur hur" No, he's as much as an ignorant jerk as you are and I disagree with both of you.

Oh yeah, I'm aware. It's sort of what I was getting at, but I don't want to accuse someone of doing that if I don't know. Maybe there's another explanation? Part of the funny thing about that is that the way it's always done so unevenly. A woman who complains about feminists is practically an idol to many of the MRA boards, but a male feminists is pussy-whipped or a "mangina."

I'd rather deal with people on the strength of their argument, and I try to. I take issue with many people who fall under the feminist or "SJW" labels. I argue with others.

Boy, same here. I may not have many heroes, real or imagined, but I view at least some of the swm "SJW"s as something analogous to Atticus Finch or William Lloyd Garrison, at least if they're active in real life and apparently not the trolls they seem presented as.

My parents both marched for civil rights at teenagers. They were literally called "****** lovers." Sorry, but mention of Atticus Finch brought that to mind specifically. You could say I grew up with a strong sense of social justice. I may not be a warrior, but I won't shy from shaming. If my parents could be threatened in person and jailed for their beliefs, I can take a few idiots calling me a warrior on internet forums. Neither one of them was exactly analogous to Attitus Finch, but they did believe in sticking up for people who were being treated like crap.

The unfortunate truth is that minorities don't get traction without majority support.

Double standard yes. We'd need a studio of what, 50+ people to make a game on a multi million dollar budget with millions more spent on ads to have a game express a progressive viewpoint and be consumed by mainstream audiences to compete with let's just say subtle -isms and -phobias in a lot games.[footnote] I won't say most. I'd say most are a either a mixed bag, don't do anything really, or are probably not that harmful, but I'm all for someone calling something out as long as you got good argumentation on your side and don't get too malicious. [/footnote] But apparently people think we can do it, and that seems promising.

Apparently, people are afraid we'll do it, too. After all, the feminists and SJWs are invading their hobby.

I sort of wonder how many people would give such a game a fair shake. For all the complaints of "design by committee" and "political correctness, this doesn't happen in works considered feminist or inclusive in other genres. I wonder what is it about gamers that makes them think they're so special. I say "they" because I'm a feminist and therefore not a "real gamer," evidently.

 

[Seneschal]

snippy

Now I'm seriously feeling like two mobs are having a food-fight on things they actually agree on, but they're convinced the other side has fanatics so radical that pie-to-the-face is the only way to go. And we're letting that fanatical fringe dictate the tone and the vocabulary.

E.g., I'd probably agree with Albetta a whole bunch (except on Gone Home), but I'm afraid I'm a "SJW" in his/her eyes, since I actually appreciate when Polygon reviews have a sidebar-paragraph about how the game's played-for-laughs peek-at-the-breasts minigame could be sexist and tone-deaf. I'm supposed to believe those easily skippable bits are the bane of gaming.

I mind, therefore, I'm a whiner.
I didn't shut up and remain stoic and "unpoliticized," therefore I'm a "warrior," at war with fun.
Hearing about the ever-broadening options in games gives me hope for the future, therefore I'm "encouraging agendas and left-leaning biases that make gaming political."
I'm gay in a hilariously catholic country, therefore "I'm not doing it for equality but because I like playing a victim."

Any of those things is enough to hear "SJW!" thrown my way, no matter how little I do or how moderately I do it. Because I cannot be moderate enough. The very fact that, as a gay person, I do not consider the recognition of my existence "a political agenda" is enough to put me in that basket.

How would I converse with anyone that uses "SJW" with a straight face? It's never a self-identifier, always a slur directed at a group whose only criteria for membership is "not thinking that gaming discussion should be more limited and directed away from culture & society" - that describes everyone, including Albetta and including most GG-ers. It's a pointless word for a pointless argument that's between two groups that basically agree, except one wants the other to stop talking how they agree.

 

[Something Amyss]

Any of those things is enough to hear "SJW!" thrown my way, no matter how little I do or how moderately I do it. Because I cannot be moderate enough. The very fact that, as a gay person, I do not consider the recognition of my existence "a political agenda" is enough to put me in that basket.

Hell, I got called one for pointing out women have served in wars historically and will continue to do so in the future. That's not even a particularly political point, it just undermines the notion of how feminists want men to do all the hard work.

Telling someone I thought there was plenty of room for everyone at the table got me yelled at recently. Because apparently, even the idea of diversity in any sense is just too toxic.

How would I converse with anyone that uses "SJW" with a straight face? It's never a self-identifier, always a slur directed at a group whose only criteria for membership is "not thinking that gaming discussion should be more limited and directed away from culture & society" - that describes everyone, including Albetta and including most GG-ers. It's a pointless word for a pointless argument that's between two groups that basically agree, except one wants the other to stop talking how they agree.

