Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Keyrock]

LOL.

 

[ Twitter post image removed ]

No need to comment on the text, it speaks for itself.  I'm wondering if I can get my hands on a replica of that sweet shirt.  I've seen others wearing one.  I've done some google searching with no luck.  I gotta get me a shirt like that.

 

Edit:  And, if anyone is wondering, I would like to get a shirt like that both because I think it's a bitchin' (while still tacky as ****) shirt and because it's a **** you to SJWs.

[pseudonymous]

 

How about make your own choices about what to consume. How %&$#ing difficult is that?

Would you support a child-rape simulator? A holocaust simulator?

 

 

No, but I would support a child-holocaust rape simulator.

 

btw - GTA V was banned from Target AU because of the rape mod.  Why hasn't every single Bethesda game been banned from Target AU?

[Keyrock]

The thing about Target Australia pulling GTA V off store shelves.  First, much of the reasoning behind it (the arguments sent forth by the concerned petitioners and gobbled up by Target Australia) are just plain false.  That said, Target Australia, as a private company, can choose to sell or not sell (within legal limits) any product it desires.  They are well within their rights to pull GTA V.  To Rockstar and Take Two this means nothing.  They've already made a fortune off the game in the first release and another fortune off the game the second time around.  This crap is a hilarious joke to them.  Will it damage their reputation?  Let's see how GTA VI sells.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say it makes ridiculous amounts of money.  Heck, this "controversy" may help them get more sales.  

 

Here's the thing.  If I was a gamer in Australia, what I would do is write a letter/email to Target Australia telling them I was unhappy with their decision and I would no longer shop at any of their stores, not for video games, not for clothes, not for furniture, not for electronics, not for anything.  The most important part is following through with it.  If you state you will boycott their stores then still shop there, that means nothing, you need to stick  to it.  Now, if just one person does that, it means nothing to Target Australia, whooptie doo.  But if 10,000 or 100,000 people all do that, then it will get their attention.  Not happy with Target Australia? Then let them know and never shop there again.  I'm sure there are plenty of alternatives that would love to have your business.  Vote with your wallet (as well as your mouth).

Edited December 6, 2014 by Keyrock

[Namutree]

 

Here's the thing.  If I was a gamer in Australia, what I would do is write a letter/email to Target Australia telling them I was unhappy with their decision and I would no longer shop at any of their stores, not for video games, not for clothes, not for furniture, not for electronics, not for anything.  The most important part is following through with it.  If you state you will boycott their stores then still shop there, that means nothing, you need to stick  to it.  Now, if just one person does that, it means nothing to Target Australia, whooptie doo.  But if 10,000 or 100,000 people all do that, then it will get their attention.  Not happy with Target Australia? Then let them know and never shop there again.  I'm sure there are plenty of alternatives that would love to have your business.  Vote with your wallet (as well as your mouth).

You can do that if you want, but I don't see why you would. Target didn't do anything wrong.

[Keyrock]

 

 

Here's the thing.  If I was a gamer in Australia, what I would do is write a letter/email to Target Australia telling them I was unhappy with their decision and I would no longer shop at any of their stores, not for video games, not for clothes, not for furniture, not for electronics, not for anything.  The most important part is following through with it.  If you state you will boycott their stores then still shop there, that means nothing, you need to stick  to it.  Now, if just one person does that, it means nothing to Target Australia, whooptie doo.  But if 10,000 or 100,000 people all do that, then it will get their attention.  Not happy with Target Australia? Then let them know and never shop there again.  I'm sure there are plenty of alternatives that would love to have your business.  Vote with your wallet (as well as your mouth).

You can do that if you want, but I don't see why you would. Target didn't do anything wrong.

 

I disagree.  In my judgement, they did do something wrong.  Legally, they didn't do anything wrong, what they did was well within their rights.  But, to me, as a consumer, they followed through and decided to acquiesce to the demands of a group of protesters (much of their argument is based on false pretenses, but that's besides the point).  The protesters have a right to protest and Target Australia has a right to pull any product off their shelves for any reason.  As a consumer, I have a right to voice my displeasure with a retail outlet (or protest, if I want to take it that far) and to take action, whether that means (and not limited to) starting a petition, picketing, or simply voting with my wallet, or any combination thereof.  Sure, what Target Australia did is well within their legal rights, I'm not in any way disputing that.  I am also well within my legal right to voice my displeasure and to boycott their company because they acted in a way I saw unfit (same as the "concerned parents" that petitioned to get the game pulled off the shelves in the first place were well within their rights to do so, even if they used false arguments).  Simply put, as a consumer, if a company acts in a way I deem unfit (not in a legal way, this is strictly in my own judgement as to what I think is right or wrong) I will act on it.  Depending on the level of breach of trust, and my previous relationship with said company, my actions may include simply a letter/email stating my displeasure, or a letter/email stating my displeasure and an outright boycott of said company.  That is my right as a consumer.  I decide when and where I spend my money.  

