Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Longknife]

Except the groups and people that don't support you or share your views.

Let's put it simpler: SJW don't discriminate anyone except the people they do discriminate.

 

 

Including this wonderfully charming and intelligent porn star who attempted charity work on behalf of disabled gamers, and all anti-GG seems to consider her is a sl*t who attempted to weaponize charity:

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe if they would bother to listen to her ****ing speak instead of going on rants about how sexualized women are seen only as sexual objects and not valued for the things they can do or say, they'd learn a damned thing or too, as well as hear someone with a god damn engineering degree tell them that this idea that getting into the sciences as a woman is difficult and women are discriminated against is nothing but wild fiction in her experience.

 

But no, she has her boobs out. Therefore she cannot be smart or insightful, can she?

Edited December 11, 2014 by Longknife

[Volourn]

"It sounds like Bioware's  decision to be inclusive does actually bother you despite what you claim, remember Volo gay people are just like you and me..there is nothing to be scared or worried about. And yes Bioware has become an important player in the gaming space  around inclusivity and are recognised as such by most. I respect them immensely for what they have done around appealing to the whole fanbase"

 

Inclusiveness doesn't bother me. Hatred, sexism, and racism bothers me.  Power control freaks, and nazism bother me.That is the SJW/feminist mantra. And, that's what BIO  and espicially their more vocal devs believe. Fave Gaider - even thoguh he is a white male (though gay) hates white males. Soemother BIO yahoo loathes gamers. Which is stupid because they make friggin' games.

 

And, the worst thing about SJWs/feminists (espicially the on line types) some of their most hateful disgusting acts are perpetrated against the very group they swear to be fighting for - women.  See the porn star above who they attack because of what she chooses to do with her damn body and what clothes she wears.

 

Also, i noticed you totally ignored those two female GGers videos. You want to know why?  It lets you contrinue to pretend that GG is only evil rapist sexist racist worse than ISIS white males. LMAO

 

*goes back to playing games*

 

Another win for GAMERS.

[Longknife]

Btw? Mercedes just replied to my Youtube comment.

 

 

In your face, anti-GG. My stance gets me attention from a porn star.

[Meshugger]

 

Btw? Mercedes just replied to my Youtube comment.

 

 

In your face, anti-GG. My stance gets me attention from a porn star.

 

You're just perpetuating the ongoing internalized misogyny in her and all other women. Please tell her to stop, people like to be told that. Especially if they hear that it is better for them because you say so.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Meshugger

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Speaking of Mercedes, more info on the porn charity has been released.

 

http://theporncharity.org

 

EDIT: Currently SFW

Edited December 11, 2014 by KaineParker

[BruceVC]

"It sounds like Bioware's  decision to be inclusive does actually bother you despite what you claim, remember Volo gay people are just like you and me..there is nothing to be scared or worried about. And yes Bioware has become an important player in the gaming space  around inclusivity and are recognised as such by most. I respect them immensely for what they have done around appealing to the whole fanbase"

 

Inclusiveness doesn't bother me. Hatred, sexism, and racism bothers me.  Power control freaks, and nazism bother me.That is the SJW/feminist mantra. And, that's what BIO  and espicially their more vocal devs believe. Fave Gaider - even thoguh he is a white male (though gay) hates white males. Soemother BIO yahoo loathes gamers. Which is stupid because they make friggin' games.

 

And, the worst thing about SJWs/feminists (espicially the on line types) some of their most hateful disgusting acts are perpetrated against the very group they swear to be fighting for - women.  See the porn star above who they attack because of what she chooses to do with her damn body and what clothes she wears.

 

Also, i noticed you totally ignored those two female GGers videos. You want to know why?  It lets you contrinue to pretend that GG is only evil rapist sexist racist worse than ISIS white males. LMAO

 

*goes back to playing games*

 

Another win for GAMERS.

 

Okay its good to see you dismiss the view that you are homophobic, I'm not completely convinced because you seem to bring up the inclusivity part of Bioware's strategy fairly regularly as if its a big part of there game design when in fact you hardly notice it when playing there games  unless you partake in it

 

Also I haven't watched that porn star video because I watch enough porn as it is and I like to do other things when I visit these forums...unless you are referring to other videos?

[Blarghagh]

I recommend the interview, Bruce. It touches on some interesting things about objectification of women from someone who deals with it every day.