And that's kind of the problem. It's always been a pejorative, a way to classify and shut down people who you don't agree with. And while it may have had a more specific meaning in the past, it's pretty much used against everyone who disagrees with the person speaking. There may be some people who use it thinking there's a rationale, but people say the same thing about "******" or "feminazi" when they want to justify them. They're still slurs.

At best, it's a "two wrongs make a right" argument, and that's dumb. At worst, it's just a way to shut down conversation, and that's worse.

 

[grassgremlin]

I'm bisexual, biracial, and I'm also trans. Do I win? Does my support for the so-called "social justice warriors" negate your criticisms? I'm just wondering what you sexuality and racial background have to do with this.

Good arguments are good arguments regardless of what equipment you rock, who you fancy, and how much melanin you have in your skin.

Which I think is the problem. Is there really mainstream support for more "Gone Homes?" Mostly, people seem to want to play as a chick or a person of a different skin tone in Assassin's Creed and stuff like that. I'm yet to see how Saints Row has been harmed by letting you play a gay trans black person. And yet, this is the larger sticking point.

And you know what? I'm glad. I am fucking G-L-A-D when straight white dudes actually show some support and empathy for people who aren't them.

Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Thunderf00t is a fake game guy because he clearly doesn't understand how the series works!

...Yeah, I feel dirty saying that even in jest, but still. Has anyone ever been put off by penalties in Hitman games unless they're specifically going for a score or stealth run?

His criticism wouldn't exist except he has a major hate boner for feminism. And they certainly wouldn't meet his own standards.

I'm not seeing that. And almost everyone complains about things they will never fix or aid in fixing, look at anyone with strong political opinions but doesn't vote or get politically active as an example. The "make their own games" argument doesn't help. When GG was happening, some asked why they didn't make their own forum and they said things like expenses and maintenance and such and games are much the same for excuses. Even if a kikstarter was made, news would have to spread, and wouldn't you think people would complain that sites like this were promoting an "SJW" game? You wouldn't think people wouldn't try to stop it or send some kind of threats to the developers or anyone trying to spread it?

It's funny how that works, isn't it? How suddenly it wasn't so simple to just "make your own." How people hated having that specious logic turned around on them.

Honestly, it should be easier to make your own GG website than to produce the kind of video games people want, too. Double standard?

I'd love to make a game, but my programming is terrible and I have no visual art skills whatsoever. This is why I stick to doing things in text format.

Wow, every time I read posts like this, I become less nuetral and more anti-gg, not like i haven't been convinced already. This stuff just validates my point.

I'll weigh in on something I noticed.
Both sides have a lot of things in common about what they want, the problem is Gamergate is an over reaction.

I get you have some strong points about corruption and nepotism. It be nice if we got more actual journalism, which mind you, seems to be what is happening, slowly, but fire everyone? What are you smoking. That's not how it works.

I'm glad I happen to now someone part of the industry and able to get some context, because I'd still be that dumb and jump the gun for that. Thing is. You don't know the people you want to fire, and half the "sins" these people are bringing up are so minor it hurts.

Still, if you have a good cause, it's better to follow a movement that didn't start with slut shaming and harassment and still has sectors of slut shaming and harassment. ThunderFoot and The Amazing Athiest should not be the role models you stand behind.

As an atheist, I'm ashamed to be associated with those too. And mind you, ThunderFoot is smart . . . when he's not talking about feminism and gaming.

To the OP

Don't align yourself with people known to say some real fucked up racist shit. Sorry. I won't be demonizing 4chan, cause unlike most people, I don't think it's a great evil . . . however, sorry, but how you act on 4chan should not be the same way you act professionally.

You can't sling racial slurs and other harmful speech and expect the word to just accept your words. Several years of those words being associated with awful people has conditioned me to be pretty offended by them, sorry. "Fag" less so, but I'll draw the line at "******".

Come at me as a human being, not as a offensive asshat.

Regardless, think about every aspect of what you view. I'm talking both sides. Don't read into a conspiracy and believe it verbatim. Don't read a article and accept it as fact. Don't get drawn into all this drama and think about what YOU want and how that fits into the narrative.

 

[Vigormortis]

*sigh* Ah, you mean the Thunderf00t ranting that could easily be argued against [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N-tkrxAEWw&list=UUGMegrt_97F75N-iUgyp0Tg].

And no. It is not even close to being the same argument. Either you misunderstand her argument or you misrepresent the extreme of Thompsons arguments.

