GamerGate's Image Problem

[aliengmr]

And with the Escapist's recent article on female Gamedevs discussing Gamergate, I imagine they're destined for the blacklist once again. I see they're already losing their minds about it a little, they dare not patronize an establishment that dares to impugn them in the slightest, after all.

My favorite lack-of-self-awareness quote out of the megathread at the moment?

As Archon tweeted we should use this thread as an opportunity to inform the female devs on what gamergate is. They are all reading it. Which also begs the question ... If they are reading it why did they give such uninformed answers ?

I mean... is it possible... juuuuuust possible... that someone might just come to an unflattering conclusion after honestly reading through the thread? That maybe... juuuuuust maybe... they might be coming off in the way being described? That they're neither lying or stupid or ill-informed and might... juuuuuust might... be honestly describing things as they see them?

Nah, feminazi conspiracy to destroy indie games through mailing lists. It's the only thing that makes sense.

This is really the main point. I mean while all this was going on the few developers that had commented on GG (Damion Schubert being an example) were saying the same exact thing.

If GG stands for anything at this point its about people seeing different things. They aren't misinformed, they just can't ignore what they've seen.

From the moment GG got moving it was an absolute mess. Even when the hastag debuted and started taking off it was a mess of information. The who's, what's, when's and why's were all in disarray. Even if you tried to ignore the bad stuff it was a mess. I mean fuck, Adam Baldwin? People often gave up right there trying to understand what the hell was going on.

It was just too much even without the conspiracy stuff. You can spend all day trying to clarify each event, but people saw those nasty things. The Zoe Quinn stuff was too personal for both sides. It doesn't matter how you try to place it in context of the larger scope. It was a hurt ex boyfriend retaliating against is ex-girlfriend for cheating on him. Male or Female, that is just TOO personal regardless which side you are on. We ALL have stories and that one was not a good place to start from.

This movement wasn't information based, it was personal and emotional. You can't change that.

 

[Buzz Killington_v1legacy]

edit: Now they're talking about going nuclear and boycotting all AA games this holiday season if they don't get their unspecified way, and sweet jesus that's adorable.

That is precious. You know what it's going to be like? It's going to be like those two alien races [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_races_and_species_in_The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#G.27Gugvuntts_and_Vl.27hurgs] in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy who got all mortally offended and sent a mighty battle fleet to attack Earth...where, due to a tragic error in estimating relative sizes, the entire fleet was summarily eaten by a small dog.

 

[aliengmr]

You know, I don't even care that I'm not reading through your tedious textwall. You came here and didn't want to participate in an active conversation on equal terms, and tell yourself you made a positive difference because you re-posted an essay you just posted to the megathread. That level of tone-deafness and refusal to discuss things on equal terms? It's part of the whole Image Problem we're actually here to discuss.

My apologies. Perhaps this wasn't the best place to post that. I do indeed feel there's an image problem, but part of that problem is how the narrative was originally spun against us in the first place by many of the media outlets. I've found that when people actually take the time and talk with us, their opinion changes slightly. They more they actually talk, and not just shut us out, the more they understand that the people who tarnished our name, aren't us to begin with.

What hurts us the most, is the fact that many of the media outlets only reported the harassment aspect of this. This was most people's initial exposure to #GamerGate were these articles. We don't have that sort of voice. We can't get our message out to that many people so fast and easily.

Really, unless these media outlets want to change their tune, there isn't much we can do besides what we're already doing. And that's continue to talk about this in a civil manner. @archon even mentioned over twitter, that one of these anonymous female devs said we're reacting in a civil manner, and that's doing great to wash away that image of hatred, misogyny, and harassment. I wouldn't be surprised if this is her first real interaction with #GamerGate, and not just the trolls using the cause a shield.

I'm sorry I cut in the middle of a conversation with a giant essay, but I think it's an important part of our image. I got carried away though, as @archon himself said I should post this to the forums. Maybe I kind of let that excitement get ahead of me, and I did so in the wrong manner. I'm sorry.

You are trying to rationalize and neatly organize a movement guided by emotions and politics. No amount of explaining is going to fix that.

