Last night, as you may have heard, the woman known to #GamerGaters as “Literally Who 2” pulled off a bit of a media coup, appearing on The Colbert Report for a brief interview by the sympathetic Colbert, who gently satirized some of the sillier “arguments” of the Gaters with a series of deliberatly obtuse questions. You know, his regular schtick.
When Anita Sarkeesian posted the picture above (well, a non-blurry version of it) to Twitter yesterday evening, thus alerting the world to her upcoming appearance on Colbert’s show, it set off a wave of panic and despair on 8chan’s /gg/ board, one of the central organizing hubs of the GamerGate “movement.”
Some declared it a disaster, the end of GamerGate, while others tried to rally the troops with melodramatic speeches. Still others set forth bizarre conspiracy theories about the evil SJWs who allegedly control the media.
There was so much amazing stuff there that I knew I had to start screencapping like mad.
And so, without further ado, here are the Top 22 Most Ridiculous Things Said on 8Chan About Anita Sarkeesian’s Appearance on the Colbert Report.
1) One anon advised the 8chan army on how to turn this truckload of lemons into lemonade:
2) This fella was a little less optimistic. Somehow I’m guessing a lot of his conversations involve bizarrely detailed exegeses of the sinister plots of Cultural Marxism.
3) This fellow suggested that 8chan might be able to lobby Congress for some legislation that would put an end to the SJW “gang.”
4) There were a lot of posts like this. GamerGaters just can’t help talking like cartoon supervillains.
5) This guy urgently warned fellow 8channers not to even discuss the highly charged issue of misogyny, ending his little speech with a bizarre kicker not only denying that 8channers had anything to do with the threats and doxxing that have driven Sarkeesian from her home, but flatly denied that the threats and doxxing even happened at all.
6) This fella lamented Colbert’s terrible betrayal, and the effect this would have on his late-night television viewing.
7) And this charming post reminded us one of the main reasons why GamerGate increasingly appeals only to trolls and assholes. (Note to 8channers: It’s the picture, derived from an anti-Semitic caricature, that’s the real problem here.)
8) This fella reminded his comrades that media figures like Colbert “never really cared sincerely about vidya [games]” anyway.
9) And we’re back to the rising fire.
10) More fire, accompanied this time by the howling wolves of … Twitter.
11) Winston Churchill famously proclaimed that brave British soldiers “shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.” This GamerGate warrior will do the same, only with email and Twitter.
12) A lot of 8channers think that Sarkeesian is little more than the brainless puppet of Feminist Frequency co-writer/producer Jonathan McIntosh.
13) This melodramatic fella declared in despair that Sarkeesian had won, “sitting in the lap of a group more powerful, tenacious, driven and sinister than you could ever hope to be.”
Huh. I thought they were supposed to be on the side of Truth and Light. Why would GamerGaters hope to be sinister. Could it be that maybe they are the baddies after all?
14) And speaking of GamerGaters monologuing like supervillains …
15) This fella offered his comrades a “waifu to encourage you along.”
Wait, what?
16) This fella might be spending just a little too much time with the vidya games.
17) This commenter thought that the fact that Sarkeesian appeared in public showed that she wasn’t really scared by all the threats she’s gotten. CHECKMATE, SARKEESIAN!
18) More conspiratorial nonsense about Colbert and his alleged ideological puppetmasters.
19) THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAA!!
20) Uh, dude, “some newspaper” in this case was the New York Fucking Times, and it was more than a paragraph.
21) This fella hoped that this bitter loss would help to harden the resolve of “weak” GamerGaters.
22) And this guy brought a report from the far reaches of Upside Down Backwards Land.
GamerGaters, you are officially ridiculous.
Wait, did Brian just say that devs make games for a male audience because the audience is male because devs make games for a male audience because the audience is male because devs-
oh holy shit my head
Truly, a man among men. **eyeroll**
You don’t speak for me, you asshole.
@shaenon among others
What are you all trying to prove here, that gamergate has idiots and immature kids attached to it? Pretty much all political parties/ideologies/religions/sides-of-an-issue-people-care-about have a boatload of idiots attached to them, that doesn’t instantly invalidate those, does it?
Those tweets/posts sound exactly the same as the ones you get from some of the democrats or republicans after any given election.
I haven’t seen people countering the rationale of gamergate at its most intelligently argued.
Like in this youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCExXie1XB4
Except for this one point on the Colbert Report that ethical journalism for all forms of entertainment is absent and would be unimportant anyway. I don’t really care personally in this case, because I barely ever visit any of the review sites involved, but non impartial game reviewing affects anyone who spends money on games and picks games for trying out based partially on the the average critical rating. I can imagine people getting worked up over this.
@katz
Someone tries to make a case for an opposite viewpoint to mine? Better demonize him and lump him in with the worst of his kind.
Oh, look, an “actually, it’s about ethics in game journalism” troll. Plus a heaping helping of “both sides do it” minimizing and “not all gamergaters” thrown in.
Is there a counter to “we will rape and kill you if you don’t shut up”, beyond calling the police and locking your doors?
There is no rational to rape and death threats. They are an irrational response to women speaking.
And you sir, are a second rate troll.
