Do you think the Gaming Industries attitudes toward Gender issues are Top down or bottom up

[BloatedGuppy]

Moving swiftly onwards, I'm disappointed, I thought this thread had some potential and tried to respond reasonably but people seem to just want to use it for their old grudges.

Hey now. What could be more important than listening to me about my old grudges?

I like to think nothing.

 

[Grampy_bone]

*snip*

I know, it seems like strawmanning, it really does. Yet there we have Alex Lifschitz, the trust-fund SocJus socialite, denounce games, gamers, the gaming industry, the free market and impartiality, while conducting a "book burning" in front of a cheering crowd.

You tell people the sky is blue and they call you a misogynist. *sigh*

 

[Phasmal]

Moving swiftly onwards, I'm disappointed, I thought this thread had some potential and tried to respond reasonably but people seem to just want to use it for their old grudges.

Hey now. What could be more important than listening to me about my old grudges?

I like to think nothing.

Oh of course not YOU Guppy, I love hearing about your grudges.

I just mean I see this thread going the way of all the other ones, just filling up with anger at imaginary `SJWs`.

Spoiler: You know how it goes

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I know, it seems like strawmanning, it really does. Yet there we have Alex Lifschitz, the trust-fund SocJus socialite, denounce games, gamers, the gaming industry, the free market and impartiality, while conducting a "book burning" in front of a cheering crowd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_vividness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization

Generally speaking, given time, you will be able to mine/cherry pick evidence to support almost any conclusion you want.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I congratulate you on finding evidence of a particular person saying/doing preposterous things, but generally speaking that really isn't much of an accomplishment. People are forever saying/doing preposterous things. When you use that as a launching off point to make sweeping generalizations about entire cross sections of people, reducing individuals to catch phrases like "social justice warrior", then YOU have become guilty of saying/doing preposterous things, and that is never a solution.

Oh of course not YOU Guppy, I love hearing about your grudges.

Well that's more like it. MY grudges are sacrosanct, and should be a delight to all.

 

[Grampy_bone]

Hey cool it took exactly two posts for this thread to turn into frothy SJW paranoia. Oooh, they're forcing their wicked liberal agenda on us gamers! Look out! Look ooouuuutttt!

Also something something SJWs and Feminists are trying to take over the world with their nefarious SISSY RAYS.

I think your supply of straw is running dry.

Meanwhile, there is mountains of evidence that says targeting your AAA game towards women results in lower sales. If the mythical wider audience actually existed, eager for social justice propaganda games, then games like Gone Home and Depression Quest would sell gangbusters. But they don't.

And so is yours.

Nobody wants "social justice propaganda games". What the hell is "social justice propaganda"? Look I hate SJW types as much as anyone but Gone Home is not an example of an "SJW game".

"Hurr hurr Gone Home isn't a game, you can beat it in 20 seconds". Gone Home is one of the humblest and least pretentious games I've ever played. Something tells me that its lack of pretension is seen as "pretentious" because the mundanity of the game is novel and at odds with the fantastical settings of most other games.

Depression Quest and its creator aren't comparable. Gone Home's designer worked on the DLC for Bioshock 2. Level design I believe. He and his team have legitimate talent and passion for game design. Depression Quest and Literally Who are the result of nepotism, attention-seeking and controversy.

Most people don't like games like Gone Home, I agree. But I think it's because it is unconventional not because it "panders to SJWs". Games like GTA and Call of Duty have wider appeal, but there's still room on the market for games like Gone Home and (ughghhh) Depression Quest.

Fair points, however I feel it's worth it to point out that I'm not pulling games like Gone Home and Depression Quest out of nowhere, people like Alex Lifschitz and Anita Sarkeesian are holding them up as examples of "Pro-female" and social justice games. In the video I linked he cited Depression Quest as a Very Serious and Important game, then went on a huge butt hurt diatribe about how people were too stupid to understand it and would rather play GTA 5 instead.

So if you think Gone Home is not an example of a SJW game, tell that to them, not me. Of course there is room in the market for indie niche titles and experimental games, the problem is when people call for active censorship and destruction of certain games while demanding artificial promotion and hype for others, and doing it from a position of moral superiority to boot.