Quite frankly, all three videos are filled to the brim with utter bullshit. Most of their claims and counter-arguments are one part truth, five parts nonsense.

A fair few of his counter-arguments to Thunderf00t's video can be counter-argued.[footnote]And before anyone asks: No. I won't be wasting my time getting into it in this thread.[/footnote] Though, that certainly doesn't validate much of the nonsense from Thunderf00t's video. Nor Anita's, for that matter. If anything, it just reinforces how ridiculous this whole fiasco has become.

The issue is: Both sides of this argument are so inundated with confirmation bias that neither side has; or indeed can, it seems; make a rational argument for either stance.

It's gotten so out of hand that even I have begun washing my hands of it. And I relish a good debate.

 

[briankoontz]

So you don't know about the now infamous Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe that Feminist Frequency went on? (As a side note I would like to point out that this was the same argument used by Jack Thompson and his Ilk in the past against GTA and violent video games.

*sigh* Ah, you mean the Thunderf00t ranting that could easily be argued against [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N-tkrxAEWw&list=UUGMegrt_97F75N-iUgyp0Tg].

And no. It is not even close to being the same argument. Either you misunderstand her argument or you misrepresent the extreme of Thompsons arguments.

Thompson didn't make arguments - he made assertions out of fear, ignorance, and a desire for attention. He was a buffoon. Then gamers did something terrible and paid attention to him, while ignoring serious game critics.

Unlike Thompson, Sarkeesian makes good points, amid some questionable reasoning and laziness. She's far from an ideal feminist or ideal game critic, but at least she *is* a feminist and game critic. Thompson didn't even play the very video games he was criticizing.

This is progress. The low point was giving the limelight to Thompson, who was on par with the "Dungeons and Dragons is satanic" people who gained the limelight in the 1980s. We've improved since then to the point where we give the limelight to Sarkeesian. Hopefully we'll keep improving to the point where we give the limelight to the best video game critics in the world.

 

[Verlander]

Ultimately the market decides what games sell, and how much "inclusion" is required. At the same time, this is a business, and a corporation would be a failure if they didn't try and explore new markets. Hence, diversity and inclusion.

The logic behind GG etc is that developers can convince critics to like their games, through industry contacts and personal relationships, and thus skew the sales of a game making diverse games look proportionately more popular than they are. This doesn't work in reality - critics loose reputation quickly if they back shoddy games, and there's still a significant portion of the market to make purchases on word of mouth or even box art over critical review. Likewise, the biggest selling games are not going to be put out of business by diversity, even if COD begin to have female protagonists, or Team Fortress 3 features transgender players. If the game is good, then the game is good, and only bigots will be enraged by what amounts to cosmetic changes.

Games that have a complete overhaul in style and content are currently indie games or only gain slight popularity among audiences, regardless of how "raved about" they are in the press. Just like how french arthouse films that get slapped on the back at Cannes haven't stopped the onslaught that is Marvel Studios or Michael Bay, these games won't stop big dumb popular titles. Therefore the whole argument is a bit silly, and is why the GG movement is inevitably falling to the bigots, when it originally had some substance behind it.

 

[Lono Shrugged]

. I believe games should be for the good of all and not to represent minorities. I will only play games that appeal to me, a white straight man.
.

so they should only represent straight white guys?

Not even remotely what I am trying to say. I said "games should be for the good of all"

 

[Dragonbums]

http://youtu.be/4ZPSrwedvsg?t=22m11s

1. Oh Anita. Even by her standards those are some poor arguments, and are entirely unsubstantiated.
2. I see Hitman still has its sleaze factor set to 11. The jiggling tits when the girl is lying prone and unconscious? Classy.
3. Never heard anything about "Hit man "Stripper killing simulator" diatribe" though.

Tm
Because there really isn't one. She was talking about devs putting certain elements into a scenario knowing they'll be used that way by some players. Thunderb00t's retort is largely centered on the game penalizing you (via a meaningless scoring system) as proof you're not supposed to kill the strippers.

But even then that penalized score was easily negated by hiding the bodies inside a box. Which means there still wasn't much of a "penalty" to begin with, and score reductions to people who don't give a shit isn't exactly off putting to the majority of the players. I believe a rebuttal video of Thunderf00t's criticism pointed that out.

So what's your solution?

Allow the player to kill any and every NPC aside from the dancers? How would that make any logical sense? It would break any immersion the game actually had.

Are you also insinuating that GTA should allow the player to also kill any and every NPC... just not the ones who happen to be in the strip club?

Way to put words in my mouth when I never suggested or implied such a thing.