Drop the hashtag and start a new one that is clearly defined. Don't target the journalists if you want to engage them. As long as GG is is waiting to pounce, those people you claim should be representing you, aren't going to say a word. Be transparent about wanting to start anew and people will be FAR more likely to back you.

This "Well they just weren't informed enough, sad." business won't win you any favors. You have legit concerns fine, but how is one to honestly engage an angry mob?

Its either that, or GG fades away as nothing more than toxic, emotional rant.

 

[R0guy]

Drop the hashtag and start a new one that is clearly defined. Don't target the journalists if you want to engage them.

Brilliant idea. So websites like Kotaku falsely accusing Brad wardell (CEO of Stardock) of sexual harrassement (which was proven false in court later on) which got his kid bullied at school and sent rape/death threats too, will just come around, apologise and never do it again as long as we stop holding them accountable for their actions. Brilliant.

Sure, let's go back to those happy, happy times of harrassing the developpers Assassins Creed, Divinity original sin, Skullgirls or Dragon crown or cards against humanity (which isn't even a freakin' video game) with our best buddies at Kotaku and Polygon, hand in hand, off into the sunset.

Nope.

 

[aliengmr]

Drop the hashtag and start a new one that is clearly defined. Don't target the journalists if you want to engage them.

Brilliant idea. So websites like Kotaku falsely accusing Brad wardell (CEO of Stardock) of sexual harrassement (which was proven false in court later on) which got his kid bullied at school and sent rape/death threats too, will just come around, apologise and never do it again as long as we stop holding them accountable for their actions. Brilliant.

Sure, let's go back to those happy, happy times of harrassing the developpers Assassins Creed, Divinity original sin, Skullgirls or Dragon crown or cards against humanity (which isn't even a freakin' video game) with our best buddies at Kotaku and Polygon, hand in hand, off into the sunset.

Nope.

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

If you want to yell and scream, by all means do so. Just don't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.

The tragedy is, whatever could have been done, can't, because GG can't stop listing all of its grievances.

Divinity:OS - critic: 87 user: 8.9
Skullgirls - critic: 83 user: 7.6
Dragon's Crown - critic: 82 user: 8.4
Assassins Creed - critic: 80 and up user: 6 and up

So why are you bringing them up again? Because it looks like they all weathered their storm of criticism quite well.

 

[AgedGrunt]

Been a gamer for 23+ years. At the end of the day, this entire thing started because a woman had sex with someone, and people got angry. In my mind, that's always going to be what I associate Gamer Gate with, and all the negative connotations that comes with it (as well as the stupid name, Gamer Gate? Seriously? It's fucking video games for christ's sake).

A gross simplification perhaps? Maybe, but I find a movement is only worth as much as what sparked it in the first place, and anything that uses the term SJW unironically isn't something I want to associate with, or be associated with.

So basically the first reply in the thread is what people really need to see: the superficial, prejudicial antagonists who have allergic reactions to GamerGate, and think pointing the finger back at them is the source.

The issue needing discussion isn't GamerGate for having an image problem. Have an objective look at the people who try to give GamerGate an image problem, in so much as they piss on its face.

Those above aren't exactly "gross simplifications". A gross simplification would have been to call GamerGate a bunch of people complaining about integrity. What you have is called an animus, and it's no better than what "game journalists", Cracked and people like Zoe have been doing to dismantle GG, marginalize gamers and anyone seen as a threat for calling them out for their corruption and bullshit.

If there's a good voice to be heard opposite the GG fence, they would say you're not someone they want to be associated with. Well, they would need to if these absurd opinions would ever give image problems to the social justice union, but from experience it's established that, when holding the right positions you basically have diplomatic immunity to say whatever you want.

 

[R0guy]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

If you want to yell and scream, by all means do so. Just don't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.

The tragedy is, whatever could have been done, can't, because GG can't stop listing all of its grievances.

Divinity:OS - critic: 87 user: 8.9
Skullgirls - critic: 83 user: 7.6
Dragon's Crown - critic: 82 user: 8.4
Assassins Creed - critic: 80 and up user: 6 and up

So why are you bringing them up again? Because it looks like they all weathered their storm of criticism quite well.