Alex Lifschitz think's its a crime that Depression Quest sold next to nothing while GTA was universally beloved, so he says the solution is to burn books. His words and actions, not mine.

 

[Skull Bearer]

I agree with most people that it's both. I think it started with the developers, as pre-crash era gaming was not so dominantly male marketed, and as we moved into the playstation era the push came to appeal almost exclusively to boys, but right now we have enough entrenched defensive misogynistic arsewipes that the current exclusion is coming from both top and bottom. This might be why people like Anita are pushing from change at the top- get the head and the rest will follow.

 

[Dizchu]

ahhhh, I just find that picture funny. Particularly as it's frequently thrown up as either a rebuttal to the argument that the industry is still overly male-centric,

Nobody is disputing that it is mostly men that design games. I studied game design in university and there were only a few girls. But then again I think it has more to do with the disparity in gender representation when it comes to most tech-related fields. The computing course in the same university had zero females. Animation (arguably the closest field to game design) had a much fairer representation while subjects like fine art are more equally split.

I know it's a cliché but I think women tend not to enjoy computer programming or related fields. There are obviously exceptions but I am extremely skeptical of claims that women are "unwelcome" in tech industries. That collage of female devs is there for multiple reasons. Mostly to dismiss the assertion that game design is as heavily male-centric as many claim it is (you'll find people of all demographics in game design, trust me). Another reason is to encourage women who may have an interest to consider game design. Nothing's stopping them.

or as a demonstration that gamers revere "good" female developers as license to continue heaping shit on the ones they disapprove of. You'll notice there's no Hepler in that list, despite the fact everyone and their dog knew her by name when that picture first started making the rounds.

I revere male developers. I don't use that as an excuse to criticise things John Romero, Phil Fish, Tim Schaffer etc. have done. There are developers I have respect for and developers I have issues with. Regardless of gender. The collage is there to contradict the assertion that people hate female developers and want to "drive them out of the industry".

I didn't make the collage. Nor did I know who Jennifer Hepler was until I looked her up. I don't play many Bioware games so I can't really comment. I also don't know her history. If I knew who made the collage I'd ask them about it.

PS - I liked Gone Home too, for much the same reasons as yourself, although I thought the game was woefully over-priced and deceptively marketed.

Agreed. Probably where most of the backlash came from to be honest. I thought it was like playing an indie hipster film from the 90s (in a good way). But there's many people that did expect some sort of spooky horror game and when they got a game with the plot of a 90s coming-of-age drama they got mad.

Alex Lifschitz think's its a crime that Depression Quest sold next to nothing while GTA was universally beloved, so he says the solution is to burn books. His words and actions, not mine.

I think it's a crime Depression Quest even got exposure. Also did he actually say "Depression Quest sold next to nothing"? Because if so that's HILARIOUS. Depression Quest was released for free.

Zoe Quinn has other methods of getting money though and she's obviously been able to make a living off doing the minimum amount of work.

 

[Grampy_bone]

I know, it seems like strawmanning, it really does. Yet there we have Alex Lifschitz, the trust-fund SocJus socialite, denounce games, gamers, the gaming industry, the free market and impartiality, while conducting a "book burning" in front of a cheering crowd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_vividness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization

Generally speaking, given time, you will be able to mine/cherry pick evidence to support almost any conclusion you want.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I congratulate you on finding evidence of a particular person saying/doing preposterous things, but generally speaking that really isn't much of an accomplishment. People are forever saying/doing preposterous things. When you use that as a launching off point to make sweeping generalizations about entire cross sections of people, reducing individuals to catch phrases like "social justice warrior", then YOU have become guilty of saying/doing preposterous things, and that is never a solution.

Oh of course not YOU Guppy, I love hearing about your grudges.

Well that's more like it. MY grudges are sacrosanct, and should be a delight to all.

So you admit I have a point but attack me for generalizing. Three things:

1. People only complain about generalizations when they're negative. If I was claiming SJWs possess above average intelligence and nice haircuts, would you be attacking me with the same fervor?

