"We are not your shield"? Gamergate, you need a new motto.

[WhiteNachos]

If I didn't know anything about #Shamergate, "we are not your shield" would be meaningless to me.

My god you are so clever with those alternate nicknames for gamergate. Like this and lamergate, I mean my god how many brain cells did it take to come up with that one. This is almost as clever as that time someone called liberals, liebrals or that time someone called a bunch of people sheeple (get it it's a combination of sheep and people) and told them to wake up. /s

Anyway to the OP not your shield just says to me "you can't use us to defend yourself". It may seem passive agressive if its addressed to everyone (like any 'not your ___' hashtag) but hopefully they're addressing a specific person when they use it.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Bah, minorities are only useful to gamergate so long as they can use us to bash journalists they deem as journalisticly corrupt.

I cannot wait for 3 months from now when minorities start pondering lack of diversity in gaming and it will be met with jokes like "maybe we should have a latino, bisexual, androgynous appearing dinosuar women and everyone will be happy", and "maybe if you guys were a larger demographic or didn't buy GTA and NBA all the time we would ponder even acknowledging your existence in videogames.

Funny you mention GTA because they've had a playable character of every major race except Arabic. And if we're talking non-playable characters (which is all it would take to acknowledge their existence) then there's lots of those. Oh but does that not count if they're not the protagonist.

Oh here's the best one "It doesn't matter what the race is!" which only ever crops up in threads asking for different races of protags because if they truly didn't care they wouldn't feel the need to say anything of the sort at all in that thread.

Yeah no one ever replies to say that they disagree with the OP and to tell them that their complaints don't matter if that's what they think. /s

So please. Imnotyourshield? More like Imnotyourweapon. I'll believe it when y'all actually geniunely care about us in videogmes outside of bashing game journos.

The whole movement is about gaming journalism, what you want them to stop and talk about you some more just because?

 

[Something Amyss]

My god you are so clever with those alternate nicknames for gamergate. Like this and lamergate, I mean my god how many brain cells did it take to come up with that one. This is almost as clever as that time someone called liberals, liebrals or that time someone called a bunch of people sheeple (get it it's a combination of sheep and people) and told them to wake up. /s

Apologies, friend, a harmless bit of wordplay appears to have really set you off. Sorry I offended you so much.

 

[Dragonbums]

Funny you mention GTA because they've had a playable character of every major race except Arabic. And if we're talking non-playable characters (which is all it would take to acknowledge their existence) then there's lots of those. Oh but does that not count if they're not the protagonist.

Because clearly we as a minority group should be lauding well written minority characters in videogames who also happen to be hard core criminals. A perception that plagues us in real life as well and often has dire consequences. The most positive example I can think of is Jacob from Mass Effect and he was as boring as a cut out piece of wood.

EDIT: Also seriously? We should all just be content with background and side characters while you all have the protagonists? Talk about giving the scraps to the dogs.

The whole movement is about gaming journalism, what you want them to stop and talk about you some more just because?

I'm specifically talking about gamergate in relation to #notyourshield.

 

[WhiteNachos]

My god you are so clever with those alternate nicknames for gamergate. Like this and lamergate, I mean my god how many brain cells did it take to come up with that one. This is almost as clever as that time someone called liberals, liebrals or that time someone called a bunch of people sheeple (get it it's a combination of sheep and people) and told them to wake up. /s

Apologies, friend, a harmless bit of wordplay appears to have really set you off. Sorry I offended you so much.

I'm not offended just annoyed.
I just want the level of discourse to have some degree of maturity to it. This reminds me of the people who use the phrase libturd ever other second. I mean at some point you gotta ask if they want an actual conversation or if they just want to pat themselves on the back all day.

 

[WhiteNachos]

Funny you mention GTA because they've had a playable character of every major race except Arabic. And if we're talking non-playable characters (which is all it would take to acknowledge their existence) then there's lots of those. Oh but does that not count if they're not the protagonist.

