Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Namutree]

 

 

I don't know much about either of them.

 

That Aurini guy is the most disgusting ****heel I ever listened to on youtube ("we should be absolutely furious with the n***ers... not the blacks, but the f***ing n***ers"; "whites have been working for the past several hundred years to eliminate slavery throughout the globe - and even when we bought the black slaves, we treated them extremely well"; "women in our culture have become the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome" etc. etc.). The other guy I'm also unfamiliar with.

 

 

He sounds like someone who should align himself with GG, his perspective will fit in very well there

 

I don't think his views on race or slavery would be appreciated. As for his claim about women, well I'm not sure his claim is true, but I like decadence and sluts so maybe it was meant as a compliment?

[Longknife]

 

 

I don't know much about either of them.

 

That Aurini guy is the most disgusting ****heel I ever listened to on youtube ("we should be absolutely furious with the n***ers... not the blacks, but the f***ing n***ers"; "whites have been working for the past several hundred years to eliminate slavery throughout the globe - and even when we bought the black slaves, we treated them extremely well"; "women in our culture have become the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome" etc. etc.). The other guy I'm also unfamiliar with.

 

 

He sounds like someone who should align himself with GG, his perspective will fit in very well there

 

 

 

Bruce how about you go **** yourself and again: get out of this thread until you're interested in productive debate?

 

Seriously, the last page or two brought up rather good and relevant points, such as the counter to your "we can't have people thinking feminism is bad" already being a sailed ship if it was infamous enough to win TIME's poll, or how censoring those results is literally implying feminism is more important than truth, not to mention such a tactic is something not unheard of from totalitarian regimes.

 

  But do you respond to that? No, you make some horrendously off-color remark likening all of us who support GG with some guy who's blatantly and disgustingly bigoted, both towards other races and sexes. Your remark just now - as far as I'm concerned - is right up there with that article calling gamers fascists.

 

 

You know why I'm always preaching about productive debate? Because if you get two sides both stating their cases while both are capable of admitting when they're wrong, then you can do fantastic work to figure out who's right and who's wrong, as well as figure out the best course of action.

 

But I've never seen that from you. I've seen some sad little man who is too simple-minded to realize that yes, a woman claiming to be an oppressed victim is also capable of being a bully, a liar and a fight instigator. And yet when there's an entire page filled with counter-points to highlight this, what do you do? You look over them and just make an incredibly insulting remark, likening your debate opposition to racists and sexists.

 

 

As I've said, kindly get the **** out, cause it's clear you have no interest in productive debate, nor do you have anything to offer any productive discussion.

[Fighter]

He sounds like someone who should align himself with GG, his perspective will fit in very well there

 

And you're apparently trying to fit in with the worst of anti-GG with this comment. We've had some lively examples of such a-holery in here.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

I don't know much about either of them.

 

That Aurini guy is the most disgusting ****heel I ever listened to on youtube ("we should be absolutely furious with the n***ers... not the blacks, but the f***ing n***ers"; "whites have been working for the past several hundred years to eliminate slavery throughout the globe - and even when we bought the black slaves, we treated them extremely well"; "women in our culture have become the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome" etc. etc.). The other guy I'm also unfamiliar with.

 

 

He sounds like someone who should align himself with GG, his perspective will fit in very well there

 

 

 

Bruce how about you go **** yourself and again: get out of this thread until you're interested in productive debate?

 

Seriously, the last page or two brought up rather good and relevant points, such as the counter to your "we can't have people thinking feminism is bad" already being a sailed ship if it was infamous enough to win TIME's poll, or how censoring those results is literally implying feminism is more important than truth, not to mention such a tactic is something not unheard of from totalitarian regimes.

 

  But do you respond to that? No, you make some horrendously off-color remark likening all of us who support GG with some guy who's blatantly and disgustingly bigoted, both towards other races and sexes. Your remark just now - as far as I'm concerned - is right up there with that article calling gamers fascists.

 

 

You know why I'm always preaching about productive debate? Because if you get two sides both stating their cases while both are capable of admitting when they're wrong, then you can do fantastic work to figure out who's right and who's wrong, as well as figure out the best course of action.

 

But I've never seen that from you. I've seen some sad little man who is too simple-minded to realize that yes, a woman claiming to be an oppressed victim is also capable of being a bully, a liar and a fight instigator. And yet when there's an entire page filled with counter-points to highlight this, what do you do? You look over them and just make an incredibly insulting remark, likening your debate opposition to racists and sexists.