My favourite part of you post is where you ignored Brad Wardell's son getting bullied and threatened or Cards Against Humanity creator Max Temkin being accused of being a rapist.

Also on the topic of Divinity:OS one of the devs had this to say: http://orogion.deviantart.com/journal/Save-the-Boob-plate-380891149

The funny thing is that the Brad Wardell and Max temkin ordeals happened long before #gamergate. And the exact same responses were made by the journos: deleted comments and accusations of mysoginy. We (those who complained) didn't have our own hashtag back then.

Contrast that to the Escapist now, particularly one of the editors, Greg Tito. He's completely convinced of all the anti-GamerGate stuff and yet, somehow, he was able to admit he was wrong about making false allegations against Wizardchan and updated an article to reflect that. #GamerGate is completely leaving TheEscapist alone. Now it's the other-side, who btw don't seem to be concerned at all about changing names after ruining careers and giving trauma to some developpers' child, who DDOSed these forums.


Or here's a thought, since we're on the topic of sweeping generalisations, how about you and those so-called journalists distance yourself from #killallmen, or report on #notyourshield.

 

[TheLastSandwich]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

If you want to yell and scream, by all means do so. Just don't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.

.

I would like to point out that this is happening right now to the SJW's. I always wondered wether or not this would have happened naturally or if GamerGate is that actual occrunece.

 

[kyp275]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

Funny, and who are the ones who keep bringing up ZQ and Anita? Why don't you people stop nailing yourself to that cross?

 

[aliengmr]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

If you want to yell and scream, by all means do so. Just don't be surprised when people don't take you seriously.

The tragedy is, whatever could have been done, can't, because GG can't stop listing all of its grievances.

Divinity:OS - critic: 87 user: 8.9
Skullgirls - critic: 83 user: 7.6
Dragon's Crown - critic: 82 user: 8.4
Assassins Creed - critic: 80 and up user: 6 and up

So why are you bringing them up again? Because it looks like they all weathered their storm of criticism quite well.

My favourite part of you post is where you ignored Brad Wardell's son getting bullied and threatened or Cards Against Humanity creator Max Temkin being accused of being a rapist.

Also on the topic of Divinity:OS one of the devs had this to say: http://orogion.deviantart.com/journal/Save-the-Boob-plate-380891149

The funny thing is that the Brad Wardell and Max temkin ordeals happened long before #gamergate. And the exact same responses were made by the journos: deleted comments and accusations of mysoginy. We (those who complained) didn't have our own hashtag back then.

Contrast that to the Escapist now, particularly one of the editors, Greg Tito. He's completely convinced of all the anti-GamerGate stuff and yet, somehow, he was able to admit he was wrong about making false allegations against Wizardchan and updated an article to reflect that. #GamerGate is completely leaving TheEscapist alone. Now it's the other-side, who btw don't seem to be concerned at all about changing names after ruining careers and giving trauma to some developpers' child, who DDOSed these forums.


Or here's a thought, since we're on the topic of sweeping generalisations, how about you and those so-called journalists distance yourself from #killallmen, or report on #notyourshield.

How are you expecting to get justice when you can't stop adding things to the list?

Solution, never go to Kotaku. Anything else? Like I said you can keep yelling and throwing an endless stream of charges but its all just noise.

Unless you actually want something you have to stop regurgitating your list. Are you trying to pursue legal action? Then do it.

 

[aliengmr]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

Funny, and who are the ones who keep bringing up ZQ and Anita? Why don't you people stop nailing yourself to that cross?

I'll be serious. Was going to be snarky, but I won't.

Honest answer, is because it deeply effects how people see GamerGate. As the recent articles have shown. What GG hasn't seemed to grasp in all the yelling is how they were treated stained the entire movement.

If all GG wants is some sort of war, fine, go ahead. If you want actual change you have to actually engage.

 

[kyp275]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

Funny, and who are the ones who keep bringing up ZQ and Anita? Why don't you people stop nailing yourself to that cross?

I'll be serious. Was going to be snarky, but I won't.

Honest answer, is because it deeply effects how people see GamerGate. As the recent articles have shown. What GG hasn't seemed to grasp in all the yelling is how they were treated stained the entire movement.