Because clearly we as a minority group should be lauding well written minority characters in videogames who also happen to be hard core criminals.

Please, like you would've complained if Walter White was an Asian or if the cast of the Godfather had all been minorities. But you just keep moving those goalposts.

A perception that plagues us in real life as well and often has dire consequences.

So that means you can't enjoy it in fiction? I'm a guy does mean I shouldn't enjoy the antics of fictional men that are complete perverts? How about male criminals? After all the idea that men are violent and aggressive does have negative real life consequences. Or maybe I can still enjoy those characters if the story doesn't act like this is typical male behavior.

EDIT: Also seriously? We should all just be content with background and side characters while you all have the protagonists? Talk about giving the scraps to the dogs.

That's what I said. If you'll recall you said that video game companies are refusing to acknowledge the existence of minorities. I was saying that they aren't since a lot of game characters are minorities. Hell in reality all they would have to do to acknowledge the existence of minorities is to have them as NPCs, or just have the white characters talk about them. I was pointing out how ridiculous your hyperbole was.

 

[Verlander]

snip

I'm going to have to cut this conversation off, because it's long, and soon I'll be going into more details than I would when I charge. I'm an industry analyst and business consultant (albeit generally for larger companies than games companies). If you believe that any industry is good at reaching all aspects of the community then you're mistaken - I'd be out of a job if they were. What you might call the current market, or the proven market is not how games companies think of the situation, and isn't right. I did a lot of work with King just a few months ago, and looked into the different game genres in great detail - the chart you provided is yet again a screen shot - the potential market looks a LOT different. The shooter market isn't a male dominated because women don't like the concept, it's male dominated because women don't like the games.

I've seen many of the gamer gate guys try to convince me that "this is how the market is, so treat us better", but the truth is that in being treated better the market got this way, which is unfavourable on a business level.

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

It is very pithy and to the point. I am a minority, but the way sjws label me, you'd think I was an affluent white male.

They constantly claim they are doing this for my own good. This is why #NotYourShield is needed. We don't want to be patronized by sjws claiming to speak on our behalf.

Also, my new favorite term to emerge from this whole debacle: "Weaponized minorities"

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

snip

I'm going to have to cut this conversation off, because it's long, and soon I'll be going into more details than I would when I charge. I'm an industry analyst and business consultant (albeit generally for larger companies than games companies). If you believe that any industry is good at reaching all aspects of the community then you're mistaken - I'd be out of a job if they were. What you might call the current market, or the proven market is not how games companies think of the situation, and isn't right. I did a lot of work with King just a few months ago, and looked into the different game genres in great detail - the chart you provided is yet again a screen shot - the potential market looks a LOT different. The shooter market isn't a male dominated because women don't like the concept, it's male dominated because women don't like the games.

I've seen many of the gamer gate guys try to convince me that "this is how the market is, so treat us better", but the truth is that in being treated better the market got this way, which is unfavourable on a business level.

Aside from the one woman I used to raid with who was a god at CS, there are very few women who are interested in shooters. Compare this to movies. How many women go out to see action movies compared to men? Conversely, how many men go out to see romcoms compared to women? There are many ways to make games that appeal to women, but forcing a genre that women, time and again, have proven they don't like is a foolhardy business decision.

Instead of arguing in a vacuum, where anecdotal evidence and stereotypes abound, why not just do some more focus testing? Find out what female gamers actually want. Ten to one, it'll probably be some kind of pokemon/RPG hybrid. Nearly all of my female gamer friends are into that kind of stuff.

 

[Verlander]

Aside from the one woman I used to raid with who was a god at CS, there are very few women who are interested in shooters. Compare this to movies. How many women go out to see action movies compared to men? Conversely, how many men go out to see romcoms compared to women? There are many ways to make games that appeal to women, but forcing a genre that women, time and again, have proven they don't like is a foolhardy business decision.