[BruceVC]

I recommend the interview, Bruce. It touches on some interesting things about objectification of women from someone who deals with it every day.

 

Okay I'll watch it

[Longknife]

Also I haven't watched that porn star video because I watch enough porn as it is and I like to do other things when I visit these forums...unless you are referring to other videos?

 

 

Oh god....brace yourselves everyone, I'm about to go off again.

 

 

You know what is bitterly, BITTERLY ironic here Bruce?  The very reason Mercedes acknowledged me and we had a brief chat (which ended in her welcoming me to message her on twitter, which I damned well might make a twitter account for), you know why it was...? Well you can hunt the Youtube comments on that vid yourself and just Cntrl + F and search for "Longknife," or if you're too lazy for that, I'll tell you:

 

   It's because I commented on how tragic I found it that she's so wonderfully capable, intelligent, charitable and charming, and yet I fear a large portion of the community will not bother to give her the time of day and listen to her because she's a porn star with her boobs out. I had never heard of Mercedes before this event, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the exact kind of person I love to hang out with and try to surround myself with. And sure enough she actually replied to me, as if there was some level of understanding when I expressed that concern.

 

 

   I also commented on my own personal theory that the very people who would argue a woman with her boobs out cannot be taken seriously are probably the very people who will NOT take her seriously, because I sure as hell "enjoy the view" and yet I enjoy her insights and her take on things even more. I might get in touch with her not out of some perverse desire to be like "OMG YEAH I CHATTING WITH A HOTTIE MAYBE I'LL SEE HER BOOBS" (which wtf I could google for), but because I'm genuinely interested in chatting with her, if she's open to it. Just because I like a woman who sexualizes herself does not mean I cannot appreciate other aspects of her, but this seems to be a part of the SJW argument (at least in regards to what we've heard from Polygon or Anita or the like) that sexualizing women is a problem. It dismisses sex-positive women as a problem and as something that sets women back, so I suspect those very same people would not give Mercedes the time of day or bother to hear her out.

 

 

 

And here you are dismissing the interview, not acknowledging it or commenting on it, because she's a porn star and you "already watch enough porn."

 

 

You wanna talk sexist? That statement was sexist. You basically just dismissed her interview as just an extension of porn and that it would add nothing to the debate or discussion or to the reasons you come here. And I can hear it now: "Gee Longknife I was just joking!" Yeah, the very same way you're not convinced Volourn isn't homophobic? I'm not convinced that's nothing more than an excuse, and that you don't WANT to watch the video, because the video displays THE most elegant speaker on the matter we've seen thusfar, and she just so happens to be a pro-GG Porn star with an Engineering degree who experienced absolutely zero sexism in her work with the sciences (amidst the community responsible for Shirtgate) and recently had her own charitable work denied because of her GG stance.

 

But no, she has her boobs out, so what could she possibly add...?

Edited December 11, 2014 by Longknife

[Longknife]

Oh, and on another note, get your best fake shock expression ready:

 

 

Evidence suggests Brianna Wu lied about fleeing from her home due to severity of threats.

 

Big shocker, I know. I would hope enough of us have enough common sense that there's no point in discussing this or trading the evidence, but if someone's interested I can start linking it all.

[Blarghagh]

   I also commented on my own personal theory that the very people who would argue a woman with her boobs out cannot be taken seriously are probably the very people who will NOT take her seriously, because I sure as hell "enjoy the view" and yet I enjoy her insights and her take on things even more. I might get in touch with her not out of some perverse desire to be like "OMG YEAH I CHATTING WITH A HOTTIE MAYBE I'LL SEE HER BOOBS" (which wtf I could google for), but because I'm genuinely interested in chatting with her, if she's open to it. Just because I like a woman who sexualizes herself does not mean I cannot appreciate other aspects of her, but this seems to be a part of the SJW argument (at least in regards to what we've heard from Polygon or Anita or the like) that sexualizing women is a problem. It dismisses sex-positive women as a problem and as something that sets women back, so I suspect those very same people would not give Mercedes the time of day or bother to hear her out.