If all GG wants is some sort of war, fine, go ahead. If you want actual change you have to actually engage.

Engagement is a two-way street. You can't expect the others to "engage" if you yourself keep doing the exact thing that you're decrying the others of doing. It'd be like someone telling another person that driving drunk is terrible, while drunk driving.

 

[R0guy]

How are you expecting to get justice when you can't stop adding things to the list?

Solution, never go to Kotaku. Anything else? Like I said you can keep yelling and throwing an endless stream of charges but its all just noise.

Unless you actually want something you have to stop regurgitating your list. Are you trying to pursue legal action? Then do it.

...And my favourite part of this post is the bit where you ignored what I said about the Escapist.

Greg Tito and Alexander Macris allowed #GamerGate discussions on their forums, apologised, righted their wrongs and promised to not repeat them. I like that justice. <3 noise. <3 TheEscapistMagazine. <3 #GamerGate.

 

[runic knight]

*regretful peek into the megathread* ...#Comicgate now? Did I miss some news about how comic book authors sometimes have one another's emails or how indie comic artists have to sleep with powerful bloggers or... the Spiderwoman cover? Seriously? This is the... you're fighting for the right to force Marvel to use crappy art just because you prefer it's ludicrous over-sexualization, if only because it pisses off the EssJay-Dubbs?

captcha: "Live Life." Good call, Captcha.

There's been periodic calls for a comic gate thing on comics forums by the odd loose GG cannon who's also into comics. I seldom see even a couple of posts in support. I believe comics culture has less of a knee jerk reaction to feminist and other critiques as they consider comics legitimate art, and criticism is the price of admission for leaving the kids table.

Comic demographics also trend 20 years older than gamer, so there's that too. There's less people whipped into a panic because they're confronting their first realization that other people see the world differently.

You know I read that, and then use google for 2 seconds to check things and I see stuff like this

http://www.theesa.com/facts/

saying that the average age of gamers is 31. Average age of most frequent game purchaser (read:core demographic) is 35.

You are saying the average comic book reader is in their 50's?

But please, do continue to dismiss gamergate as opposing feminist and not just, you know, what they actually have been claiming from the start in being opposition to a lack of ethical and professional behavior in gaming journalism itself by use of ideological bias and dishonest McCarthyism-like tactics to dismiss, discredit, deflect, defame and outright demonize in order to avoid addressing the very real concerns of their audience. Though I suppose fairness would dictate you could add "by use of feminist ideology in particular".

You DO realize that you're citing the same study that says 48% of all gamers are women right? The same study GGers tend to discredit because it includes casual gamers? The same industry-funded study?

Also, how do you know the most frequent game purchasers are core gamers? It would make more sense if core gamers were to tend to buy fewer longer games rather than many short ones in the way a casual gamer might. A casual gamer could buy 30 casual games on their iPhone for the price of a single core game, after all.

It wouldn't make sense for statistics including so-called casual gamers to have the core gamers be older than the average either. Casual gamers often are much older than core gamers and members of a different generation than that of the supposed core audience.

I am aware, I choose it because it seemed to be accepted and promoted by, well, lets just say social justice encourager. Furthermore it also mentioned the difference between "who plays most" as well as "who buys most" which would be the "core" gamer demographic. In both cases, his claim lead to people being in the 50's when you add 20 years though.

As for what makes them "core" gamers, that is easy. Financial weight of the demographic. If you buy gamers more frequently, you are contributing more and thus are more weighted in "importance" as an audience. This is especially true when you realize that the big 3 will sell a console at a loss just to get the game sales to make it up later on. That is why I call them "core" in this case.

Ignoring that "casual" is a stupid term to begin with, how would you define a core demographic in a business sense?

 

[aliengmr]

Or don't, keep dredging it all up.

If you want actual change, you all are going to have stop nailing yourselves to a cross over every single injustice, perceived or otherwise.

Funny, and who are the ones who keep bringing up ZQ and Anita? Why don't you people stop nailing yourself to that cross?

I'll be serious. Was going to be snarky, but I won't.