Instead of arguing in a vacuum, where anecdotal evidence and stereotypes abound, why not just do some more focus testing? Find out what female gamers actually want. Ten to one, it'll probably be some kind of pokemon/RPG hybrid. Nearly all of my female gamer friends are into that kind of stuff.

You understand the irony of this, right? Where you use evidence from your limited sphere of experience to comment on what other people want, while criticisng me for using "anecdotal evidence"?

I don't need to prove anything, the games industry will change, and evolve over time, out of necessity if nothing else. I just would like people to stop banging on about how boys should get more attention in this industry.

 

[Dragonbums]

Please, like you would've complained if Walter White was an Asian or if the cast of the Godfather had all been minorities. But you just keep moving those goalposts.

I find it hypocritical that in the same sentence you accuse me of shifting goal posts you bring up the topic of race swapping well established characters when I never even brought that up in the first place.

So that means you can't enjoy it in fiction?

Maybe? There are plenty of things people can't enjoy in fiction. Shitty stereotypes that we have to deal with all the time being one of them.

I'm a guy does mean I shouldn't enjoy the antics of fictional men that are complete perverts? How about male criminals?

And yet you have a huge selection of games featuring white men that do not fit any of the above descriptors. The same luxury cannot be said for minority characters and sexualities so it's not even really a equal comparison.

After all the idea that men are violent and aggressive does have negative real life consequences.

You know that I'm talking about a race specifically. Because violent minority people have it a lot worse off than the stereotype of violent men in general.

Or maybe I can still enjoy those characters if the story doesn't act like this is typical male behavior.

Good for you.

I was saying that they aren't since a lot of game characters are minorities.

Which is implying that we should be content with being nothing but forgettable side characters while you guys get to have the limelight. You can change up the way you say it all you want. It doesn't change the core message.

Hell in reality all they would have to do to acknowledge the existence of minorities is to have them as NPCs, or just have the white characters talk about them. I was pointing out how ridiculous your hyperbole was.

My hyperbole was far from ridiculous. You just don't want to really admit that I have a point. After all the best examples you gave of prominent minority characters in videogames consisted of GTA and numerous side characters.


But you know, this comment proves exactly what I'm talking about. We as minorities are only useful to you so long as it can be used for Gamergate against journalists. But man do y'all ever like to shove us under the bus big time otherwise.

 

[Schadrach]

having never heard of it before it comes across as a negative when you first hear someone say it. not a good start

essentially it was invented on 4chan as a way to prove it wasn't about misogyny, and was started by white dudes pretending to be women and POC in an astroturf (IE fake grass roots) campaign. not sure how far its gotten though.

It did start on 4chan, but the rest of that is bollocks.

Here's the actual origin of #notyourshield:

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261346918

Anonymous Tue 02 Sep 2014 23:56:48 No.261346918 Report
Quoted By: >>261347051 >>261347184 >>261347260 >>261347271 >>261347446 >>261347503 >>261347529 >>261347751 >>261348012 >>261348110 >>261348139 >>261348303 >>261348642 >>261348920 >>261348990 >>261349447
WHO /MINORITY/ HERE? I'm like 2/3 of the things these faggots say they are fighting for, and when I engage them on Twitter (WITH MY FUCKING PERSONAL ACCOUNT) they ignore me. Jesus Christ this is getting frustrating, I might as well be a white male for these faggots.

replied to with

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261347271

Anonymous Tue 02 Sep 2014 23:59:14 No.261347271 Report
Quoted By: >>261347429 >>261347529 >>261347843 >>261347893 >>261347997 >>261349447
>>261347051
>>261346918
Something like
>#NotYourShield
And demand the SJWs stop using you as a shield to deflect genuine criticism

That post is the first appearance of #notyourshield anywhere.

A couple of other replies:

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261347843

Anonymous Wed 03 Sep 2014 00:03:32 No.261347843 Report
Quoted By: >>261347995 >>261348483 >>261348647
>>261347271
>>261347271
>>261347271

This actually seems like a really good fucking idea. But on the other hand, I don't think we should make an active push to "weaponize" the women, non-cis, and non-white ethnicities that are on our side. It would be helpful for more of them to come forward and make themselves heard (as some already have), but they should only do so on their own terms, not because we're pressuring them.