 

This is one of the major issues I've had with the current wave of feminism (and here's where I get a little angry over it too). Cover up the women or representations of women, they're bad because it turns men into lecherous pervs who objectify them? You like being sexy because you have internalized misogyny? That's the ****ing "put on a Burka" argument. That's ****ing misogynist. That's ****ing throwing Annette Kellerman into jail for wearing her one piece bathing suits. Women have FOUGHT for sexual independence for ****ing decades, for being able to do with their bodies what they want to do, for being able to wear whatever they want and express them in the way they want. ****ing right-wing infiltrants pretending to be "born again as progressives" like McIntosh and Miles Cheong while espousing all the exact same ****ing kinds of Nazi anti-freedom, right wing moral censorship bull**** are NOT taking this away from them.

[BruceVC]

 

Also I haven't watched that porn star video because I watch enough porn as it is and I like to do other things when I visit these forums...unless you are referring to other videos?

 

 

Oh god....brace yourselves everyone, I'm about to go off again.

 

 

You know what is bitterly, BITTERLY ironic here Bruce?  The very reason Mercedes acknowledged me and we had a brief chat (which ended in her welcoming me to message her on twitter, which I damned well might make a twitter account for), you know why it was...? Well you can hunt the Youtube comments on that vid yourself and just Cntrl + F and search for "Longknife," or if you're too lazy for that, I'll tell you:

 

   It's because I commented on how tragic I found it that she's so wonderfully capable, intelligent, charitable and charming, and yet I fear a large portion of the community will not bother to give her the time of day and listen to her because she's a porn star with her boobs out. I had never heard of Mercedes before this event, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the exact kind of person I love to hang out with and try to surround myself with. And sure enough she actually replied to me, as if there was some level of understanding when I expressed that concern.

 

 

   I also commented on my own personal theory that the very people who would argue a woman with her boobs out cannot be taken seriously are probably the very people who will NOT take her seriously, because I sure as hell "enjoy the view" and yet I enjoy her insights and her take on things even more. I might get in touch with her not out of some perverse desire to be like "OMG YEAH I CHATTING WITH A HOTTIE MAYBE I'LL SEE HER BOOBS" (which wtf I could google for), but because I'm genuinely interested in chatting with her, if she's open to it. Just because I like a woman who sexualizes herself does not mean I cannot appreciate other aspects of her, but this seems to be a part of the SJW argument (at least in regards to what we've heard from Polygon or Anita or the like) that sexualizing women is a problem. It dismisses sex-positive women as a problem and as something that sets women back, so I suspect those very same people would not give Mercedes the time of day or bother to hear her out.

 

 

 

And here you are dismissing the interview, not acknowledging it or commenting on it, because she's a porn star and you "already watch enough porn."

 

 

You wanna talk sexist? That statement was sexist. You basically just dismissed her interview as just an extension of porn and that it would add nothing to the debate or discussion or to the reasons you come here. And I can hear it now: "Gee Longknife I was just joking!" Yeah, the very same way you're not convinced Volourn isn't homophobic? I'm not convinced that's nothing more than an excuse, and that you don't WANT to watch the video, because the video displays THE most elegant speaker on the matter we've seen thusfar, and she just so happens to be a pro-GG Porn star with an Engineering degree who experienced absolutely zero sexism in her work with the sciences (amidst the community responsible for Shirtgate) and recently had her own charitable work denied because of her GG stance.

 

But no, she has her boobs out, so what could she possibly add...?

 

 

Please get off your soapbox for a second, I was just joking. I have just watched the video now  and its excellent

 

She is articulate, interesting, intelligent,  attractive and she is into porn ...she is my ideal girlfriend actually  I also like how committed she is to helping disabled gamers

 

I find it problematic that so many charities refuse donations from porn stars. It must be disheartening to want to help organisations but they refuse your generosity because of a moral issue with your work...its like your money isn't good enough

 

She raises some valid criticisms about the behaviour of pro and anti-GG people

 

The one thing you guys won't like to hear though is her donation to Able gamers was refused because of her association to GG and her being an outspoken supporter, they wanted to remain GG neutral. So you could say that GG was responsible for the Able gamers not accepting her donation

 

But once again I'm very impressed with her overall message and the way  she makes her points

[Blarghagh]

her donation to Able gamers was refused because of her association to GG and her being an outspoken supporter

It must be disheartening to want to help organisations but they refuse your generosity because of a moral issue [...] its like your money isn't good enough

[BruceVC]

 

her donation to Able gamers was refused because of her association to GG and her being an outspoken supporter

It must be disheartening to want to help organisations but they refuse your generosity because of a moral issue [...] its like your money isn't good enough

 

 

The difference is GG is more of a political consideration than a moral one I imagine for an group like Able gamers, don't get me wrong its silly to refuse money from a group or people associated with GG. But this just highlights how polarizing it has become.

