Aww, how cute, Wired was feeling left out (#GamerGate)

[BallGum]

Minor disagreement here: media outlets shouldn't be on any body's side, they should strive for impartiality

And that is perhaps the great irony here. All we've gotten are highly opinionated pieces that prove the pro-gamergate movement more and more correct.

The r/kotakuInAction is a great subreddit dedicated to allowing everyone express their views.

[Victorious Secret]

You know, a good way to figure out who is most likely wrong and who is most likely right in an argument/debate is to just look at who presents their side of the issue in a civil, well thought out, articulate manner and acts rationally and who engages in name-calling, threats, harassment, a lot of swearing and acts irrationally.

 

I'll let you figure out which type is usually right and which type is wrong.

 

QFT. 

 

One of the most rational things said here. 

[Tonylu1595]

All of them gates.

[Sidiox]

No we cannot. This is an important issue. We are also winning.

It was important, and it original intent wasn't bad. But now, with all these goddamn websites just adding oil to the fire and the countless useless threats it has become a "hashtag" under which to fight and threaten and create clickbait articles. It is no longer about any useful debate, it is now about who can shout the loudest and antagonizes the most. If we could go back to a constructive debate then I would support this hashtag group thing, but as it stands it is better to let it die, and with it all those trolls that feed of it and useless articles. 

 

Edit: 

Currently no one is "winning", and there shouldn't be anyone winning. There should be a constructive debate about this whole thing in which the corruption of reviewers is dealt with and this misogyny and feminist bullcrap is also being eradicated. If by winning you however mean "getting more and more hate for gamers and gaming from main stream media, and giving this entire demographic, this being women, men, boys, girls, whatever cisgender crap you wish, of gamers a bad name because of so many fuckers that shout their deathhreats the loudest", then yes you are winning. 

[BurgerBum]

GamerGate.

because female gamers dont exist because only guys can play games and anyone who plays pokemon or gta is either childish and needs to grow up or is a rapist and mass murderer. also all video games promote female slavery and make you view them as sex objects.

 

*is female*

*is gamer*

*plays pokemon and gta*

*wouldnt hurt a fly even though they gross me out*

*is a person who WOULD become a mass murderer if i see another fucking article about how video games are bad in any way shape or form*

*reeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllly loves cake*

[BallGum]

I'm confused of what is going on here? Is the OP taking shots at a blog for bringing light to the abusiveness that females have to deal with in the gaming community?

Logical fallacy right there: asking a question that has an assumption already in it so that no matter what you answer will be wrong.

One side is willing to have discussion about the points, while the other rejects discussion. That alone is pretty telling.

[BurgerBum]

i just dont see why gamergate ever even existed.

 

moviegate.

there are PLENTY of PG movie that are much worse than some M rated games......

 

so the reason why games were EVER treated differently just baffles me.

[Snickerzz]

whats gamergate?

[BurgerBum]

whats gamergate?

bullshit.

[BurgerBum]

whats gamergate?

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

there you go.

its bullshit.

[Vendetta]

Logical fallacy right there: asking a question that has an assumption already in it so that no matter what you answer will be wrong.

One side is willing to have discussion about the points, while the other rejects discussion. That alone is pretty telling.

 

Are you serious? What fucking assumption? The new article he posted WAS ABOUT SEXISM IN THE VIDEO GAME COMMUNITY. Also you are sadly confused about what is happening. One side is pointing out facts and making childish ass, misogynistic video gamers uncomfortable and the other side is making death threats and outlandish claims to derail the original subject.

[BurgerBum]

the ESRB exists for a reason.

what reason is that?

a good one. a damn good one. to protect the user.

 

what started the ESRB?!?!?!

night trap. for its time it was the marilyn manson of video games.

some dude saw it as masogonistic,  promoting female enslavement and ultra violent. (which it was the opposite of, the goal is to save them and kill the oggers or whatever, but he's a dipshit and didnt look into what he was talking about before talking about it)

 

its still good that we have the ESRB though.

 

 

 

about what news and shit says... dont listen to them... its all click bait and view bait...... just to make money, if it was to provide honest news then they wouldnt bring in ONE ill-informed non gamer to defend games and have 5 liberal over reacting assholes prosecuting games.

[BurgerBum]

and dont forget the bullshit ''think of the children'' crap that they always pull.

[cae]

Don't give them attention and clicks. Keep writing those emails.

[BallGum]

Are you serious? What fucking assumption? The new article he posted WAS ABOUT SEXISM IN THE VIDEO GAME COMMUNITY. Also you are sadly confused about what is happening. One side is pointing out facts and making childish ass, misogynistic video gamers uncomfortable and the other side is making death threats and outlandish claims to derail the original subject.

Posing a question with a premade assumption / statement in it is a logical fallacy. This is black and white.

The assumption in your first question was that the article is bringing to light misogynistic vitriol.

I can assure myself I know about the two sides. Look at your comment. Look how angry it is. Now look at the other Pro-GGer's and their comments. See the difference?

It's in news site's interests to deflect critique by calling GG-ers misogynistic. It is textbook ad hominem. They're conflating two different issues.

The only thing GG-ers really care about are journalistic ethics. Zoe Quinn is a different issue, and Anita Sarkesian's "feminist" (that's an insult to feminism IMO) views are another. We need to talk about misogyny in the industry but it is a different discussion for another place.

[IdortMasterRace]

How about every fucking female that plays any game online? Don't play stupid like you have never been in a lobby with a girl and didn't hear all the guys start harassing her and shit. And how fucking ignorant do you have to be to say females should just hide from it. They can fight for their respect in all aspects of life and any intelligent person should help them.