Otherwise we become no better than companies like Bioware and the very people we're fighting against.

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261348647

Anonymous Wed 03 Sep 2014 00:09:01 No.261348647 Report
>>261347843
Its up to them to come forward with it. I'm sure many non-white-cis-male anons here are tired of these asshats using them against themselves

Maybe you'd like this too:

Spoiler

 

[WhiteNachos]

Please, like you would've complained if Walter White was an Asian or if the cast of the Godfather had all been minorities. But you just keep moving those goalposts.

I find it hypocritical that in the same sentence you accuse me of shifting goal posts you bring up the topic of race swapping well established characters when I never even brought that up in the first place.

Point is that there's been lots of great characters who were criminals. Being a criminal does not give a character less depth.

So that means you can't enjoy it in fiction?

Maybe? There are plenty of things people can't enjoy in fiction. Shitty stereotypes that we have to deal with all the time being one of them.

So any time a black character is a criminal it re-inforces the idea that all black people are criminals?

I'm a guy does mean I shouldn't enjoy the antics of fictional men that are complete perverts? How about male criminals?

And yet you have a huge selection of games featuring white men that do not fit any of the above descriptors. The same luxury cannot be said for minority characters and sexualities so it's not even really a equal comparison.

How big is huge exactly?

After all the idea that men are violent and aggressive does have negative real life consequences.

You know that I'm talking about a race specifically. Because violent minority people have it a lot worse off than the stereotype of violent men in general.

Men are a minority, in the US at least. And knock it off with this oppression Olympics bullshit. Who has it worse is subjective and trying to act like you have it so much worse is not helping anyone. Men get more prison time than women for the same crimes, so it really doesn't matter if other minorities have it worse.

E: What I meant was, men have their problems and you can't act like they are insignificant. And if you want to say violent minority characters perpetuate the stereotype then the smae is true of violent male characters.

I was saying that they aren't since a lot of game characters are minorities.

Which is implying that we should be content with being nothing but forgettable side characters while you guys get to have the limelight. You can change up the way you say it all you want. It doesn't change the core message.

Will you stop with the straw men? You said games won't acknowledge the existence of minorities and I'm saying that's bullshit. Nothing more, nothing less.

Hell in reality all they would have to do to acknowledge the existence of minorities is to have them as NPCs, or just have the white characters talk about them. I was pointing out how ridiculous your hyperbole was.

My hyperbole was far from ridiculous. You just don't want to really admit that I have a point.

You don't have a point. That's becoming more and more obvious when you say bullshit like this:

After all the best examples you gave of prominent minority characters in videogames consisted of GTA and numerous side characters.

At no point did I say this was all I could come up with in terms of non-white characters. Ever. I brought up GTA because you brought up GTA. You never challenged me to come up with more and now you're acting like this is all I can do?

But you know, this comment proves exactly what I'm talking about. We as minorities are only useful to you so long as it can be used for Gamergate against journalists.

WTF are you talking about? The whole movement is against game journalists, it's not there to demand more non-white characters or whatever. This is like saying "minorities are only useful to the pro-life movement so long as we can fight abortion". It's nonsensical.

Oh and I'm not even part of gamergate.

But man do y'all ever like to shove us under the bus big time otherwise.

So disagreeing with you is shoving you under the bus?

 

[Something Amyss]

I just want the level of discourse to have some degree of maturity to it.

And yet, you went the same route yourself. Not to mention, you don't particularly have a good track record for mature discourse. But even if you did, responding to offhand comments in the fashion you did in the name of "maturity" is like running over people in the name of safe driving. It's massively hypocritical.

Still, if you want quality discourse, I'd recommend you live by example, rather than complaining about the same methods you're willing to use.