2. It's false to claim exemption from criticism for trends. All dogs are unique, yet we can make many accurate predictions about dog behavior from collected observations and study. Indeed, SJWs show remarkable unity and solidarity, with swift punishments for defectors.

3. Alex Lifshitz is not some random crank on the internet like me, he is a wealthy person with industry contacts, delivering a speech at a conference to a cheering crowd. Clearly someone is listening to him.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Nobody is disputing that it is mostly men that design games. I studied game design in university and there were only a few girls. But then again I think it has more to do with the disparity in gender representation when it comes to most tech-related fields. The computing course in the same university had zero females. Animation (arguably the closest field to game design) had a much fairer representation while subjects like fine art are more equally split.

I know it's a cliché but I think women tend not to enjoy computer programming or related fields. There are obviously exceptions but I am extremely skeptical of claims that women are "unwelcome" in tech industries. That collage of female devs is there for multiple reasons. Mostly to dismiss the assertion that game design is as heavily male-centric as many claim it is (you'll find people of all demographics in game design, trust me). Another reason is to encourage women who may have an interest to consider game design. Nothing's stopping them.

Eh. Like all things, the reason for less women in the industry would be multi-factoral. I'm sure there ARE some women who have wanted to break in but found an intimidating boys-only attitude awaiting them. Just as I'm sure there are lots that don't really give two shits about coding for fourteen hours a day and would rather do something else with their life. Nothing is ever just one thing. The industry could profit from a little self-reflection. Reflection is always beneficial, unless you let it become paralyzing, and I don't think we're anywhere near there.

I revere male developers. I don't use that as an excuse to criticise things John Romero, Phil Fish, Tim Schaffer etc. have done.

The tenor of the criticism tends to fall along very different lines.

There are developers I have respect for and developers I have issues with. Regardless of gender. The collage is there to contradict the assertion that people hate female developers and want to "drive them out of the industry".

Well that's such a generic statement it shouldn't be hard to disprove. What people? What developers? All people and all developers?

I didn't make the collage. Nor did I know who Jennifer Hepler was until I looked her up. I don't play many Bioware games so I can't really comment. I also don't know her history. If I knew who made the collage I'd ask them about it.

Hepler's crime was saying there should be a way to skip the shooty segments of a game like Mass Effect and go straight to the story. The result was thundering cries of "Fat ****" and "Get out of our industry, you don't even know what a game is". That The Walking Dead would go on to become GOTY despite basically being a game in which you skip any semblance of game play to get to story beats would raise the question of what exactly she said that was so fucking controversial, but whatever. Hepler is old news now.

Agreed. Probably where most of the backlash came from to be honest. I thought it was like playing an indie hipster film from the 90s (in a good way). But there's many people that did expect some sort of spooky horror game and when they got a game with the plot of a 90s coming-of-age drama they got mad.

Yeah that was pretty much exactly it. I think they wanted that...they were looking to subvert expectations...and that's clever, but I think you could probably lay a charge at their feet that the end result was some misleading marketing. If it had been free to play or something no harm no foul, but if I was some horror fan expecting Amnesia level scares and plopped $20 down, I might have been irate.

Caveat Emptor I suppose.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

So you admit I have a point but attack me for generalizing.

What point, exactly? As we discussed you neither constructed nor supported anything resembling a coherent argument. You raged about "social justice warriors" and later rather amusingly "Marxists", and then mined a random nutbar doing something stupid as evidence that everything you were saying was justified. That is not good argumentative form. As someone making forays about logical fallacies, you should be cognizant of that.

1. People only complain about generalizations when they're negative. If I was claiming SJWs possess above average intelligence and nice haircuts, would you be attacking me with the same fervor?

I would dismiss it as equally intellectually bankrupt. I'm honestly not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you defending lazy generalizations?

2. It's false to claim exemption from criticism for trends. All dogs are unique, yet we can make many accurate predictions about dog behavior from collected observations and study. Indeed, SJWs show remarkable unity and solidarity, with swift punishments for defectors.