[Blarghagh]

I see the difference, I'm just saying it's still very disheartening.

[Longknife]

 

   I also commented on my own personal theory that the very people who would argue a woman with her boobs out cannot be taken seriously are probably the very people who will NOT take her seriously, because I sure as hell "enjoy the view" and yet I enjoy her insights and her take on things even more. I might get in touch with her not out of some perverse desire to be like "OMG YEAH I CHATTING WITH A HOTTIE MAYBE I'LL SEE HER BOOBS" (which wtf I could google for), but because I'm genuinely interested in chatting with her, if she's open to it. Just because I like a woman who sexualizes herself does not mean I cannot appreciate other aspects of her, but this seems to be a part of the SJW argument (at least in regards to what we've heard from Polygon or Anita or the like) that sexualizing women is a problem. It dismisses sex-positive women as a problem and as something that sets women back, so I suspect those very same people would not give Mercedes the time of day or bother to hear her out.

 

This is one of the major issues I've had with the current wave of feminism (and here's where I get a little angry over it too). Cover up the women or representations of women, they're bad because it turns men into lecherous pervs who objectify them? You like being sexy because you have internalized misogyny? That's the ****ing "put on a Burka" argument. That's ****ing misogynist. That's ****ing throwing Annette Kellerman into jail for wearing her one piece bathing suits. Women have FOUGHT for sexual independence for ****ing decades, for being able to do with their bodies what they want to do, for being able to wear whatever they want and express them in the way they want. ****ing right-wing infiltrants pretending to be "born again as progressives" like McIntosh and Miles Cheong while espousing all the exact same ****ing kinds of Nazi anti-freedom, right wing moral censorship bull**** are NOT taking this away from them.

 

 

 

Exactly. This absolutely infuriates me to no end.

 

I wrote this in a youtube comment but I'll rewrite this here:

 

I have commitment issues. My mom is very obsessive, very controlling, I was an only child to a single mother, and I think it affected me in a way that I subconciously worry a relationship with a woman could feel the same. I think I've been offered sex or sexual favors by a woman I had just become acquainted with or didn't know so well a good 4 times in my 25 years of age, and whereas the average guy would accept this, I turned every single offer down. Why? Because ideally yes, I don't owe them anything for this offer of theirs and they should understand a gift is a gift and if it was meant to guilt-trip me so we become closer, tough sh** for you, and otherwise I would HOPE the offer is one of being genuinely interested in...yknow, having sex. I'm by no means trying to say all women are underhanded or something, I simply mean that when you don't know a person well, that possibility exists, and I have commitment issues to a degree where I will NOT take that risk, despite being a man and having a ****. The risk of meeting someone, having sex, and then realizing that person is taking that as an invitation into my life like I owe them is terrifying to me.

 

   As such, there's two types of women I fall for: stone-cold b****es who send a clear message they could survive without me (this one is tragic and unfortunate for me) and women that would be regarded as "slüts" by many. The first just seems detached and doesn't seem to care and in some warped way this makes me feel comfortable, the latter clearly understands sex or flirting or whatever is just for fun and does not equate to "omg we're meant to be together forever now."  Regardless, I have a lot of experience talking to both.

 

 

 

  What have I learned about slüts? Quite frankly, I see the term as a compliment, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not going to toss it around and expect people to understand my interpretation of the word, mind you, but the very women who often get named slüts, you know what personality trait I think rings true in all of them....? Honesty. Honesty with themselves and with others. These are women who won't adamantly deny having sexual desires or being turned on by this or that, these are women who are very genuine, honest and straightforward about all of that. And flirting? Flirting can often lead to getting to know each other, so what you have is a woman who is comfortable just being honest about who she is and more than willing to get to know each other. I'm not trying to knock on women who ARE self-concious about their sexuality, mind you. There's nothing wrong with being embarassed about something (though I'd also tell those women they shouldn't need to feel embarassed or ashamed), I just find the honesty of the slütty crowd very refreshing.