 

 

As I've said, kindly get the **** out, cause it's clear you have no interest in productive debate, nor do you have anything to offer any productive discussion.

 

 

No, no I'll continue to post in this thread, I do sometimes enjoy the debate

 

And I was just joking with my comment, hence the    

 

You GG people are very sensitive and defensive, it seems  you can't take a joke

[Namutree]

 

 

No, no I'll continue to post in this thread, I do sometimes enjoy the debate

 

And I was just joking with my comment, hence the    

 

You GG people are very sensitive and defensive, it seems  you can't take a joke

 

I was a little surprised by how upset Longknife/Fighter was. I didn't think you were totally serious.

[Fighter]

In a world where people find ways to be offended by obscure symbolism they read into things it's become hard to read people. I'm sure Bruce would be the first to defend the next feminist who finds a joke offensive. Which is why it is not clear if he is joking himself or not.

[Namutree]

In a world where people find ways to be offended by obscure symbolism they read into things it's become hard to read people. I'm sure Bruce would be the first to defend the next feminist who finds a joke offensive. Which is why it is not clear if he is joking himself or not.

I'm not trying to blame anyone for not knowing if it was a joke. Text based communication can't convey what people mean accurately all the time. 

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

No, no I'll continue to post in this thread, I do sometimes enjoy the debate

 

And I was just joking with my comment, hence the    

 

You GG people are very sensitive and defensive, it seems  you can't take a joke

 

I was a little surprised by how upset Longknife/Fighter was. I didn't think you were totally serious.

 

 

Yes, they completely overreacted. People mustn't always assume the worst when people make comments, sometimes a bit of levity is important

[TrashMan]

Still doesn't change the fact that you avoid answering and make "joke" responses as a smokescreen.

[BruceVC]

Still doesn't change the fact that you avoid answering and make "joke" responses as a smokescreen.

I thought the point about the word " feminism " been taken out the poll was answered ?

 

It was taken out because it would have skewered the result, if you had the word "ISIS " in the poll surly they should receive more negativity ?

 

But people who are active on the Internet vote on emotion and somehow "feminism " becomes the worst word ever. But that doesn't reflect the reality....just people who can influence the poll

 

I'm not sure what else I didn't answer?

[Chilloutman]

 

Still doesn't change the fact that you avoid answering and make "joke" responses as a smokescreen.

I thought the point about the word " feminism " been taken out the poll was answered ?

 

It was taken out because it would have skewered the result, if you had the word "ISIS " in the poll surly they should receive more negativity ?

 

But people who are active on the Internet vote on emotion and somehow "feminism " becomes the worst word ever. But that doesn't reflect the reality....just people who can influence the poll

 

I'm not sure what else I didn't answer?

 

 

I am starting to believe that you are biggest troll on these forums, and is quite a lot considering we got oby around

[TrashMan]

I thought the point about the word " feminism " been taken out the poll was answered ?

 

It was taken out because it would have skewered the result, if you had the word "ISIS " in the poll surly they should receive more negativity ?

 

But people who are active on the Internet vote on emotion and somehow "feminism " becomes the worst word ever. But that doesn't reflect the reality....just people who can influence the poll

 

I'm not sure what else I didn't answer?

 

 

You are wrong, there is no "should".

A poll is not a tool to get the result you want, it's to get a result that is.

So a result that does not conform to what you think is "skewered" and has to be discarded?

That people decide to vote like that IS the reality, you just don't want to accept it.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Even broken clock is right twice a day. Furthermore I think this shows one of the major differences between GamerGate and those who are against it. We talk about ideas and it is irrelevant where the idea comes from. Opposition talks about people and does so in a very binary fashion, if the person is against them then nothing he or she say has no value.  

 

 

 

Is that taking the "red pill"? I am quite unfamiliar what exactly those kind of people are, except for the Matrix-reference. Anyhoo, even Hitler agreed that people need to relax from work during the holidays and that cancer research needs more funding than before. Does that invalidate the opinion itself? not really.

 

Gee, sorry for not thinking an openly racist and misogynyst scumbag has any valuable opinions about, y'know, social justice.

 

I'm perfectly okay with a racist and misogynyst scumbag offering his opinions on stuff unrelated to racism and misogyny (f'rex, I don't think James Watson should be forbidden from talking about genetics, despite his absolutely vile opinions on black people), but you literally can't discuss Sarkeesian's work (or gamergate-as-an-anti-SJW-movement) in any meaningful way without touching on those issues.

