BREAKING: Women of #GamerGate Make Breakthrough on HuffPo Live

[Ushiromiya Battler]

Kinda ironic that you used the same argument people annoyed at sexism in games threads do.

Only in the same way that it's ironic that the people annoyed at sexism in games aren't applying it evenly.

I'm sorry, but I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at, could you clarify?

 

[Something Amyss]

You said it better than I did, which is usually the case with your comments.

For your flattery, you shall be spared when the SJW army moulds this world in our image.

Err...Did I say that out loud?

I'm sorry, but I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at, could you clarify?

Exactly what you said in reverse. That the people who were saying "don't like it? Ignore it." have suddenly switched around to the "don't like it? Change it for me!"

Similarly, the whole "make your own games" line has come from a ton of people who are demanding a better press. Well, if it's so freaking easy to make better AAA games, why can't these people make a better press and conduct better games journalism? Why, if they feel that this is an appropriate response for others, is it not an appropriate response for themselves?

I'm not even sure that the post you referenced wasn't intentionally ironic, a bittersweet retort to the "make your own games/don't buy it" crowd.

 

[Nirallus]

If you thought gaming journalists were corrupt, what's stopping you from not reading the things they write?

It's simply this - If the gaming press belongs to one clique, subscribes to one ideology, and speaks with one voice, they become the gatekeepers. If Bayonetta 3 comes out a few years down the road and they don't like it because they think it's sexist (or in general, "Game X is Y-ist because Z"), they'll release a barrage of articles saying "It's a terrible game, don't buy it" and they'll tank its metacritic score. Part of what fuels GamerGate is that we recoil at the censorious instinct that crowd* has always harbored. The nightmare scenario is a Comics Code Authority for video games. This time the line taken by moral busybodies isn't "comic books are corrupting our youth", it's "video games are rife with misogyny". We had a taste of it on August 28th with the Time On Target barrage of articles.

*Let's not call them "Social Justice Warriors" because justice is not part of their methods or goals.

Edit: Quoted more than I meant to.

So, to clarify, you read things they write because of something that hasn't happened?

No, don't be deliberately obtuse. I can choose to ignore them, but doing so means their corruption, collusion, and narrative go unchallenged.

 

[Ushiromiya Battler]

Kinda ironic that you used the same argument people annoyed at sexism in games threads do.

Only in the same way that it's ironic that the people annoyed at sexism in games aren't applying it evenly.

I'm sorry, but I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at, could you clarify?

I believe he's pointing out the irony (though I think it's more hypocrisy than anything) in the people who usually go around saying "If you don't like it, don't buy it" now ignoring their own advice and going "I don't like it, change it now!"

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

 

[Ushiromiya Battler]

I'm sorry, but I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at, could you clarify?

Exactly what you said in reverse. That the people who were saying "don't like it? Ignore it." have suddenly switched around to the "don't like it? Change it for me!"

Similarly, the whole "make your own games" line has come from a ton of people who are demanding a better press. Well, if it's so freaking easy to make better AAA games, why can't these people make a better press and conduct better games journalism? Why, if they feel that this is an appropriate response for others, is it not an appropriate response for themselves?

I'm not even sure that the post you referenced wasn't intentionally ironic, a bittersweet retort to the "make your own games/don't buy it" crowd.

Ah, I see, well in that case I have no qualms with your comment.
EDIT:Goddamnit, sorry for the double post

 

[Nirallus]

It's simply this - If the gaming press belongs to one clique, subscribes to one ideology, and speaks with one voice, they become the gatekeepers. If Bayonetta 3 comes out a few years down the road and they don't like it because they think it's sexist (or in general, "Game X is Y-ist because Z"), they'll release a barrage of articles saying "It's a terrible game, don't buy it" and they'll tank its metacritic score. Part of what fuels GamerGate is that we recoil at the censorious instinct that crowd* has always harbored. The nightmare scenario is a Comics Code Authority for video games. This time the line taken by moral busybodies isn't "comic books are corrupting our youth", it's "video games are rife with misogyny". We had a taste of it on August 28th with the Time On Target barrage of articles.

*Let's not call them "Social Justice Warriors" because justice is not part of their methods or goals.

Edit: Quoted more than I meant to.

So, to clarify, you read things they write because of something that hasn't happened?

No, don't be deliberately obtuse. I can choose to ignore them, but doing so means their corruption, collusion, and narrative go unchallenged.

Well the example you used hasn't happened, so I wouldn't say it's being deliberately obtuse to point that out. You can clarify what exactly I got wrong there if you want.