 

 

  And time and time again, these very same women are treated like absolute crap just because omg they enjoy showing cleavage and they openly admit to liking attention from men. And this is a crime how...? Seriously, get over yourselves.

 

  Just this month, I've actually met TWO women who would be regarded as slütty, and you know what? They do charity work. They don't judge others. One is insanely polite and apologetic to the point I make fun of how often she feels compelled to apologize or worry about offending someone else. But no, a good portion of the community would belittle these women to nothing more than sexually-hungry animals devoid of any other personality.

 

  You're not fooling anyone, at least not me. Women love sex just as much as men and get aroused just as much as men, they just have a far better pokerface for it. And there's nothing wrong with sexual desires. It's natural, it's how we all are, and so long as you're not hurting anyone with them (without their consent....cause a lot of people like that. ), it's perfectly fine.

 

 

 

   And what's bitterly ironic? That the very people who argue those women set all women back are the true guilty party when it comes to holding women back.

 

It's just as you said. It's the same argument as the Burka.

 

If every speaker both for and against GamerGate were to suddenly have a debate right now and Mercedes showed up showing cleavage, you know who would be too distracted by her cleavage to actually have a productive discussion? Two groups:

 

1) The people who didn't have anything productive or valuable to say anyways.

 

2) The very people claiming she's holding women back by dressing provacatively.....though yknow this might fall into category one, too.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but isn't "blaming the victim" a thing? If Mercedes wears a top that gets stares, are you not blaming her for the fact that others cannot control themselves? And do you REALLY think men are that pathetic, that the mere sight of some cleavage prevents us from being able to make an intellectual comment whatsoever, and that we are capable of recognizing a woman for anything BUT her body if she so happens to have it on display?

 

   This is all fantasy, this is all fallacy. None of it holds any merit, all of it is utter bullsh*t.

 

And why am I so mad? Because I genuinely believe Mercedes is the most eloquent speaker we've seen for or against GamerGate thusfar. By a clear mile. And yet some people will discredit her "cuz boobs," and yknow who those people are...? The very ones that take offense to sexualizing women, NOT the guys who happen to enjoy the view while having a nice intelligent conversation with her. You want to talk about holding society back? THAT is holding society back. When you've got a mental superior in the room and all you care to discuss is whether or not she should show cleavage, you can jump off a cliff for all I ****ing care. That goes for men who WOULD objectify her, and that goes for women who would refuse to look past that aspect of her as a person.

 

 

  As I've said before, live and let live. You want games with non-sexualized females? I'm all for it. Go make them. But if Mari Shimazaki (a woman btw) wants to make Bayonetta a sexy woman? Then Mari Shimazaki has a right to make a sexy woman.

 

 

Absolutely infuriates me to know charity workers and eloquent and intelligent speakers are getting sub-par treatment because they showed some cleavage.

[Longknife]

Please get off your soapbox for a second, I was just joking.

 

 

 

You know what you're really good at Bruce?

 

Empty statements.

 

Empty statements that don't mean a damned.

 

 

"She made good points."

 

"This is a good post, everyone should read it."

"Very good points!"

 

"I'm impressed!"

 

 

 

You never seem to address anything specific. Ever.

 

Perhaps if you realize this, you would realize why I have such a difficult time believing or putting any value into a word you say. Because quite frankly, you can fully remove all of your posts from a discussion and the only thing that changes is there's a lot less "excellent post!" comments.

 

 

  

 

So having said that, if you don't mind I would like to see an ACTUAL comment and point made; I would like to know why it doesn't absolutely infuriate you to realize that many of the most significant anti-GG proponents take offense to sex-positive women, sex-positive characters and sex-positive ideals, when as we all just saw, we have been given an example of a woman who is just that and - quite frankly - we all seem to be more or less in agreement that she has been one of the best speakers involved in the discussion of GamerGate thusfar.

 

  It's infuriating to me because as I said, it presents a message of "this is a person of extreme value, but let's discredit them ENTIRELY because cleavage." The very same philosophy is being provided to video games. Maybe you think video games are harmless and don't care if something like GTA V disappears off shelves because of this attitude....but what happens when it results in a speaker not being taken seriously, or not being heard out?