[BruceVC]

 

I thought the point about the word " feminism " been taken out the poll was answered ?

 

It was taken out because it would have skewered the result, if you had the word "ISIS " in the poll surly they should receive more negativity ?

 

But people who are active on the Internet vote on emotion and somehow "feminism " becomes the worst word ever. But that doesn't reflect the reality....just people who can influence the poll

 

I'm not sure what else I didn't answer?

 

 

You are wrong, there is no "should".

A poll is not a tool to get the result you want, it's to get a result that is.

So a result that does not conform to what you think is "skewered" and has to be discarded?

That people decide to vote like that IS the reality, you just don't want to accept it.

 

No you wrong and I tie your spurious assertion back to the " EA was the worst American company "  ever vote

 

Worse than the big  banks, the oil companies, the cigarette companies?  Of course its not, its a frigging software company. How could it be worse than them, yet according to your logic " its must be the worst company ever because the poll said so ". There are  factors that the poll doesn't consider so it can create an unreasonable  and unrealistic result

[TrashMan]

 

 

I thought the point about the word " feminism " been taken out the poll was answered ?

 

It was taken out because it would have skewered the result, if you had the word "ISIS " in the poll surly they should receive more negativity ?

 

But people who are active on the Internet vote on emotion and somehow "feminism " becomes the worst word ever. But that doesn't reflect the reality....just people who can influence the poll

 

I'm not sure what else I didn't answer?

 

 

You are wrong, there is no "should".

A poll is not a tool to get the result you want, it's to get a result that is.

So a result that does not conform to what you think is "skewered" and has to be discarded?

That people decide to vote like that IS the reality, you just don't want to accept it.

 

No you wrong and I tie your spurious assertion back to the " EA was the worst American company "  ever vote

 

Worse than the big  banks, the oil companies, the cigarette companies?  Of course its not, its a frigging software company. How could it be worse than them, yet according to your logic " its must be the worst company ever because the poll said so ". There are  factors that the poll doesn't consider so it can create an unreasonable  and unrealistic result

 

 

A POLL DOES NOT EXIST TO VALIDATE YOUR OPINION.

 

You think EA is not the worst? I agree. But you know what? It doesn't matter what I think. It doesn't matter what you think either.

 

Polls are reflective of what people who voted think at the time of voting. OF COURSE emotions factors into it. Everything does.

The result is what it is.

 

You just don't want to accept it because it clashes with what you think the result should be

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Polls are reflective of what people who voted think at the time of voting. 

 

 

This is also why they generally tend not to offer any meaningful insight into what the wider populace thinks. I mean, you can certainly ascertain what the subgroup of "people who have access to Internet, have time to and like to fill out internet polls, and are aware of the poll in question" think, but these selection criteria are not guaranteed to grant you a representative sample.

 

Gee, it's like you people have never heard of selection bias.

[Chilloutman]

 

 

Polls are reflective of what people who voted think at the time of voting. 

 

 

This is also why they generally tend not to offer any meaningful insight into what the wider populace thinks. I mean, you can certainly ascertain what the subgroup of "people who have access to Internet, have time to and like to fill out internet polls, and are aware of the poll in question" think, but these selection criteria are not guaranteed to grant you a representative sample.

 

Gee, it's like you people have never heard of selection bias.

 

 

I agree with you that people who reply were limited sample, still poll have its results and doesnt have to reflect your opinion and definitely should not change winning option because it's comfortable for someone

[TrashMan]

 

 

Polls are reflective of what people who voted think at the time of voting. 

 

 

This is also why they generally tend not to offer any meaningful insight into what the wider populace thinks. I mean, you can certainly ascertain what the subgroup of "people who have access to Internet, have time to and like to fill out internet polls, and are aware of the poll in question" think, but these selection criteria are not guaranteed to grant you a representative sample.

 

Gee, it's like you people have never heard of selection bias.

 

 

 

What this poll tells you is that a lot of people are fed up with SJW's and radical feminists. a big backlash is happening.

 

Polls like that are not proper scientific polls, yes. So what?

It's a poll specifically for people who come to that site. In theory, it's representative of THAT.

If you already now that, then why censor?

 

[Longknife]

 

 

 

No, no I'll continue to post in this thread, I do sometimes enjoy the debate

 

And I was just joking with my comment, hence the    

 

You GG people are very sensitive and defensive, it seems  you can't take a joke

 

I was a little surprised by how upset Longknife/Fighter was. I didn't think you were totally serious.