 

[WhiteNachos]

I just want the level of discourse to have some degree of maturity to it.

And yet, you went the same route yourself.

I did not call you names like a 2nd grader. I was sarcastic and that's it. Then I had some actual discussion.

Not to mention, you don't particularly have a good track record for mature discourse.

And you seem to dismiss everyone who disagrees with you, so I'm not buying your claims about me.

But even if you did, responding to offhand comments in the fashion you did in the name of "maturity" is like running over people in the name of safe driving. It's massively hypocritical.

Slightly hypocritical, I could've been nicer but oh well, I still think it's not as a bad as lamergate. At least I'm making an argument rather then just insulting people.

 

[Dragonbums]

Point is that there's been lots of great characters who were criminals. Being a criminal does not give a character less depth.

Great. And I never said criminal characters lack depth either. The original thing I was talking about is why the black gaming community isn't going to uphold a well written black criminal with praise.

So any time a black character is a criminal it re-inforces the idea that all black people are criminals?

Have you looked in the Ferguson threads?

How big is huge exactly?

Give me a fucking break.

Men are a minority, in the US at least.

Wow, a minority by 2 whole percentage points. Such a huge fucking difference.

And knock it off with this oppression Olympics bullshit.

I simply love it when the most catered to group has to resort to "Opression Olympics" tactic when you yourself tried to claim minority of men when said minority is such a small gap it's not even worth nothing outside of interesting fact statistics.

Who has it worse is subjective

Only subjective if your like to ignore statistics and trends that tend to happen to happen most often to only a particular group of people. Like black people historically getting longer jail sentences than their white counterparts for often times the same crime.

and trying to act like you have it so much worse is not helping anyone.

I suppose your in any danger?

Men get more prison time than women for the same crimes,

Have you looked into the severity of those crimes? If a man and a women both did drugs and the man had significantly higher portion of drugs on them than the women than it's obvious who's going to be doing more jail time.


Oh, but I see what your doing here- for someone accusing me of shifting goal posts, you sure were quick to turn this conversation from minorities in videogames to social issues in real life.
Going on about how men are treated more unfairly than women in the crime world while also simoultaneously condemming me for playing the "Opression Olympics." Perhaps you may want to preach what you speak? So I think I'm done commenting on this front.

Will you stop with the straw men?

What was the strawman?

You said games won't acknowledge the existence of minorities and that's bullshit.

No, I said that whenver we complain about lack of minority protagonists in videogames I noted that time and time again we get told the statistics bullshit that justifies why game devs and pubs won't acknowledge our existence outside of Fifa, NBA, NFL, and GTA

You don't have a point.

You have a pattern of saying that to anyone who just so happens to be on the advocating side of inclusiveness in videogames.

At no point did I say this was all I could come up with in terms of non-white characters.

But you did. You said not even a couple of posts ago that minorities exist in videogames as side characters and GTA and that totally means we are equally represented in videogames and we should stop whining because everything is A-Okay.

I brought up GTA because you brought up GTA.

You brought up GTA as an example of a character we seemingly ignore. So no, you were the one that brought it up first.

You never challenged me to come up with more and now you're acting like this is all I can do?

Your the one that made the claim that we are well represented in videogames in my response to how we are on the wayside of videogame representation. So yeah, I kind of expect you to put the petal to the medal and give me better examples outside of GTA games and side characters.

WTF are you talking about? The whole movement is against game journalists,

And #notyourshield is gamergates weapon to point at journalists they don't like but when we ask for more representation in videogames we get confronted with this nonsense. We are only as useful as long as you can continue to heckle Kotaku journalist for as long as possible.

it's not there to demand more non-white characters or whatever.

Never claimed as such. Then again the fact that you do shows that you completely missed the point of my original comment anyway.

This is like saying "minorities are only useful to the pro-life movement so long as we can fight abortion". It's nonsensical.

Comparing apples to oranges here.

Oh and I'm not even part of gamergate.