 

  That's just one of the reasons I support GG, and yet here you stand with an anti-GG stance acknowledging this brilliant woman, and yet you still stand in support of a side that would like her to shutup and put a shirt on, and would like any real women or games with sex-positive female characters to kindly go away or keep quiet. Why? We are clearly holding back our potential in game creation and our potential in meaningful discussion by doing so, so why do you turn a blind eye to it?

[Blarghagh]

Sorry for this empty statement then Longknife, but: If anything, your posts are always interesting and make me think about things in a different light, whether I agree with everything you say or not.

 

Back to a pure #GamerGate thing: Female pro-GG developer Jennifer Dawe (@GMShivers on Twitter, the developer of SeedScape) claims a rather well-known journalist (she either declined to name or I simply haven't found the comment where she did name him) offered her free coverage for her game on the condition she denounce GG and state that GG's goals and convictions are all unfounded. Take from that what you will. If it's true that this happened, I'm wondering how well this journalist thought it would go to give a corrupt offer to someone who stands against corruption in games media.

[BruceVC]

 

Please get off your soapbox for a second, I was just joking.

 

 

 

You know what you're really good at Bruce?

 

Empty statements.

 

Empty statements that don't mean a damned.

 

 

"She made good points."

 

"This is a good post, everyone should read it."

"Very good points!"

 

"I'm impressed!"

 

 

 

You never seem to address anything specific. Ever.

 

Perhaps if you realize this, you would realize why I have such a difficult time believing or putting any value into a word you say. Because quite frankly, you can fully remove all of your posts from a discussion and the only thing that changes is there's a lot less "excellent post!" comments.

 

 

  

 

So having said that, if you don't mind I would like to see an ACTUAL comment and point made; I would like to know why it doesn't absolutely infuriate you to realize that many of the most significant anti-GG proponents take offense to sex-positive women, sex-positive characters and sex-positive ideals, when as we all just saw, we have been given an example of a woman who is just that and - quite frankly - we all seem to be more or less in agreement that she has been one of the best speakers involved in the discussion of GamerGate thusfar.

 

  It's infuriating to me because as I said, it presents a message of "this is a person of extreme value, but let's discredit them ENTIRELY because cleavage." The very same philosophy is being provided to video games. Maybe you think video games are harmless and don't care if something like GTA V disappears off shelves because of this attitude....but what happens when it results in a speaker not being taken seriously, or not being heard out?

 

  That's just one of the reasons I support GG, and yet here you stand with an anti-GG stance acknowledging this brilliant woman, and yet you still stand in support of a side that would like her to shutup and put a shirt on, and would like any real women or games with sex-positive female characters to kindly go away or keep quiet. Why? We are clearly holding back our potential in game creation and our potential in meaningful discussion by doing so, so why do you turn a blind eye to it?

 

 

Well the anti-GG side isn't some  monolithic group that is united on all it views. So you would have people who would dismiss someone like Mercedes automatically and that's wrong but that's not justification to now distance myself from the criticism levelled towards GG. But I will say that GG really seems to evolving to a more acceptable social movement and that is good news

 

Also I don't care if she has nice cleavage, I care about what she has to say when it comes to these types of debates . I also don't judge people on how they chose to earn money and that includes hookers, stripper and any other possibly morally  questionable profession. I believe you shouldn't judge anyone until you have walked in there shoes. 

[Chilloutman]

 

 

Please get off your soapbox for a second, I was just joking.

 

 

You know what you're really good at Bruce?

 

Empty statements.

 

Empty statements that don't mean a damned.

 

 

"She made good points."

 

"This is a good post, everyone should read it."

"Very good points!"

 

"I'm impressed!"

 

 

 

You never seem to address anything specific. Ever.

 

Perhaps if you realize this, you would realize why I have such a difficult time believing or putting any value into a word you say. Because quite frankly, you can fully remove all of your posts from a discussion and the only thing that changes is there's a lot less "excellent post!" comments.

 

 

  

 

So having said that, if you don't mind I would like to see an ACTUAL comment and point made; I would like to know why it doesn't absolutely infuriate you to realize that many of the most significant anti-GG proponents take offense to sex-positive women, sex-positive characters and sex-positive ideals, when as we all just saw, we have been given an example of a woman who is just that and - quite frankly - we all seem to be more or less in agreement that she has been one of the best speakers involved in the discussion of GamerGate thusfar.