 

 

 

I'm upset by it because Bruce has this wonderful habit of not even replying to points he cannot counter while posting nothing but things that fit into his agenda or things to derail from serious discussion. I've got nothing against humor or even derailing comments when it's only to a certain extent.

 

But seriously, flip back through the pages. You'll notice a clear pattern where some of the most effective arguments by a GGer are blissfully looked over as he pretends they do not exist.

 

 

Meanwhile, in the very first thread of this series, I proposed a challenge to name one prominent GG supporter who has made a single sexist or racist comment or condoned harassment. My point was that the only people the SJWs and anti-GG point to are the anonymous trolls with names like "umadsosad" who post things like "I'll fookn cut j00 n***er lel" and try to claim that's the face of an entire movement. Such tactics could be used against literally -ANY- group.

 

  And here we are and he's "joking" about how sexist and racist GG is while still failing to cite a SINGLE example of sexism or racism even after I and others have asked him to do so.

No, you do not have the right to make such jokes when you cannot even participate in a real debate or respond to requests to cite your stances.

 

 

 

Why did that comment piss me off? Because it beautifully sums up how delusional and blind Bruce is. I'm not blind to the fact it was a joke, but what's disturbing to me is that he apparently thinks ANYONE would find it funny. It's the most obvious thing in the world that he's in the overwhelming minority opinion in this thread, and yet he spouts that "joke" as if he were in some sort of supermajority and everyone will love it. That to me says that regardless how much we talk to him or tell him this or that, he won't listen or acknowledge reality. Talking to him is like talking to a brick wall, and even when people make good points, he blatantly ignores them and continues to go about with an attitude that he is right and we are wrong and obviously everyone in GG is sexist and racist.

 

Yes, I would surmise from that joke that he still believe GamerGate to be a sexist/racist/all the bad word in the world movement, and that pisses me off, because for him to think that now is nothing short of delusional.

 

 

You wanna challenge my point? Ask him yourself, right now, if he thinks people in GG are sexist and racist, then ask him to name prominent examples. As I said, no, I do NOT find such a joke ok when he cannot name examples because when one makes such a joke while completely lacking evidence to reinforce that joke and actually warrant it's existence, then that to me says "this individual is delusional as ****." Him telling that joke is essentially on par with a Republican going to a Democratic convention and telling a joke about how the scumbag democrats framed Richard Nixon: it's nothing short of delusional to think it'd be well-received and highlights just how in-denial he is to think it would be.

 

 

To quote a comedian, "it's my firm belief, you absolutely have to know where you are in the time space continuum." I never thought I'd meet someone where I questioned if they did.

Edited November 19, 2014 by Longknife

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I agree with you that people who reply were limited sample, still poll have its results and doesnt have to reflect your opinion and definitely should not change winning option because it's comfortable for someone

 

 

Yupp, definitely. I mean, those who would tout it as Ultimate Proof would betray nothing more but their own ignorance of how statistics work. Censorship in this context is an extremely bad move, it just lends legitimacy to the idea that the poll is somehow relevant.

 

 

Meanwhile, in the very first thread of this series, I proposed a challenge to name one prominent GG supporter who has made a single sexist or racist comment or condoned harassment. 

 

 

You mean, one that is impossible to answer due to "prominent GG supporter" being impossible to define? I mean, I've provided multiple quotes dripping with racism and misogyny from the Aurini guy who has somehow managed to gather 15k dollars from (presumably) GG supporters, so I guess you could call him "prominent". Or Milo Whatshisname who made a career out of being a professional bigot? Hell, even TB did the casually dismissing death threats thingie (for which he later apologized, but still).

[Meshugger]

 

Even broken clock is right twice a day. Furthermore I think this shows one of the major differences between GamerGate and those who are against it. We talk about ideas and it is irrelevant where the idea comes from. Opposition talks about people and does so in a very binary fashion, if the person is against them then nothing he or she say has no value.  

 

 

 

Is that taking the "red pill"? I am quite unfamiliar what exactly those kind of people are, except for the Matrix-reference. Anyhoo, even Hitler agreed that people need to relax from work during the holidays and that cancer research needs more funding than before. Does that invalidate the opinion itself? not really.

 

Gee, sorry for not thinking an openly racist and misogynyst scumbag has any valuable opinions about, y'know, social justice.