To reply to the second part of your post, you appear to be basing their "corruption, collusion and narrative" on things that haven't happened, hence your Bayonetta 3 review. And it doesn't mean it goes unchallenged, it means it goes unsupported. If you actively choose to support them by reading what they write, they will just continue to write it. That's capitalism.

It hasn't happened, but it came damn close. Look at GameJournoPros, look at the Aug. 28 article salvo, look at how few sites would even let people talk about this. Look at Ben Kuchera et al. trying to browbeat Greg Tito into submission just because he didn't ban GamerGate discussion from the Escapist. The corruption, collusion, and narrative have been plainly visible, and beyond that, explained in detail on Page One of the megathread.

Obtuse is saying "it hasn't happened yet, so why are you worried?" I made it clear that the scenario I described is one that I felt might happen, that the industry was trending towards, and that it seemed to be nearing. Capitalism would ensure that alternatives appear, but if one voice takes total control of the public narrative, competitors will be shouted down as misogynist, making it socially unacceptable to be associated with them.

 

[Dizchu]

I must say that I have gained a lot of respect for HuffPost lately with their GG interviews. It's like they are actually interested in a discussion unlike most other journalism sites (Vice is probably the absolute worst). I am also glad that a left-leaning publication took this approach, if Fox News did this it'd spell the end for Gamergate.

I agreed with the neutral stance more than the other two (objective review? Ughh I can see what she was TRYING to say but she said it so poorly) however neither of them were as bad as Brianna Wu in the previous interview.

So yeah. Nice job HuffPost. I hope other news sources follow suit or amend their ways because as a person that is supportive but not a participant in Gamergate, it frustrates the hell out of me when they get misrepresented. I disagree with conservatives but I'm not gonna claim they all hate women or want to execute gays.

 

[Nirallus]

Well the example you used hasn't happened, so I wouldn't say it's being deliberately obtuse to point that out. You can clarify what exactly I got wrong there if you want.

To reply to the second part of your post, you appear to be basing their "corruption, collusion and narrative" on things that haven't happened, hence your Bayonetta 3 review. And it doesn't mean it goes unchallenged, it means it goes unsupported. If you actively choose to support them by reading what they write, they will just continue to write it. That's capitalism.

It hasn't happened, but it came damn close. Look at GameJournoPros, look at the Aug. 28 article salvo, look at how few sites would even let people talk about this. Look at Ben Kuchera et al. trying to browbeat Greg Tito into submission just because he didn't ban GamerGate discussion from the Escapist. The corruption, collusion, and narrative have been plainly visible, and beyond that, explained in detail on Page One of the megathread.

Obtuse is saying "it hasn't happened yet, so why are you worried?" I made it clear that the scenario I described is one that I felt might happen, that the industry was trending towards, and that it seemed to be nearing.

You say you feel it might happen, but that doesn't explain why you're supporting it. Why read the things they write? What is it you're gaining from supporting them like that which outweighs not supporting them? By reading what they write you're actively going out of your way to give them revenue.

I use AdBlock to prevent sites I don't like from getting ad revenue (The Escapist is greenlit). To avoid giving them views I have to rely on archived links (very handy when stories get taken down or altered). I can hardly take up a position against them without reading the articles.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

These interviews gave me one whole hell of a lot of a good morning, I'll tell you typical naysayers that much. And the fact that I know exactly who's going to show up to these threads (including me) every time is getting a bit wearisome.

Some of you aren't even bothering to bring your sarcastic A game anymore. It's disheartening.

With that said:

The "objective review" part was the one bit of this that soured me.

Reviews, by their very nature, are subjective to some degree. I believe a better case could have been made for "more objective reviews" as opposed to an absolute, but, whatever.

The girls had never been interviewed before, especially not in so high stress of an atmosphere (on Huffington Post of all things, hell) and afterwards, in Pol's stream, admitted to being extremely nervous. With more time to delve into the subject, I'm sure it would have been better explained, but the rush to get out counterpoints and an overall message was readily apparent.

Stumbling a bit is to be expected though. *shrug*

And they were doing their collective best to stay on 'message,' which, unfortunately, had to sort of counteract the previous 'message' put forth by Literally Wu. *secondary shrug*

So. Fuck it. I'm still happy about it.

Edit: The fact that NeoGaf was already discussing putting forth articles about these women being victims of "internalized misogyny" not 10 minutes after the stream ended was hilariously and depressingly expected.