Honest answer, is because it deeply effects how people see GamerGate. As the recent articles have shown. What GG hasn't seemed to grasp in all the yelling is how they were treated stained the entire movement.

If all GG wants is some sort of war, fine, go ahead. If you want actual change you have to actually engage.

Engagement is a two-way street. You can't expect the others to "engage" if you yourself keep doing the exact thing that you're decrying the others of doing. It'd be like someone telling another person that driving drunk is terrible, while drunk driving.

You are right, and those journalists/bloggers, whatever you want to call them, aren't saying a word because, lets face it its only a matter of time before GG pins the the Kennedy assassination on them.

Your point is well made, but what about your part. There are plenty of big names out there that are willing to pursue change but can't because of the gamergate image. Its not about trying to show them how they were wrong, we're past that, its now down to whether or not the hashtag is more important than the corruption.

Pursue change or burn it all.

 

[runic knight]

*regretful peek into the megathread* ...#Comicgate now? Did I miss some news about how comic book authors sometimes have one another's emails or how indie comic artists have to sleep with powerful bloggers or... the Spiderwoman cover? Seriously? This is the... you're fighting for the right to force Marvel to use crappy art just because you prefer it's ludicrous over-sexualization, if only because it pisses off the EssJay-Dubbs?

captcha: "Live Life." Good call, Captcha.

There's been periodic calls for a comic gate thing on comics forums by the odd loose GG cannon who's also into comics. I seldom see even a couple of posts in support. I believe comics culture has less of a knee jerk reaction to feminist and other critiques as they consider comics legitimate art, and criticism is the price of admission for leaving the kids table.

Comic demographics also trend 20 years older than gamer, so there's that too. There's less people whipped into a panic because they're confronting their first realization that other people see the world differently.

You know I read that, and then use google for 2 seconds to check things and I see stuff like this

http://www.theesa.com/facts/

saying that the average age of gamers is 31. Average age of most frequent game purchaser (read:core demographic) is 35.

You are saying the average comic book reader is in their 50's?

But please, do continue to dismiss gamergate as opposing feminist and not just, you know, what they actually have been claiming from the start in being opposition to a lack of ethical and professional behavior in gaming journalism itself by use of ideological bias and dishonest McCarthyism-like tactics to dismiss, discredit, deflect, defame and outright demonize in order to avoid addressing the very real concerns of their audience. Though I suppose fairness would dictate you could add "by use of feminist ideology in particular".

I'm obviously talking about the more hardcore fan communities that cares about these things, you cited the amount of people who play games, total. I'm glad you know how to goggle, but your ability to find relevant statistics instead of grabbing the first thing that looks like it makes your point is lacking. I do appreciate the effort, though. The gamer community, the hardcore enthusiasts, average much younger than 31. Much as not everyone that goes out to see Transformers is not a cinema buff, not everyone that games is a gamer. The overall category would be "player".

I dismiss gamergate because I think they're incompetent as an overall movement, for the record. I don't feel the need to talk about it because a movement that can't do better than 40% support in their own demographic isn't going anywhere. You're totally unable to win over people who should be your allies because, as this thread suggests, you have an image problem, and are comically opposed to acknowledging it. Beyond maybe crushing some indie developers who are powerless in the grand scheme of things, gamergate will accomplish nothing due to their inability to make their case. The knee jerk reaction to feminism is less a cause to dismiss gamergate per say, and more a sign that the movement tends to get off on irrelevant tangents that gain them little.

I have no interest in opposing gamergate, I'm sure you'll collapse just fine on your own. I'm not even really talking about gamergate, I'm spitballing about probable reasons there's a larger number of gamers who have a trouble with girly stuff compared to other nerd culture communities. You are the one projecting gamergate into this. Granted, the thread is tangentially about discussing gamergate, but it's not like that's happening much anyway.

I cited 2 points of data in order to cover two possible ways a business might define their demographics: Total size and profitability. If you look back, you will see I also cited the amount of people who buy games regularly, just to be sure I covered what you might have meant. If I still missed it though, please, define for me how the core demographics would be viewed from a business sense if not either by size itself (number of customers defined by people in the demographic who buy games, i.e. that first number I gave) or profitability (number of repeat customers, i.e. the second number I gave).