@timoosterhuis
Started watching your video. Stopped when he brought up how Zoe Quinn totally used her sexy wiles to make Nathan write about her (TWICE!!!1!), despite the fact that the timelines don’t add up, neither of them are reviews, and the one about the game jam fiasco was written because Zoe was one of the main people involved.
*yawn*
Point me to where actual, credible arguments begin, because I don’t trust this dude to present a reasonable argument.
And please, don’t let this become a thing like ID proponents, where every time someone debunks a person, another shows up and claims they weren’t dealing with the REAL intellectuals, that they should totally try to debunk this dude over here making the exact same bad arguments, occasionally with fancier wording.
Oh, do go on about how you’re so totally objective because you so aren’t affected by review sites. Or rather, don’t. Instead try to imagine that some people, women perhaps, might actually give a damn about aspects of the game beyond controls and graphics, that they might care if the game has some elements that appeal to them like female characters or plots more interesting than “Hero McManlyman rescues the damsel, shoots the bad guy, and saves the world.”
Is it that time again where we remind these guys that most of us really don’t care who Zoe Quinn did or did not fuck? Just because you guys are obsessed with her sexual history doesn’t mean anyone else gives a shit.
But don’t you see, cassandrakitty? A single person that allegedly slept around to get mentioned in a few articles is evidence of MASSIVE INDUSTRY-WIDE CORRUPTION that must be stopped!
One woman’s wandering vagina will destroy everything! Please ignore the blatant payola that everyone knows about, since we can’t figure out a way to blame that on evil slutty ladies.
I don’t understand what they think an impartial review actually is. Or why, beyond not giving a glowing review because you were paid to, a biased view is less helpful. The BEST way to make good purchasing decisions is to find a reviewer whose opinions and tastes you often or never agree with and see what they have to say.
The only game review I pay attention to are Zero Punctuation and my boyfriend’s both of which are very biased and also helpful in my deciding what to play. Or I watch the trailer like I do with any other medium.
Are gamergaters so stupid they need to be told what their opinions and tastes should be? Are they only allowed to play games that get enough stars?
For those who’ve been around for a while, remember a certain old troll’s reaction to the suggestion that may Radiohead a. weren’t necessarily universally acknowledged as the best band ever and b. probably wouldn’t share his views on bitches being out to get him anyway? This seems to basically be that same fandumb instinct, just combined with extra petulant misogyny, racism, and so on.
Actually, are there any game (and movies and tv) review sites that *do* review media from a feminist worldview? But regular reviews of “will you like this” not just analysing them.
Heh, I don’t remember which troll that was. I’m guessing blog herpes/his sock or Star Wars fiction the greatest ever.
If you keep dismissing everyone as Not a True GlorpGlubber, pretty soon you’ll run out of people.
Are Eron Gjoni, Adam Baldwin, Kingofpol, thunderf00t, Milo Yiannopoulos, Internet Aristocrat, Sargon of Akkad, Mike Cernovich, A. Wyatt Mann, TFYC, Camera Lady, RogueStarGamez, Davis Aurini, Jordan Owen, et al, Not True GibberGhouls too? Because they’re all either immature idiots, racist scumbags, crooks, shameless liars or all of those at the same time.
@Sparky
Why are you calling me a troll? Is it inconceivable that someone might hold the genuine opinion that “actually, it’s about ethics in gamer journalism.” Or in my case rather: “actually, there are two different issues here which should be addressed separately, instead of being lumped in a false dichotomy together.”. Those issues being the notion that the bulk of video games are sexist, or at least noninclusive and the notion that the bulk of gaming review sites are not impartial. As far as I’m aware the discussion about whether video games as a whole are sexist has been going on for more than a year and gamergate has only been trending on twitter, since people started complaining about the zoe quinn thing and whether game review sites give honest reviews.
@kirby
According to the manager of kotaku, the relationship between one of the guys at kotaku and zoe quinn was only after he wrote about her, not before. That’s possible. I’m too far removed from that world to say anything finite about it, I don’t really blame people for being sceptical about that though. Relationships often begin privately before they publicly start.
The video I linked to builds in my opinion a good case for the notion that the game review sites as a whole are not separate sources for objective journalism, but rather a clique of friends and associates which includes some of the indie game developers they’re reviewing. The guy in it did another video about gamergate in which he complains about shadow of mordor’s review contract which forces youtube reviewers to give it a positive review if they want to review it prerelease at all. Why would he make this video if he didn’t care about ethics in journalism and only about countering the arguments for sexism in video games?
@valyt
Out of those I only know thunderf00t, and he doesn’t strike me as a liar, a racist scumbag or a crook. Just a guy who laughs at creationists and gets angry at feminists. (Now you probably think I have nothing valuable to say, because I am guilty of not hating his guts, but just hear me out.)