I really don't care?

So disagreeing with you is shoving you under the bus?

Making up excuse by pulling the "Oppression Olympics" tactics, claiming I have no point in regards to minority representation in videogames and all in all deliberately misunderstanding my main comment so you can go on another rant about how wrong minorities are about complaining about their place in videogames is a bonifide example of shoving us under the bus.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm going to have to cut this conversation off, because it's long, and soon I'll be going into more details than I would when I charge.

Meaning you're opting not to deal with the facts I presented and responding instead in generalities? I get if you just don't want to put the work into it. But I'm also a professional who charges hundreds of dollars per hour for my time with major companies and I still put what would otherwise be a billable effort into my post to you. So I'm not sure what we do outside of this thread really matters to discussion as an excuse. Your time is not more important than mine. If you don't want to put the time in then don't. But don't dismiss my results and talk on like I didn't present any.

I'm an industry analyst and business consultant (albeit generally for larger companies than games companies). If you believe that any industry is good at reaching all aspects of the community then you're mistaken - I'd be out of a job if they were.

Look, I took industry analysis courses too and have had to do it myself. I get what you're trying to do but I didn't say they reach all aspects of the community well. Not only am I sure that there are still blue ocean strategies to pull but I'm certain some aspects aren't being reached. What I am saying, however, is that it isn't advantageous to attempt to reach some aspects of the community at the cost of alienating other aspects of the community. Again, the panty hose company making their entire line of panty hose more ball-friendly for the small proportion of men who wear them at the cost of some comfort of the women who are the vast majority of consumers of stockings just doesn't make sense. Producing a smaller secondary line to see if that demand is viable is instead a better decision to make. This analogy should apply to any industry that clear and distinct preferences of qualities of the product differ amongst genders or any divided groups. Books, movies and TV have figured this out. It's time to accept that video games face the same sort of genre issues amongst genders as the other story-telling industries face.

There is a different problem though. Interactive media has trouble making non-action games fun. So there's going to need to be some innovation to figure out how to make romance and dramatic games more enjoyable to appeal to audiences. So that's something additional to contribute.

What you might call the current market, or the proven market is not how games companies think of the situation, and isn't right. I did a lot of work with King just a few months ago, and looked into the different game genres in great detail - the chart you provided is yet again a screen shot - the potential market looks a LOT different. The shooter market isn't a male dominated because women don't like the concept, it's male dominated because women don't like the games.

Then how would you explain the same genre preference existing across movies and literature? Why do you believe that women would start magically enjoying action games when they show a marked decrease in preference of action films over drama and romance?

Why do you believe this case is different despite the numbers already showing it's the same? You can't force women to favor violent action games as a gender just by slapping a breast laden skin on the protagonist. The nature of the entire game has to change into something less action-y which in turn damage the much larger male audience's enjoyment of it. You're advocating ball-friendly stockings as the main product here when we really just need a separate line.

Men and women are buying games and they do have different preferences. Male demographic is not only larger, but the males also spend a larger amount per individual (the NDP group's study shows that the main core gamers are mostly male and spend twice as much).

If you're developing an action game and trying to capture female consumers then maybe you should rethink the "action" component before anything else.

I've seen many of the gamer gate guys try to convince me that "this is how the market is, so treat us better", but the truth is that in being treated better the market got this way, which is unfavourable on a business level.

The data I showed indicates and actual difference in preference between genders. The same differences we see in movies, television, and even literature preferences.

You're pretending like all genders have the same preference in genres but this isn't the case. I get that it sounds offensive or like I'm trying to push the buck off on nature. But we shouldn't be afraid of facts, especially not as analysts. Analysts who are afraid of facts should be out of work analysts. That's what my old boss used to tell me anyways.

 

[WhiteNachos]

So any time a black character is a criminal it re-inforces the idea that all black people are criminals?

Have you looked in the Ferguson threads?