 

  It's infuriating to me because as I said, it presents a message of "this is a person of extreme value, but let's discredit them ENTIRELY because cleavage." The very same philosophy is being provided to video games. Maybe you think video games are harmless and don't care if something like GTA V disappears off shelves because of this attitude....but what happens when it results in a speaker not being taken seriously, or not being heard out?

 

  That's just one of the reasons I support GG, and yet here you stand with an anti-GG stance acknowledging this brilliant woman, and yet you still stand in support of a side that would like her to shutup and put a shirt on, and would like any real women or games with sex-positive female characters to kindly go away or keep quiet. Why? We are clearly holding back our potential in game creation and our potential in meaningful discussion by doing so, so why do you turn a blind eye to it?

 

 

Well the anti-GG side isn't some  monolithic group that is united on all it views. So you would have people who would dismiss someone like Mercedes automatically and that's wrong but that's not justification to now distance myself from the criticism levelled towards GG. But I will say that GG really seems to evolving to a more acceptable social movement and that is good news

 

Also I don't care if she has nice cleavage, I care about what she has to say when it comes to these types of debates . I also don't judge people on how they chose to earn money and that includes hookers, stripper and any other possibly morally  questionable profession. I believe you shouldn't judge anyone until you have walked in there shoes.

 

Well I would not consider morally questionable progefesion hooker, or stripper - they work hard to earn their money.

 

Politician, emplyes of non-profit organisations aiming on politica agendas (such as ethical minority supporters, feminist movements etc) funded by government cash - those are morally questionable professions

[Amentep]

I think I'm going to take a few day break from all this once again. It's just too ****ty to read and talk about daily. Especially since they can keep doing this **** and no one seems to care.

 

I took a few weeks off of the internet for that same reason.  To be honest this whole situation is rather depressing.

[Malcador]

https://archive.today/1DbIe

 

This was pretty funny. I am not sure the game is especially reveling in the deaths of hookers versus other NPCs (you get money from them regardless, right?)

[BruceVC]

https://archive.today/1DbIe

 

This was pretty funny. I am not sure the game is especially reveling in the deaths of hookers versus other NPCs (you get money from them regardless, right?)

He actually makes a compelling argument and raises some cogent points

 

Did you read the whole article because he answers your question, see below where he explains the difference between killing a hooker and killing other people

 

 

"What I personally find repulsive about this game is the pleasure it offers in portraying the savaging of a class of people who are already victims, in real life. This is where GTA 5 shows a lack of judgment. I take issue with the portrayal of sex workers being abused and murdered, because sex workers are already victims, and it's just not right to take your fun in abusing victims.

I know a lot of people desperately want to believe that killing a prostitute in GTA 5 is the same as killing any other character, but it's really not. Unlike gangsters or cops or business dudes or hot dog vendors, prostitutes, as a class, are despised, marginalized and abused in real life, all the time. This means that GTA 5 takes its pleasure in humiliating and abusing victims of humiliation and abuse.

In what kind of world is that not worthy of debate, above and beyond the ignorant cry of "if you don't like it, don't buy it"? "

He is basically advocating for Rockstar to remove the killing of hookers as they are already victims and it makes sense to me after reading that article. Its not unreasonable

[Malcador]

I did read the whole article, he doesn't really give a good answer other than indicating he has some issues with hookers. You can kill them just like anyone else - GTA's freedom to go on rampages is part of the fun of the series - but you don't have to do so to progress the completion of the game. Killing an NPC hooker is indeed just the same as killing any other NPC - these things aren't real, I really hope he is aware of that.

 

If killing virtual hookers is bad though for whatever reason (I guess perception of them will be the best shot he can offer) - how can he be okay with killing NPCs with glasses ? elderly ones ? ANY NPC ?

Edited December 11, 2014 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

I did read the whole article, he doesn't really give a good answer other than indicating he has some issues with hookers. You can kill them just like anyone else - GTA's freedom to go on rampages is part of the fun of the series - but you don't have to do so to progress the completion of the game. Killing an NPC hooker is indeed just the same as killing any other NPC - these things aren't real, I really hope he is aware of that.

 

If killing virtual hookers is bad though for whatever reason (I guess perception of them will be the best shot he can offer) - how can he be okay with killing NPCs with glasses ? elderly ones ? ANY NPC ?

But you agree this can be removed from the game without it really impacting your experience? That's his point