This graphic by somewhat_brave on Reddit pretty much nails it. (Click here to see a larger version.) When #GamerGaters talk about “ethics” in journalism, this is pretty much code for “journalists shouldn’t be allowed to say anything critical of us!”
And in case you missed the all-Cat version of the manifesto, here it is again:
It is a rather odd sentiment, though, considering critical analysis of a game outside of its graphics and mechanics is taking videogames – as an artistic medium – seriously.
Most GamerGaters I find, far from being these intellectual titans they claim, to be incredibly anti-intellectual. That they behave as if somehow be “above” ideology is a a sign of such, when they take sources from Breitbart-related websites (so much for “journalistic integrity”!) and regularly throw their hats in with right-wing ideologues – it makes unfortunate sense given the majority of the “SJWs” they hate (including us here) are largely left-wing. The fact they give more of a shit about videogames simply being a product, an over-glorified toy, than as narrative that deals with issues of importance tells me they don’t want their much-loved medium to evolve.
@NickNameNick
Sargon is on this expose of the “bad apples” of GamerGate. That article’s only failing is bringing up Paul Elam, but not mentioning that he created a fake offender’s registry to coordinate harassment against women (which still exists, but has been gutted and abandoned). Seems awfully relevant now.
Fifth Estate? What’s that? The last few weeks have shown that they must obviously mean the mob.
Like I said: it’s a false pretense. Most people who go around claiming they are somehow more objective than anyone else are full of horseshit.
His “About” section is sickeningly self-aggrandizing while also managing to be kind of pathetic:
The kicker being…
Having trouble finding work myself, part of me feels it’d be unfair to mock him for such…but it doesn’t help he spends time making videos that are as long as four hours.
Seems less like a “job” and more of an “obsession” at that point.
Totalbiscuit, oy. So much for Let’s Players staying silent about Gamergate, the one person who makes noise happens to be on the pro- side.
Lacking? If you press them, you always end up with “The basic rights and dignity of non-whitecismen are just a matter of opinion, man! Calling the reactionaries and racists out is censorship, so let’s have a debate about what kinds of people count as human. And by debate I mean shut up! “. I spit on their faces.
I say “lacking self-awareness” because, in my experience online, some people are naive and gullible enough – not to mention desperate – to fall for racist and sexist arguments while reducing it down to “just an opinion”.
Question for those who ID as radical feminists:
What does “radical feminist” mean to you? In the circles I move in the term is entirely synonymous with trans-exclusionary radical feminism* and support for the criminalization of sex work.
*To the point where the word “radical” seems redundant; i.e. trans exclusionary feminism IS radical feminism and vice versa
Sort of off-topic, but I’ve come to the conclusion that hardcore #GamerGaters aren’t truly gamers anymore – not because “No true Scotsman” or “Not up to my standards,” but because they spend so much time harassing women on the Internet that they physically can’t have any time left for it.
Reblogged this on Confusing Medical Science Since 1971.
@M. the Social Justice Ranger
In their minds, they are still gamers because this is all an elaborate game to them and that’s what’s frightening. The fact that they dehumanize Zoe, Anita, and Brianna by calling them “Literally Who (LW) 1, 2, and 3” and talk about the public perception of GamerGate if one of them is murdered is probably the part I find the most suspect about them.
@Leum
I speak for nobody but myself. For myself, I would say that the several non-radical flavors of feminism, in general, lack the ability to address the structure of society. Suppose the topic is the corporate glass ceiling. Liberal feminism says, “Women are people, and the problem with the glass ceiling is that women are facing forms of discrimination that men do not. If that gender-based discrimination did not exist, we would have more or less equal numbers of male and female CEOs.” Okay, that’s fair as far as it goes.
Radical feminism says, “The corporate structure is, at its base, is a male ideal, so there are no surprises in the fact that men do well in corporations. Corporations are designed with hierarchy, work hours, work structure, and work expectations that match a certain archetype that men are raised to fit, and women are not. So of course more men are at home in the corporate structure, and of course women struggle to fit. If a suit is tailor-made to one person, it should shock nobody when the suit actually fits that person and other people feel awkward in it.” That goes MUCH farther that the previous formulation.
Again, other people may have a different view and I don’t claim mine is the correct one.
@Policy of Madness, I personally favor radical politics over liberal politics. Radical politics gets to the very heart of the problem, which is usually extreme global capitalism. I find liberals very admirable in their cause of social justice. My problem, however, is that things like racism, sexism, classism, imperialism (practically every “ism” out there) are not bugs in the system, they are core features. As long we live in an extreme capitalist society we will live in a culture that rewards oppression and exploitation.