Are there people in those threads saying that they think all black people are thugs because of some piece of media? The question wasn't whether people have those beliefs, it's whether black criminal characters cause those beliefs.

Men are a minority, in the US at least.

Wow, a minority by 2 whole percentage points. Such a huge fucking difference.

Still counts.

And knock it off with this oppression Olympics bullshit.

I simply love it when the most catered to group has to resort to "Opression Olympics" tactic when you yourself tried to claim minority of men when said minority is such a small gap it's not even worth nothing outside of interesting fact statistics.

So you don't dispute the fact that you were using Oppression Olympics bullshit then? Great. And saying that men are a minority is not the same thing as saying they are oppressed, certainly not the same as 'men have it worse so your problems don't matter much'.

Who has it worse is subjective

Only subjective if your like to ignore statistics and trends that tend to happen to happen most often to only a particular group of people. Like black people historically getting longer jail sentences than their white counterparts for often times the same crime.

Men have the same problem. They get sentenced more than women for the same crimes. Here's some studies http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html

And who has it worse is subjective unless you're saying one group has 0 problems.

and trying to act like you have it so much worse is not helping anyone.

I suppose your in any danger?

Are you? More importantly is every racial minority in the US in danger?

Men get more prison time than women for the same crimes,

Have you looked into the severity of those crimes? If a man and a women both did drugs and the man had significantly higher portion of drugs on them than the women than it's obvious who's going to be doing more jail time.

Ah so you made up a reason to dismiss the studies before seeing them. Wonderful. And I know that that doesn't take everything into account. There's been cases recently where an underage straight couple was having sex. The boy got charged with statutory rape and the girl doesn't get charged with anything.

Also wouldn't explain this part of the study "Starr also found that females arrested for a crime are also significantly more likely to avoid charges and convictions entirely, and twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted."

Going on about how men are treated more unfairly than women in the crime world while also simoultaneously condemming me for playing the "Opression Olympics."

Do you know what Oppresion Olympics is? It's when someone says 'my problems are worse than yours therefore they matter more'. I never even said men have it worse.

You said games won't acknowledge the existence of minorities and that's bullshit.

No, I said that whenver we complain about lack of minority protagonists in videogames I noted that time and time again we get told the statistics bullshit that justifies why game devs and pubs won't acknowledge our existence outside of Fifa, NBA, NFL, and GTA

There you go again with them not acknowleding your existence. A game can acknowledge the existence of minorities without having the main character be one. If they have a minority character period then that's acknowledging their existence. That's what it means to acknowledge that they exist.

E: That last sentence was badly worded, what that they only need one minority character to acknowledge they exist (or even just have a non-minority character talking about them). If the game didn't acknowledge they existed then they wouldn't be in the games or mentioned in them period.

At no point did I say this was all I could come up with in terms of non-white characters.

But you did.
You said not even a couple of posts ago that minorities exist in videogames as side characters and GTA and that totally means we are equally represented in videogames and we should stop whining because everything is A-Okay.

More straw men. This was about debunking your "they don't acknowledge our existence claims" and nothing more. I don't need to list off every game that has a minority protagonist to do that.

I brought up GTA because you brought up GTA.

You brought up GTA as an example of a character we seemingly ignore. So no, you were the one that brought it up first.

Here is my first reply to you in this thread, it has me quoting you talking about GTA.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.860604-We-are-not-your-shield-Gamergate-you-need-a-new-motto?page=2#21402648

You never challenged me to come up with more and now you're acting like this is all I can do?

Your the one that made the claim that we are well represented in videogames

Where?

WTF are you talking about? The whole movement is against game journalists,

And #notyourshield is gamergates weapon to point at journalists they don't like

Journalists who act like they represent racial minorities/women, who act like they're fighting on their behalf, those who accuse everyone else of being racist/misogynists and those who say that those on the other side are all privileged white men afraid of change.

E: Just anyone who hides behind being/supposedly advocating for a minority to deflect criticism.