I was talking about the kids who’s posts this article is mocking. Like all caps: THE. FIRE. STARTS. NOW. That’s a dumb 10-13 year old stuck in a heavy metal phase or an adult with actual cognitive disability. No one else would think that sounds cool. Even by trying to mock these fish so obviously in a barrel you give them undeserved recognition. By equating these dumbasses with the bulk of the so called gamergate movement, you’d misrepresent people who weren’t even speaking out against anita sarkeesian to begin with as being sexist. And by lumping it in with actual debate on anita sarkeesian’s claims or sexism in video games in a big ‘disagrees with me, therefore gamergate troll’ basket, you’d basically dehumanize all dissent. As if it’s impossible to convince the other with rational arguments, or at least to mutually understand where the other is coming from.
I personally disagree with anita sarkeesians claim that video games I play somehow reinforce sexist ideas in me, because I don’t feel like I’m more gender biased than my peers (quite the opposite), and anita sarkeesian has no evidence of any kind that gamers would be more sexist than non gamers. (She receives buckets full of hate mail/flame comments and even death threads, I know that, but so does every internet celebrity who holds controversial opinions, it doesn’t amount to proof that they’re right.)
If there is a good reason out there why I should avoid all non inclusive games with narratives written from a male perspective (CoD, assassins creed, etc.), I’d love to hear it.
@kirby (again, sorry)
Ok, so you care if the game has some elements that appeal to them like female characters or plots more interesting than “Hero McManlyman rescues the damsel, shoots the bad guy, and saves the world.” So do I, to an extent. I also care about controls, entertainment value, multiplayer options, replayability, etc. Someone else might care about graphics. Is that just a difference in taste, or do you actually hold the opinion that that makes you a better person than me?
@timoosterhuis:
Excellent! An actual example of bad ethics in games journalism that isn’t just about taking women down.
Because he’s a complex human that can both be a sexist douche perpetrating lies and misconceptions about a targeted woman as well as tackle actual issues? This isn’t difficult.
There’s a reason I didn’t listen past his very first rant about Zoe, and don’t much care to reference him for argument. Someone can make good points and rotten ones; I’d much rather have a dialog with someone who doesn’t insist on the rotten ones, even if they echo what I believe on the good points.
Jim Sterling tackled the skeezy stuff behind Shadow of Mordor in a video that didn’t go on to harangue Zoe Quinn. That’s where I first heard about it. If there’s going to be a real debate about ethics in games journalism, I’ll listen to the people who I believe are arguing in good faith.
@timoosterhuis:
It’s a difference in taste, obviously. I’ll search out reviewers who talk about the context of the game, you’ll search for reviewers who talk more about the stuff you’re interested.
Guess who’s trying to silence reviewers who talk about games in a way the movement doesn’t like, and guess who wants to expand the reviewer dialogue to include new concepts that haven’t been a focus before?
@timoosterhuis
Yawn.
Mid-yawn, however, I will say that Anita Sarkheesian does not try to prove that video games directly reinforce sexist ideas in individual gamers (i.e you). Nor does she, at any point ever (I have no idea where you came up with this), state or attempt to prove that gamers are more sexist than non-gamers.
She explores the idea that the sexist tropes within games are a reflection of and may be contributing to a much wider culture of sexism, and that more multi-dimensional representations of women within games might be, horrors, a good thing. She even stresses that it’s ok to enjoy playing games currently lacking this.
Do keep up.
See, here’s the thing though: gamergate really isn’t about “ethics in game journalism.” It never was. It started when Eron Gjoni decided to post the details of his break-up with Zoe Quinn online. The main focus of gamergate are women like Quinn and Sarkeesian, and it’s major accomplishment is to harrass and send death threats to these women – none of who are game journalists. let me repeat that: the people gamergaters focus on are not video game journalists.
Let me ask you this: What, exactly, has gamergate done about “ethics in game journalism?” What exactly is their goals in regards to “ethics in game journalism?” What exactly are they hoping to accomplish?
And if there are people in gamergate who actually care about “ethics in video game journalism” then why the hell are they attaching themselves to a movement that uses “ethics in video game journalism” as a cover to harrass women?
I’ll preempt the “SJWs are trying to force the games industry to meet their unreasonable demands” argument as well, adding on to what Misha said.
Name one game reviewer with an opinion on a game that wouldn’t want to see that opinion reflected in the industry.
Yahtzee Croshaw would be pleased as punch if the endless stream of cover-based, brown and grey, military FPS shooters he lovingly calls “spunk-gargle-wee-wee” were to cease and more variety in AAA games were explored. Yet I don’t think I’ve ever seen Gamergate argue that someone like him is ruining the industry by trying to force it to cater to his whims.
If you feel like games are missing an element, or one element is way overdone, it’s completely natural to wish that the industry would change, and even act to try to make that change. It’s how industries function. Gamergate’s biggest mistake, besides existing, is failing to realize that if people speak up and the industry listens, there doesn’t need to be some backroom shadiness. The people speaking up are just making a convincing argument.
Ah, yes, keyboard diagnoses and casual ableism, two things that are sure to go down here like a spoonful of sugar. Covered in ants. On fire.
Don’t you dare label Stormfront as a hate movement, because you’ll misrepresent people who never thought white people were the dominant race, and who just like the bake sales.
if you actually give a damn about real ethical concerns and don’t care about anita or zoe or all the other women being targeted, then why the hell would you voluntarily adopt the label of gamergate? Get out and find a different banner; this one’s poisoned.