Because right now, you don't actually have any backing for your claim, just sort of trying to get it to agree with your preconceived notion in order for that to support your overall claim. And that just isn't going to fly. Right now all you have done is go "oh, not that, I meant something else that I will not provide a factual backing to." So please, define "hardcore gamers" for me and then provide some evidence of that being a relevant classification. Because the argument you started to make was that the comic industry's core demographic was "about 20 years older" then gaming's. And I'll be honest, that is just full of shit.

So if you meant "hardcore demographic", how do you define that and since we need to compare apples to apples, how do you define that for both gaming and comics.
If you just meant core demographics, how else would you define them if not by the two examples I mentioned before, both of which would put "core comic fans" into their 50's by your statement?

Your rejection of gamergate for those reasons provided though suggests you either don't actually have a clue what it is (as suggested by your 40% statistic thing since as a consumer revolt, we wouldn't all agree about what we feel is the exact goal, but rather it would be a nebulous concept such as "Journalism and parasitic SJw and ethics" which would require you add the total number of a few options of the rather poorly worded poll because you try to pull a number), can't look beyond the media portrayal (as the image remark itself suggests since the largest reason the image is bad is because of the constant slander and misrepresentation of it by the media individuals implicated and under scrutiny), or simply do not want to give up whatever per-conceived view you started with. Hell, go and reread the first post and see who first suggested this thread in the first place before trying to tell me that I am "comically unaware" of the image problem.

Your final paragraph does suggest the "simply refuses to abandon per-conceived bias" though, as you are the one projecting your views of the community onto gamergate itself (which isn't "tangentially" related to the topic, it is the reason. Hell, it is in the thread name).

Still, this seems more like you just wanted to post something like "lol gamers are losers" and try to cite a very poorly backed excuse to justify it while taking pot-shots at gamergate as a whole. I'm sorry, but no.

 

[RexMundane]

Serves me right, I leave the thread for the evening to try and have some kind of life and it gets overrun shouting down dissent all over again. Dunno why I expected any different, really.

Reading the megathread is just silly at this point, they're back on attacking Sterling over godknowswhat, NPR and Escapist are headed for the blacklist for daring to be unflattering, Mass Effect 2 over somethingorother, they're talking about Zoe and Anita and Leigh again and pretending they're not, like usual, so I dunno anymore. Pointing out the asaninity of it at this point has itself become asanine. There hadn't been anything worth addressing out of this madness in what feels like years now.

An observation I've had numerous times before is that People remember the wrong damn part of the movie Network. They remember the "Mad as Hell" rant, and literally nothing else. But you watch it, and it's obvious that Beale isn't the hero of that movie, he's the tragic figure because he's allowed to think he's the hero. I mean, you watch the scene yourself [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q], it's clearly showing how unhinged and rambling he is, all over the place with random greivances, and once he just keeps repeating the "Mad as Hell" line, the network knows they hit easily exploited paydirt, and out in the world everyone's doing it too.

And why do they do that? Because they agree with his pointless ramblings? Because he made anything like a coherent argument? No, because the fact is that anger is fun. Him and his audience get to think that anger is effective and useful, in spite of the whole damn movie demonstrating that no, wow, it really really isn't, that it's just a way to get people excited while keeping them ineffectual.

Beale's position becomes that of one freak in a sideshow when he gets his new program after the rant, but has convinced himself, and his audience, that they're powerful and just and in the right in all things. So he eventually whips them into a frenzy about cancelling a business deal where Saudis are buying American businesses or something, it's been a while and I can't remember details. They successfully stop it, but Beale's network needs to reign him in.

At this point we get what I think is the real "defining moment" of the movie, Ned Beatty delivering "You Have Meddled With The Primal Forces of Nature, Mr. Beale!" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKkRDMil0bw] Which starts out where you're thinking Beale is getting chewed out by the boss, but you eventually come to realize the cold, logical reality that the world Beale lives in, with great enemies and heroic legacies of fighting against oppressive foreign concerns, is largely a fairy tale. That Beatty, while not a good guy, isn't evil either, and his worldview is, while arguably perverse and fixated on currency, more rational, less emotional, and working towards everyone getting along through free flowing commerce rather than fighting phantom enemies and fixating on ill-defined ideologies and inflated sense of self-worth. Beatty, wrong as he arguably is, is ultimately trying to help people, while Beale can only ever hope to frustrate them.