"Social Justice Warrior" is a pejorative invented with the intention to insult. You might as well argue that we can make accurate predictions about "spics" by collected observation and study. I'm sure you're bright enough to see where the problem with that line of thinking lies. I might also add there is nothing remotely scientific about the "observation and study" of cherry picking youtube videos or tumblr comments off the internet and using them as evidence of a nebulous and shadowy conspiracy.

3. Alex Lifshitz is not some random crank on the internet like me, he is a wealthy person with industry contacts, delivering a speech at a conference to a cheering crowd. Clearly someone is listening to him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization

 

[Bombiz]

From me own personal experience these type of people only exist on tumblr. The 2 main examples of this that I can think of is one 18 year old pansexual ( according to their profile info) who actively made fun of and stated their hatred for cisgendred people. and another who I think was a 12 year old (at least what I gathered from their posts it sounded like they where 12) who made posts such as "lol i hope you die if your cisgendered" and " if your cisgendered unfollow"

these people for me usually are no different then the people who say Gay people aren't people and refer to the Iraq war as "The Great Crusade"

So... like, nutters that you have to go looking for? Okay. Not really a problem then.

And I LIKE tumblr, where else am I supposed to drool over pictures of my favourite celebrities?
Moving swiftly onwards, I'm disappointed, I thought this thread had some potential and tried to respond reasonably but people seem to just want to use it for their old grudges.

I actually have to agree with the tumblr thing. I only find these type of people when I purposelessly search for "SJW".

 

[Sithmorack]

I need to tell you all something. I personally believe that BloatedGuppy is arguing for the sake of arguing. What I mean by that...

ehhh I guess I mean that he enjoys arguments. He likes having an opinion and then enjoys trying to disprove someone's opinion and make his right. That isn't a bad thing.

I personally found his arguments in this thread to be hilarious. His responses are great.

I'm just confused because it seems clear as day that he doesn't really believe a lot of the stuff he's saying. I mostly think this because he keeps switching back and forth between arguments and changing sides. Honestly its kind of refreshing for a person to see both sides of the argument rather than his own.

Not to say that anyone here has a bad argument. I liked the majority of them and thought all of them had good points.

You all have a good day.

 

[Dizchu]

Eh. Like all things, the reason for less women in the industry would be multi-factoral. I'm sure there ARE some women who have wanted to break in but found an intimidating boys-only attitude awaiting them.

You're right but I just think if everything in game design were gender-neutral there'd probably still be mostly men in the industry. I think everyone's an individual of course, but genders have tendencies. I know you're not arguing for a 50/50 split between male and female in the games industry but I think female representation has a limit. Of course we are nowhere NEAR that limit yet (the industry could do with a lot more women) but there comes a point where you won't get better representation of diverse demographics without being unfair (choosing people less qualified in job interviews, for example).

Just as I'm sure there are lots that don't really give two shits about coding for fourteen hours a day and would rather do something else with their life. Nothing is ever just one thing. The industry could profit from a little self-reflection. Reflection is always beneficial, unless you let it become paralyzing, and I don't think we're anywhere near there.

I'd love for certain companies to change things up to add some more spice to game development. Especially triple-A game developers. Though I think there are certain franchises that are allowed to (and should) make risks because even "low estimates" of their games' sales would make a profit. If GTA V had a female player character people would have still bought it (they should have made that risk to be honest).

The tenor of the criticism tends to fall along very different lines.

I think it depends on the individual rather than the individual's gender. Phil Fish didn't get the same kind of criticism as say... Peter Molyneux (one got criticised for their games and the other got criticised for being an asshat). When it comes to women in the industry two of the ones that get criticised most these days achieved their status due to nepotism. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that there are women that get criticised for absolute trivialities or for outspoken activist views.

I think it's because there aren't many women in the business with reputations like Peter Molyneux, John Romero, Richard Garriot etc. If there were and they did something stupid or made a poor game they'd get the same kind of criticism.

Well that's such a generic statement it shouldn't be hard to disprove. What people? What developers? All people and all developers?

There's a sentiment that women are "unwelcome" in the industry and people will use the fact that they're women to harass them. I don't know who said it but it was mentioned that "every woman (vocal woman?) in the tech industry will experience harassment" or something along those lines. I disagree strongly with it. Maybe it's just a fringe opinion, I don't know.