(I know non-capitalism societies like feudalism are very oppressive and exploitive also, but that doesn’t change the fact that our society is horrible.)
Isn’t it possible to critique criticism? I’ve seen many say that GamerGate-er’s just want to silence feminist criticism, yet open discussion is also frequently discouraged. I fully understand that there are plenty of disingenuous commenters and harassers, but not every bit of dissent is done in bad faith. I know women are people, deserving of all the rights and respect that come from being human, however I don’t understand why fully accepting someone’s interpretation of a piece of media is a necessary component of that stance. I could try to ask questions to further understanding, but all I get is either snark or banned. What is it that I need to do to either ask questions correctly or somehow quiet my skepticism?
I am, as I have said here before, one of those raggedy old womens libbers from the seventies. The dominance and submission paradigm is postulated as the basis for the social hierarchy we are trained from birth to comply with, and even promote, in myriad ways. We aim to rip that apart and rebuild society without the dominance and submission and without the hierarchy.
Did anyone read this steaming pile of shit written by Philip Wythe as it pertains to Gamergate ? This person describes themself as an intersectional feminist but all I see is a confusing, shameful masquerade:
http://theflounce.com/harassment-abuse-apologism-sanitizing-abuse-social-justice-spheres/
TB allied himself with Pressfart, the Guy who was stalking one of TBs coworkers
And the YouTube shits define rational as “Atheist and Half read the wiki article on logical fallacies”
I didn’t make it all the way through, orangedesperado. The second paragraph contradicts the first which is to me a bit of a red flag.
I stopped when they declared how upset they were that the perp, Gonji, suffered abuse at the hands of the victim, Quinn.
I wonder if they will take it down when they read the more recent confession by Gonji that he lied about pretty much everything.
The normal procedure is not to critique the criticism, but offer a countering critique of the original work. I would definitely be willing to hear your arguments for why video games have no sexism problem (or whatever your argument may be), but if you can’t make that argument without mentioning Anita Sarkeesian or her videos, you get an F. Whatever position you take on sexism in video games should be 100% supported by the base material, and capable of complete independence from what anyone else has said on the topic.
As an essay it is most confusing, particularly with the whole hearted faith in the honesty of the very smeary Gjoni essay/statement/work of fiction. Like holy social justice activist appropriation while being worse than clueless. Yes, what an abuser that Quinn was (eye roll and sad head shake).
@vaiyt
Yup, thats TB. Dude claims YouTube is the new games journalism but when Warner pays YouTubers for positive coverage of shadow of mordor suddenly youtubers aren’t journalists so the supposedly pro-journalistic ethics gaters shouldn’t care
@A Wolverine
He did? I’ll need a link for that because if this is true, it’s just… holy fucking shit, that’s inexcusable. Was it just sympathetic support for him after he was doxxed* (while not saying shit about Brianna Wu) or was it full on “this man deserves our respect”? Both are terrible, but the latter might actually make his employment at Polaris a liability. Either way, I think Dodger should probably hear about this.
*Fun fact: TotalBiscuit participated in the Thunderclap campaign. One of the news posts on the front page of that site was about PressFart being doxxed. They posted the Twitter screencap, but did not redact the address. Also, that same site has a “GamerGate in sixty seconds” video that opens right up with repeating the thoroughly debunked claim that Zoe Quinn slept with someone for review coverage. This site links to a text repository (banned on multiple sites) that advocates sockpuppeting and details an “operation” specifically about digging up dirt to justify a priori dismissal of feminist academics. And while it doesn’t have a direct link in the menu bar any more, the site is clearly allied with 8chan.
TotalBiscuit approved!
“I know women are people, deserving of all the rights and respect that come from being human, however I don’t understand why fully accepting someone’s interpretation of a piece of media is a necessary component of that stance.”
It’s not. Not everybody who’s anti-#GamerGate agrees entirely with Anita’s opinion; we just all think that the harassment and threats she gets for said opinion is fucking disgusting. I don’t understand why that’s so hard to understand.
It seems that a lot of people operate under the assumption that being a perpetrator of abuse immunizes somebody against being victimized themselves.
As in somebody who has committed any infraction of any sort deserves everything that happens to them forever – unless they can get away with it. In that case, they’re naturally beyond reproach and we just have to deal with their shit.