Beale comes to realize that all the rage which filled him and fueled him was valueless, and ultimately amounted to frustrating things instead of fixing them. People love to be angry because it's simple, and don't like to fix things because it takes more effort. It's simple sociological tricks like that that FoxNews and Breitbart and Alex Jones exploit to get people watching constantly, because anger is fun, it's easy, it lets you think you're affecting something just by screaming at people. And boy, are you not. Rage is silly, it's pathetic, it's people at their worst and weakest. It's a refusal to fix something when it's more fun to break it even further because that will show it who's boss. It's Basil Fawlty giving his car a damn good thrashing [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78b67l_yxUc] for breaking down. Yes it feels right, it feels good, cathartic, empowering... but it's all you have, and when you get tired, and you will, because of course you will, you're left with the same broken thing you could have been trying to fix this whole time instead of raging blindly.

edit: kept adding bits, think I'm done now.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Been a gamer for 23+ years. At the end of the day, this entire thing started because a woman had sex with someone, and people got angry. In my mind, that's always going to be what I associate Gamer Gate with, and all the negative connotations that comes with it (as well as the stupid name, Gamer Gate? Seriously? It's fucking video games for christ's sake).

A gross simplification perhaps? Maybe, but I find a movement is only worth as much as what sparked it in the first place, and anything that uses the term SJW unironically isn't something I want to associate with, or be associated with.

So basically the first reply in the thread is what people really need to see: the superficial, prejudicial antagonists who have allergic reactions to GamerGate, and think pointing the finger back at them is the source.

The issue needing discussion isn't GamerGate for having an image problem. Have an objective look at the people who try to give GamerGate an image problem, in so much as they piss on its face.

Those above aren't exactly "gross simplifications". A gross simplification would have been to call GamerGate a bunch of people complaining about integrity. What you have is called an animus, and it's no better than what "game journalists", Cracked and people like Zoe have been doing to dismantle GG, marginalize gamers and anyone seen as a threat for calling them out for their corruption and bullshit.

If there's a good voice to be heard opposite the GG fence, they would say you're not someone they want to be associated with. Well, they would need to if these absurd opinions would ever give image problems to the social justice union, but from experience it's established that, when holding the right positions you basically have diplomatic immunity to say whatever you want.

'Marginalise gamers'

Lol yeah, a'reet.

If you took the time to read the entire thread, instead of getting all excited at the first post you saw, you'd notice someone explains the the whole thing to me in greater detail several posts down, and I actually agree with them.

But that's fine, you keep on going ;3

 

[aliengmr]

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/TomBattey/20140923/226276/

Just wanted to post something interesting about art and criticism.

This seems to be major issue and it explains things very well.

 

[jonc83]

...snip...

People love to be angry because it's simple, and don't like to fix things because it takes more effort. It's simple sociological tricks like that that FoxNews and Breitbart and Alex Jones exploit to get people watching constantly, because anger is fun, it's easy, it lets you think you're affecting something just by screaming at people. And boy, are you not. Rage is silly, it's pathetic, it's people at their worst and weakest. It's a refusal to fix something when it's more fun to break it even further because that will show it who's boss. It's Basil Fawlty giving his car a damn good thrashing [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78b67l_yxUc] for breaking down. Yes it feels right, it feels good, cathartic, empowering... but it's all you have, and when you get tired, and you will, because of course you will, you're left with the same broken thing you could have been trying to fix this whole time instead of raging blindly.

edit: kept adding bits, think I'm done now.

Nicely said. It's a difficult thing to do and requires a level of self-awareness which most of us lack.

Aristotle phrased it roughly as:
It is easy to fly into a passion - anybody can do that - but to be angry with the right person to the right extent and at the right time with the right object and in the right way - that is not easy, and it is not everyone who can do it.