Hepler's crime was saying there should be a way to skip the shooty segments of a game like Mass Effect and go straight to the story. The result was thundering cries of "Fat ****" and "Get out of our industry, you don't even know what a game is".

I can see why she got criticised (without condoning the harassment for one second). People react badly to change. A guy got death threats for altering the bullet damage of an assault rifle in Black Ops 2. It sucks. It's the sign of an entitled gamer market.

Yeah that was pretty much exactly it. I think they wanted that...they were looking to subvert expectations...and that's clever, but I think you could probably lay a charge at their feet that the end result was some misleading marketing. If it had been free to play or something no harm no foul, but if I was some horror fan expecting Amnesia level scares and plopped $20 down, I might have been irate.

I completely understood most of what Gone Home was going for. That's why it resonated so much with me. The 90s setting, lesbian theme, unfamiliarity when returning home after a long journey... I went to a talk with Steve Gaynor and I think we have very similar interests in the use of narrative in games design. Part of my dissertation was about Gone Home, I just really dig it.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I need to tell you all something. I personally believe that BloatedGuppy is arguing for the sake of arguing. What I mean by that...

ehhh I guess I mean that he enjoys arguments. He likes having an opinion and then enjoys trying to disprove someone's opinion and make his right. That isn't a bad thing.

I personally found his arguments in this thread to be hilarious. His responses are great.

I'm just confused because it seems clear as day that he doesn't really believe a lot of the stuff he's saying. I mostly think this because he keeps switching back and forth between arguments and changing sides. Honestly its kind of refreshing for a person to see both sides of the argument rather than his own.

Not to say that anyone here has a bad argument. I liked the majority of them and thought all of them had good points.

You all have a good day.

This is calumny sir! Pistols at dawn.

Actually scratch that, I'm a terrible shot. I really need to come up with a better dueling option.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You're right but I just think if everything in game design were gender-neutral there'd probably still be mostly men in the industry. I think everyone's an individual of course, but genders have tendencies. I know you're not arguing for a 50/50 split between male and female in the games industry but I think female representation has a limit. Of course we are nowhere NEAR that limit yet (the industry could do with a lot more women) but there comes a point where you won't get better representation of diverse demographics without being unfair (choosing people less qualified in job interviews, for example).

Oh heavens, yeah, I'm not looking to socially engineer developers to make sure it's the fucking United Colors of Benetton up in there, I just think it would be nice to see more voices in games than what we're presently getting. It's a mainstream entertainment medium, there are a lot of places to take it beyond what we've currently got. I like what we've got just fine, and I'm not going to like every new perspective, but that doesn't mean the exploration and diversity isn't worth having.

I'd love for certain companies to change things up to add some more spice to game development. Especially triple-A game developers. Though I think there are certain franchises that are allowed to (and should) make risks because even "low estimates" of their games' sales would make a profit. If GTA V had a female player character people would have still bought it (they should have made that risk to be honest).

I remember the girlfriend was annoyed that there were three protagonists and none of them were female. Might've missed a sale, there. On the plus side, GTA's loss was Saint's Row's gain, and I think she enjoyed the tenor of the latter series a lot more than she would have GTA's milieu.

I think it depends on the individual rather than the individual's gender. Phil Fish didn't get the same kind of criticism as say... Peter Molyneux (one got criticised for their games and the other got criticised for being an asshat).

Well that's the thing. Phil Fish gets criticized for being an asshat because he behaves like an asshat. Romero got criticized for being an inept blowhard because he was an inept blowhard. Molyneux gets criticized for over-promising and under-delivering because that is what he does. Hepler got criticized for being fat and for having a vagina, and somehow this ruined Dragon Age 2, a game she was barely involved with and was responsible for virtually none of the problems of.

There's a sentiment that women are "unwelcome" in the industry and people will use the fact that they're women to harass them. I don't know who said it but it was mentioned that "every woman (vocal woman?) in the tech industry will experience harassment" or something along those lines. I disagree strongly with it. Maybe it's just a fringe opinion, I don't know.