 

[The_Darkness]

Here's the actual origin of #notyourshield:

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261346918

Anonymous Tue 02 Sep 2014 23:56:48 No.261346918 Report
Quoted By: >>261347051 >>261347184 >>261347260 >>261347271 >>261347446 >>261347503 >>261347529 >>261347751 >>261348012 >>261348110 >>261348139 >>261348303 >>261348642 >>261348920 >>261348990 >>261349447
WHO /MINORITY/ HERE? I'm like 2/3 of the things these faggots say they are fighting for, and when I engage them on Twitter (WITH MY FUCKING PERSONAL ACCOUNT) they ignore me. Jesus Christ this is getting frustrating, I might as well be a white male for these faggots.

replied to with

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261347271

Anonymous Tue 02 Sep 2014 23:59:14 No.261347271 Report
Quoted By: >>261347429 >>261347529 >>261347843 >>261347893 >>261347997 >>261349447
>>261347051
>>261346918
Something like
>#NotYourShield
And demand the SJWs stop using you as a shield to deflect genuine criticism

That post is the first appearance of #notyourshield anywhere.

A couple of other replies:

http://archive.moe/v/thread/261343810/#261347843

Anonymous Wed 03 Sep 2014 00:03:32 No.261347843 Report
Quoted By: >>261347995 >>261348483 >>261348647
>>261347271
>>261347271
>>261347271

This actually seems like a really good fucking idea. But on the other hand, I don't think we should make an active push to "weaponize" the women, non-cis, and non-white ethnicities that are on our side. It would be helpful for more of them to come forward and make themselves heard (as some already have), but they should only do so on their own terms, not because we're pressuring them.

Otherwise we become no better than companies like Bioware and the very people we're fighting against.

So... I'm confused. What exactly did Bioware do?

As for the rest - yes, I misunderstood exactly what #NotYourShield was about in my explanation in the OP. I'll go back and edit that, but I stand by the opinion that it is needlessly aggressive.

To check that I'm understanding correctly:
The hashtag is directed towards a specific set of journalists. These journalists are attempting to speak on behalf of minorities (not necessarily a bad thing) but are using that cause to deflect criticism (yeah, that's the bad thing), including criticism from the very minorities they claim to represent (also a bad thing).

I would appreciate an example of a journalist doing some of that deflection, by the way.

 

[Something Amyss]

I did not call you names like a 2nd grader.

How fortunate I didn't, either. Why do you feel the need to make things up?

And you seem to dismiss everyone who disagrees with you, so I'm not buying your claims about me.

I'll remember to tell that to NotTheBees. We've been having a lovely chat despite disagreement. But then, I suspect this is just another attempt to make things up.

Slightly hypocritical, I could've been nicer but oh well, I still think it's not as a bad as lamergate. At least I'm making an argument rather then just insulting people.

I didn't "just insult people."

I actually didn't say anything negative about people in the first post you quoted. In fact, you ignored most of the context. You know, that I was disagreeing with the OP about ShamerGate in the first place:

To me it conveys passive aggressiveness. A lack of inclusion of other people. The sentence is saying to the reader "We are not on your side." And it's saying that regardless of who is reading it.

Emphasis mine.

No, you got offended, so you started doing exactly what you accused me of: mocking people in a less than clever fashion. It was hypocritical, and now you're hiding behind the notion that I insulted people and ignoring the context of the comment to act as if you added to discussion in a way I didn't. That's a lie.

Again, I'm sorry if you found off-hand remarks like LamerGate and Shamergate to be so hideously offensive (and saying so would be a better way to approach this). I find the sum of the movement to be utterly absurd. But what you've done here is not take me to task for not contributing, you've constructed a narrative notwithstanding the facts to justify doing exactly what you claimed you hated.

And that may be the closest thing to a perfect metaphor for this #LamerGate horsecrap I have come across yet. Lies, mistruth, and hypocrisy over largely imagined "wrongs." And this is exactly why it's not taken seriously outside its own echo chamber.