 

I, as a male, have been called a faggot, a cocksucker, a dickhead, a pleb, a casual, etc. while online - do I fucking whine about it and start some agenda campaign about it though? Do I rally up a political message that all gamers are hateful terrorists because of a few names I've been called online? No, I tell them to go fuck themselves then block/mute/delete them and tell myself that a small minority of idiots online doesn't represent EVERYONE.

 

Stop trying to make out that a certain demographic is a fucking mass victim, all you're doing is embarrassing yourself. You may be easily led like sheep by people such as Anita Sarkeesian, but fortunately not everyone else is.

[IdortMasterRace]

You know, a good way to figure out who is most likely wrong and who is most likely right in an argument/debate is to just look at who presents their side of the issue in a civil, well thought out, articulate manner and acts rationally and who engages in name-calling, threats, harassment, a lot of swearing and acts irrationally.

 

I'll let you figure out which type is usually right and which type is wrong.

 

Well so far, I've seen calm debate from people on the GG side who provide facts, evidence, sources and counter-arguments. And on the anti-GG side, I've mostly been seeing cherry picking, strawman statements, threats, abuse, generalising, demographic attacking, and just generally non-arguments.

[IdortMasterRace]

It is no longer about any useful debate

 

Says who? You? What you need to understand is the occasional fuckwit that bandwagons on to GamerGate to do horrible things is not a fucking representative of GamerGate. Already you are acting the same as people like Anita Sarkeesian - you are generalising a demographic/movement based on what a couple of idiots did. In every pro-GG discussion I've seen, NO ONE encourages the threats, the doxing, the harassment, and are generally 100% against that crap.

 

because of so many fuckers that shout their deathhreats the loudest

 

Again, see above. The death threat thing isn't what GamerGate is about - the people who have been making threats or doxing people online have been shunned by the pro-GG side.

[RH00D]

Well so far, I've seen calm debate from people on the GG side who provide facts, evidence, sources and counter-arguments. And on the anti-GG side, I've mostly been seeing cherry picking, strawman state,emts, threats, abuse, generalising, demographic attacking, and just generally non-arguments.

You missed all the death threats and blatant harassment. Neat. Oh I know what it is, the people on GamerGate's side that have done terrible things "aren't actually a part of GamerGate" how convenient. Also, I have never advocated for either side of this debate. I have never implied that people against GamerGate are the best thing since sliced bread. I take neither side on the debate cause honestly the whole thing is just a volcano of feces and I don't feel like jumping into that.

[IdortMasterRace]

the people that have done terrible things "aren't actually a part of GamerGate"

 

Correct! See, you got there eventually. Glad we're on the same page now.

 

 

By the way, if I go to Twitter right now and send something like "ALL WOMEN ARE SCUM, FROM LINUSTECHTIPS", does that mean LinusTechTips is now an anti-women group that supports sexism and harassment?

[RH00D]

Correct! See, you got there eventually. Glad we're on the same page now.

 

Now that I know I'm dealing with someone who like to take statements out of context, twist their words and misquote them, I'm done here.

[IdortMasterRace]

Now that I know I'm dealing with someone who like to take statements out of context, twist their words and misquote them, I'm done here.

 

That's right, just leave because you have no argument. It's pretty funny to, I made a statement, you played the sarcastic strawman card, then when I tell you you're sarcastic statement is correct, I'm "twisting words". Where have I seen this kind of argument before?

 

 

I'm still awaiting a response for: "If I go to Twitter right now and send something like "ALL WOMEN ARE SCUM, FROM LINUSTECHTIPS", does that mean LinusTechTips is now an anti-women group that supports sexism and harassment?" too. Of course, I don't expect one.

[Seldszar]

You missed all the death threats and blatant harassment. Neat. Oh I know what it is, the people on GamerGate's side that have done terrible things "aren't actually a part of GamerGate" how convenient. Also, I have never advocated for either side of this debate. I have never implied that people against GamerGate are the best thing since sliced bread. I take neither side on the debate cause honestly the whole thing is just a volcano of feces and I don't feel like jumping into that.

I don't know much about gamers gates but in every mass demonstration in real life, those breaking stuff and acting like shitheads are never part of the real movement. If you take those seriously and "group" them with the real movement, you are just trying to brush it off as another bunch of asshole doing bad stuff and make it look like their cause is wrong.

 

You have to be careful with the troublemakers and not mistake them as legit representatives of anything.

 

As I said, I didnt read anything about gamers gate my comment is only related to the usual way news talks about that kind of things.

[LAwLz]

You missed all the death threats and blatant harassment. Neat. Oh I know what it is, the people on GamerGate's side that have done terrible things "aren't actually a part of GamerGate" how convenient. Also, I have never advocated for either side of this debate. I have never implied that people against GamerGate are the best thing since sliced bread. I take neither side on the debate cause honestly the whole thing is just a volcano of feces and I don't feel like jumping into that.

Yes and people on the gamergate side is getting death threats and harassment as well. Pretty much everyone on the Internet gets them, not just women.

Sure you can say that the people who sent those threats are part of gamergate (of the threats were even real to begin with, there is quite a lot of evidence suggesting otherwise and there have been SJW caught by the police faking threats against themselves before) but that's kind of like saying some Christians are murderers. Does that mean that Christianity stands for violence, or are those actions unrelated to their religion? The actions of a few individuals do not speak for the entire group of people they associate themselves with.

There is at least one self proclamation misandrist in the anti-GG movement but I don't go around saying that everyone against it are misandrists. You will inevitable have at least some bad people in any large group like this.

[CatCloud]

why is this not locked?