 

I'm perfectly okay with a racist and misogynyst scumbag offering his opinions on stuff unrelated to racism and misogyny (f'rex, I don't think James Watson should be forbidden from talking about genetics, despite his absolutely vile opinions on black people), but you literally can't discuss Sarkeesian's work (or gamergate-as-an-anti-SJW-movement) in any meaningful way without touching on those issues.

 

 

Apology accepted.

[Meshugger]

Btw, TB is a practising christian that really hates Thatcher and support Labour fully.  

[Malcador]

I am starting to believe that you are biggest troll on these forums, and is quite a lot considering we got oby around

Pretty much.

 

Btw, TB is a practising christian that really hates Thatcher and support Labour fully.

Don't think TB's ever really been racist or bigoted, no ? Then again, that latter one is possible for anyone with enough adjustments

Edited November 19, 2014 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

No, no I'll continue to post in this thread, I do sometimes enjoy the debate

 

And I was just joking with my comment, hence the    

 

You GG people are very sensitive and defensive, it seems  you can't take a joke

 

I was a little surprised by how upset Longknife/Fighter was. I didn't think you were totally serious.

 

 

 

I'm upset by it because Bruce has this wonderful habit of not even replying to points he cannot counter while posting nothing but things that fit into his agenda or things to derail from serious discussion. I've got nothing against humor or even derailing comments when it's only to a certain extent.

 

But seriously, flip back through the pages. You'll notice a clear pattern where some of the most effective arguments by a GGer are blissfully looked over as he pretends they do not exist.

 

 

Meanwhile, in the very first thread of this series, I proposed a challenge to name one prominent GG supporter who has made a single sexist or racist comment or condoned harassment. My point was that the only people the SJWs and anti-GG point to are the anonymous trolls with names like "umadsosad" who post things like "I'll fookn cut j00 n***er lel" and try to claim that's the face of an entire movement. Such tactics could be used against literally -ANY- group.

 

  And here we are and he's "joking" about how sexist and racist GG is while still failing to cite a SINGLE example of sexism or racism even after I and others have asked him to do so.

No, you do not have the right to make such jokes when you cannot even participate in a real debate or respond to requests to cite your stances.

 

 

 

Why did that comment piss me off? Because it beautifully sums up how delusional and blind Bruce is. I'm not blind to the fact it was a joke, but what's disturbing to me is that he apparently thinks ANYONE would find it funny. It's the most obvious thing in the world that he's in the overwhelming minority opinion in this thread, and yet he spouts that "joke" as if he were in some sort of supermajority and everyone will love it. That to me says that regardless how much we talk to him or tell him this or that, he won't listen or acknowledge reality. Talking to him is like talking to a brick wall, and even when people make good points, he blatantly ignores them and continues to go about with an attitude that he is right and we are wrong and obviously everyone in GG is sexist and racist.

 

Yes, I would surmise from that joke that he still believe GamerGate to be a sexist/racist/all the bad word in the world movement, and that pisses me off, because for him to think that now is nothing short of delusional.

 

 

You wanna challenge my point? Ask him yourself, right now, if he thinks people in GG are sexist and racist, then ask him to name prominent examples. As I said, no, I do NOT find such a joke ok when he cannot name examples because when one makes such a joke while completely lacking evidence to reinforce that joke and actually warrant it's existence, then that to me says "this individual is delusional as ****." Him telling that joke is essentially on par with a Republican going to a Democratic convention and telling a joke about how the scumbag democrats framed Richard Nixon: it's nothing short of delusional to think it'd be well-received and highlights just how in-denial he is to think it would be.

 

 

To quote a comedian, "it's my firm belief, you absolutely have to know where you are in the time space continuum." I never thought I'd meet someone where I questioned if they did.

 

 

I do think that there are elements within GG that are sexist and misogynist, so you are right about that. That's probably the only thing you are correct about in this post

 

It also sounds like you are getting into the business of telling people when and where certain jokes are applicable, this doesn't like GG? That sounds more like what a SJW would say because we believe that certain jokes are not appropriate. So welcome to the club, you'll see its not so bad here

 

I have to dismiss everything else you say as " anti-BruceVC propaganda" ...its bias and therefore we  have to question its credibility

[BruceVC]

 

I am starting to believe that you are biggest troll on these forums, and is quite a lot considering we got oby around

Pretty much.

 

 

Malc that hurts my feelings...you can't think I'm a worse Troll than Oby? Think of all the meaningful conversations we have had where I have corrected you about something and you have acknowledged it ?