 

The bottom line, with businesses, is that money speaks.  Whatever moral or ethical reasons are out there, those all take a back seat to the almighty (Australian) dollar.  If a company feels they will lose profits because of something, they will not go through with it/stop doing it.  It's really that simple.  Profit speaks, everything else is a distant, very distant, second in business.  Target Australia felt that they needed to acquiesce to the petitioners because the potential loss of profit (from the people petitioning) was greater than the loss of profit they would have made on the game sales.  If enough people show them (not just with words, but with actions, i.e. not shopping there any more) that their calculations were wrong and that they are losing more money by pulling the game off the shelves then they would have lost to the petitioners, then I GUARANTEE the game would magically reappear on store shelves.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Keyrock

[pseudonymous]

Target didn't do anything wrong.

 

 

Yes, they did.  They had a game that was rated as Adult Only (18+), that was only to be sold to adults, played by adults, etc., and they gave in to a bunch of Soccer Moms that were worried about kids playing the game.  Kids that wouldn't be playing the game if parents would do their damned job.

 

It's almost as idiotic as the people that joined the class action lawsuit against Rockstar when they found out that they could unlock a fully clothed sex QTE on the PS2 in GTA:SA with a memory hacker.  Most of the people in that class action didn't own the memory hacker required to unlock the QTE, but why should that stop anyone from their payout?  

[Longknife]

I think the only thing Target potentially "did wrong" is I personally question the ingenuity of the ban in the sense that I personally believe the people they just catered to are in the minority. Yes yes, I can "believe" all I like, but without facts to back it up, nothing will change.

 

 

Well, I believe someone posted a link in this thread to a poll that showed 63% of polled people considering it a bad choice on Target's part. Can't remember if I found it here and didn't think to make a mental note of it, unfortunately. I'm good at collecting info for myself, not so good at sharing it, admittedly.

 

 

Aside from that though, check this: https://www.change.org/p/kmart-continue-to-sell-grand-theft-auto-5-in-australia

 

 

I'm willing to bet they'll get more signatures than the ban petition. This petition is currently two days old and has 18,000 signatures. Comparatively, the ban petition had 13,000 signatures after four days.

 

 

So yeah, while I respect Target's right to ban whatever they like and also respect a system of listening to the majority or simply what's the most profitable for a company (cause perhaps you'd need an overwhelming majority before a product became unprofitable to carry), I would LOVE to hear the rationale behind the ban, as from everything I know and from all that I've seen, the ban seems short sighted to me...

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Butthurt because TotalBiscuit won an award.

[Keyrock]

Butthurt because TotalBiscuit won an award.

Well, he clearly won because he's a misogynist, cisgendered, sexist, neckbeard troll.  That's clearly why he's so popular with gamers (you know, the target audience).  Not because he gives clear, detailed, insightful information and opinion, being objective to the best of his ability, clearly disclosing his biases, and even going out of his way to entertain potential opposing viewpoints, in the interest of giving consumers as much constructive information as possible so that they can make an informed purchasing decision.  Nope, that couldn't possibly be why he's so popular.  He's clearly popular because hate movement.

 

Edit:  In fairness, the British accent probably counts for something too.  Everyone loves a British accent...  Except the French, likely.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Keyrock

[Oerwinde]

What does misogynist mean now? I thought it meant someone who hates women but I haven't seen it used in that context for a while now.

[kirottu]

[Orogun01]

What does misogynist mean now? I thought it meant someone who hates women but I haven't seen it used in that context for a while now.

Someone who doesn't kiss the ground that women walk or/and that by their actions might lead others not to kiss the ground women walk.

[Keyrock]

What does misogynist mean now? I thought it meant someone who hates women but I haven't seen it used in that context for a while now.

It's now become a catchall phrase meaning someone who doesn't share a SJW's point of view.  In fairness, the term "social justice warrior" is itself a catchall that lumps together a spectrum of radical far-left-wingers.