Well, I disagree with that too, since there's absolutely no way to substantiate it. I think there's probably a less hysterical way to present the question of women facing gender-based discrimination in the industry than to demand that it's 100%. "Gamer culture" definitely has its problems with women, one need look no further than the "Fake Geek Girl" furor to see it on display in all its sweaty, disheveled desperation, but it's hardly universal.

Or to be more succinct...they ARE unwelcome, but only by select individuals, and hardly by the industry as a whole.

I can see why she got criticised (without condoning the harassment for one second). People react badly to change. A guy got death threats for altering the bullet damage of an assault rifle in Black Ops 2. It sucks. It's the sign of an entitled gamer market.

Well, as before, I'm sure it was a mix of things. I'm sure some of the criticism was because people thought it was a genuinely terrible idea, some was from people who didn't like her writing and thought she shouldn't speak on any issues at all, some was from people who loathe change, some was from people who saw an overweight woman saying things and pulled out the knives.

I went to a talk with Steve Gaynor and I think we have very similar interests in the use of narrative in games design. Part of my dissertation was about Gone Home, I just really dig it.

Heh. Gaynor.

Oh god I'm a juvenile. I'm so sorry.

 

[WindKnight]

It's pretty obviously bottom up. I always find it rather odd that so many people believe that the money-hungry, anything-for-a-buck publishers that they spend every other thread demonizing are leaving billions of dollars on the table in the name of ideology.

There's a small, vocal segment of the internet that buys into this sort of stuff. Fortunately, people tend to age out of it.

Its more sort of shortsightedness and too narrow a focus than ideology. To bring up Jims pasta sauce analogy, their ignoring whole swathes of potential audience in an all or nothing gambit to try and be the one that goes gangbusters in a Modern Warfare sense.

Horror games are dead because they can't do MW numbers.

Adventure games are dead because they can't do MW numbers.

Tactical/strategy games are dead because they can't do MW numbers.

And yet all the above have done successfully and made profits when their not expected to or treated like they have to make MW numbers to succeed, and I'm more than willing to bet the same applies for stepping outside of how many publishers treat gender represntation in games.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

I purpose that someone does the job of making an all female staffed game development company that turns out something like 5 games a year filled exclusively with strong-female-characters just so we don't have to go through the same song-and-dance of arguing about representation. Now that is something I would Kickstart.

 

[Grampy_bone]

So you admit I have a point but attack me for generalizing.

What point, exactly? As we discussed you neither constructed nor supported anything resembling a coherent argument. You raged about "social justice warriors" and later rather amusingly "Marxists", and then mined a random nutbar doing something stupid as evidence that everything you were saying was justified. That is not good argumentative form. As someone making forays about logical fallacies, you should be cognizant of that.

1. People only complain about generalizations when they're negative. If I was claiming SJWs possess above average intelligence and nice haircuts, would you be attacking me with the same fervor?

I would dismiss it as equally intellectually bankrupt. I'm honestly not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you defending lazy generalizations?

2. It's false to claim exemption from criticism for trends. All dogs are unique, yet we can make many accurate predictions about dog behavior from collected observations and study. Indeed, SJWs show remarkable unity and solidarity, with swift punishments for defectors.

"Social Justice Warrior" is a pejorative invented with the intention to insult. You might as well argue that we can make accurate predictions about "spics" by collected observation and study. I'm sure you're bright enough to see where the problem with that line of thinking lies. I might also add there is nothing remotely scientific about the "observation and study" of cherry picking youtube videos or tumblr comments off the internet and using them as evidence of a nebulous and shadowy conspiracy.

3. Alex Lifshitz is not some random crank on the internet like me, he is a wealthy person with industry contacts, delivering a speech at a conference to a cheering crowd. Clearly someone is listening to him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization

You keep saying I'm wrong but I don't see any arguments to that effect, only misapplied fallacies, rhetorical evasions, links to unsourced wikipedia articles, and personal attacks. How much more are you going to skirt around the forum rules without directly calling me crazy? You repeat "generalization" over and over again in order to marginalize my position without actually refuting it, but then you say because I used to the word Marxist my ideas must be summarily dismissed. Is generalization only bad when I do it? Is the weather nice up there on your high horse?