Edited December 6, 2014 by Keyrock

[pseudonymous]

I think misogyny means you apologize for calling a group of men rapists.  

[Oerwinde]

 

What does misogynist mean now? I thought it meant someone who hates women but I haven't seen it used in that context for a while now.

It's now become a catchall phrase meaning someone who doesn't share a SJW's point of view.  In fairness, the term "social justice warrior" is itself a catchall that lumps together a spectrum of radical far-left-wingers.

 

 

To be fair, my definition of SJW was the extreme Social Justice activists who would ignore facts and just scream and paint people who politely disagreed and posted facts to back up their arguments ass horrible oppressors who deserve death. As GamerGate moves on people who fit that definition seemed to become the norm on the anti-gg side rather than the fringe element that it started as.

[Volourn]

"You can do that if you want, but I don't see why you would. Target didn't do anything wrong."

\

Kiddin' right? Acting like nazis is ALWAYS wrong.

[BruceVC]

 

 

What does misogynist mean now? I thought it meant someone who hates women but I haven't seen it used in that context for a while now.

It's now become a catchall phrase meaning someone who doesn't share a SJW's point of view.  In fairness, the term "social justice warrior" is itself a catchall that lumps together a spectrum of radical far-left-wingers.

 

 

To be fair, my definition of SJW was the extreme Social Justice activists who would ignore facts and just scream and paint people who politely disagreed and posted facts to back up their arguments ass horrible oppressors who deserve death. As GamerGate moves on people who fit that definition seemed to become the norm on the anti-gg side rather than the fringe element that it started as.

 

 

A misogynist is someone who dislikes women and has a prejudice towards them. This dislike of women can be overt or covert

What you see mostly nowadays is the covert display of misogyny, like GG where real misogynists mask there bigotry around other issues. So this gives them the opportunity to be sexist but pretend they not as they say they are doing it other reasons like " integrity in the gaming industry "

 

And as usual this doesn't apply to all people who support GG

[Volourn]

The only people who are misogynists are SJWs. And, it applies to ALL of them.

[BruceVC]

The only people who are misogynists are SJWs. And, it applies to ALL of them.

 

Volo what worries me the most about that statement is not how fatuous and unrealistic  it sounds but rather if you actually believe it...

 

It would demonstrate you are suffering from a form of dementia and that would personally really worry me  

[Fighter]

You can do that if you want, but I don't see why you would. Target didn't do anything wrong.

 

Yes they did. They made a blatantly ignorant decision.

[pseudonymous]

 

The only people who are misogynists are SJWs. And, it applies to ALL of them.

 

Volo what worries me the most about that statement is not how fatuous and unrealistic  it sounds but rather if you actually believe it...

 

It would demonstrate you are suffering from a form of dementia and that would personally really worry me  

 

 

Here's an idea, instead of hurling random ad hominems; prove that all SJWs actually care about women.  

 

To help you get started here is a popular "feminist" warning about the evils of Christmas music:

 

[BruceVC]

 

 

The only people who are misogynists are SJWs. And, it applies to ALL of them.

 

Volo what worries me the most about that statement is not how fatuous and unrealistic  it sounds but rather if you actually believe it...

 

It would demonstrate you are suffering from a form of dementia and that would personally really worry me  

 

 

Here's an idea, instead of hurling random ad hominems; prove that all SJWs actually care about women.  

 

 

 

 

Well that's an easy one to answer, I am a SJW and I definitely care about how women are treated

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

The only people who are misogynists are SJWs. And, it applies to ALL of them.

Volo what worries me the most about that statement is not how fatuous and unrealistic it sounds but rather if you actually believe it...

 

It would demonstrate you are suffering from a form of dementia and that would personally really worry me :ermm:

Here's an idea, instead of hurling random ad hominems; prove that all SJWs actually care about women.

 

 

Well that's an easy one to answer, I am a SJW and I definitely care about how women are treated

No, you don't. You showed time and time again you only care to be percieved as a good carrying guy and don't actually care one bit for women.

 

 

Wow, that's a serous accusation against my character. Its just slanderous really

 

I don't suppose you can give a example of where " I don't actually care about women "

[TrashMan]

 

Second part of point 2.

My search-fu (and memory) is weak.

Is that your text Longknife?

[TrashMan]

 

Wow, that's a serous accusation against my character. Its just slanderous really

 

I don't suppose you can give a example of where " I don't actually care about women "

 

Coming from a person claiming almost all of GG are mysoginists and sexists....

Edited December 6, 2014 by TrashMan