So lets see what you did here; you used the word conspiracy to imply I was crazy and, shockingly, equated criticism of an elective worldview with racism. Wow.

I didn't say there was a conspiracy. Your words, not mine. I don't think there is a SJW conspiracy, only a SJW cult. You can't apply the slippery slope argument to condemnations of SJW ideology and compare it to racism because SJW is not a race. SJW is a self-applied label these people use to promote a specific worldview so yes, I can use their own labels to describe them and no, criticizing their ideology does not make me a bigot.

The example of Alex Lifshitz is useful not as proof of any kind of conspiracy but merely as an example of the SJW mentality. You say he's a random nutbar and his attitude is not common, but I don't see any indication that is true. You spend any amount of time on tumblr and Alex seems pretty tame in comparison. I don't buy the "it's a few bad apples" excuse because the SJW community seems to specifically attract nutbars while actively policing and excluding anyone who is sane or rational.

Here is a good testimony by an ex-SJW: http://i.imgur.com/FaNk3QH.jpg

To get back tot he original topic after you so purposefully derailed, my whole intention of bringing up Alex and SJWs was to show how they are operating under a top-down worldview. They think if that can gain control of the top they can force the bottom to fall into line, without understanding that everyone at the top is at the mercy of the customer, no matter who is in charge. There's no chance they will succeed but that doesn't mean they won't do some damage on the way. Alex Lifshitz is a producer in the game industry and has worked on several AAA titles, which means he has more influence than me or anyone else on this forum. That's disconcerting when he's promoting book-burning.

Another good example where the top-down mentality of SJWs ran into the brick wall of bottom-up reality was when all those "gamers are dead" articles were put up in a single day. You have to wonder, what did Leigh Alexander and all the other authors think was going to happen? Were all the straight white males going to just roll over, admit their privilege, apologize and line up for gender theory classes? Well, the backlash was palpable, the websites were boycotted, and their sponsors received angry phonecalls. This is an example of how the bottom punishes the top for not giving it what it wants. Unfortunately they aren't finished, there's another "gamers are dead" article right here on the escapist again. These things have the effect of fracturing the audience and dividing it, as people who once cooperated under similar interest find themselves separated by ancillary issues and at odds. This isn't good for anyone, least of all gaming sub culture itself. It's the same thing that happened with science academia in the 90s, its the same thing that happened with Atheism+, and now it's happening to gaming. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's just pattern recognition.

Its highly disingenuous for these people to come into the gaming world, start pointing fingers and handing out moral condemnations, and then have the temerity to claim victimhood and oppression when gamers tell them to get lost.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You keep saying I'm wrong but I don't see any arguments to that effect, only misapplied fallacies, rhetorical evasions, links to unsourced wikipedia articles, and personal attacks.

What personal attacks?

Which fallacies are misapplied, exactly? Explain how.

How much more are you going to skirt around the forum rules without directly calling me crazy?

Criticism of your argument =/= personal attack on you.

You repeat "generalization" over and over again in order to marginalize my position without actually refuting it, but then you say because I used to the word Marxist my ideas must be summarily dismissed.

By employing generalizations you marginalized your own argument, I merely pointed them out. Also, where did I say "Because you used the word Marxist your ideas must be summarily dismissed"?

So lets see what you did here; you used the word conspiracy to imply I was crazy and, shockingly, equated criticism of an elective worldview with racism. Wow.

No, I compared prejudice with prejudice. Do you want a dictionary link to the definition of "prejudice" or can I safely assume you're familiar with how it works?

I don't think there is a SJW conspiracy, only a SJW cult.

Goodness I'm sorry. Cult then. That's much more level headed.

SJW is a self-applied label

SJW is a pejorative.

The example of Alex Lifshitz is useful not as proof of any kind of conspiracy but merely as an example of the SJW mentality. You say he's a random nutbar and his attitude is not common, but I don't see any indication that is true.

Burden of proof in this scenario is on you as it was your example, but I'm sure you know that.