Journalism and Bias in the Gaming Industry

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

So when Anita Sarkeesian received threats, did you leap to her defense and say she deserves to speak?  I'm not being facetious, you may have and I simply don't remember, as it has been a long time.

 

 

I did and I recall a few others doing so, indeed as I remember many stated that she should not have cancelled one of her speeches for bogus reasons as well. She has a perfect right to speak whatever Mr McIntosh had prepared for her.

 

 

Oh yeah Nonek, you are a huge supporter of Anita....we all know that 

[Nonek]

 

 

 

 

So when Anita Sarkeesian received threats, did you leap to her defense and say she deserves to speak?  I'm not being facetious, you may have and I simply don't remember, as it has been a long time.

 

 

I did and I recall a few others doing so, indeed as I remember many stated that she should not have cancelled one of her speeches for bogus reasons as well. She has a perfect right to speak whatever Mr McIntosh had prepared for her.

 

 

Oh yeah Nonek, you are a huge supporter of Anita....we all know that 

 

 

No I am not, she misrepresents, cherry picks content and presents flawed arguments. However I support free speech beyond personal likes and dislikes.

[Hurlshort]

Bruce can really kill the momentum of a conversation.  

 

 

Thanks Nonek and KP, it sounds like we are coming from a similar place.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Bruce can really kill the momentum of a conversation.  

 

 

Thanks Nonek and KP, it sounds like we are coming from a similar place.

They hell we are! I'm a Texas man, I eat barbecue, t-bone steaks, and chili not boiled stuff from the UK or stuff with avocado on it.

[Zoraptor]

"I'd say that it is a 'legitimate' trope, even if it is often misused as a term. There are plenty of things that don't fit the trope, but there sure are whole lot that do as well, at least so far as treating the woman as a disposable item whose purpose is solely to motivate someone else. When it comes right down to it a trope is just a classification system for the blocks out of which stories are built, whether you see it as just building a revenge motive or as a pseudo misogynist cliché depends entirely on perspective."

 

The oproblem with this line of reasoning is that it's not just women characters who are used like this. Male characters are used  like that as well. It has very little to do with sexism. At least not hateful 'i hate women' sexism.TONS of examples of males being used in the same manner. *shrug*

 

Doesn't mean it cannot be a trope in any case. Perhaps the classic trope in fanfiction is the Mary Sue, an idealised female self insertion (ooh-er) into an established milieu by an author. Idealised self insertions are not always done by women of course, so you have the Gary Stu male countertrope. So what is really needed here is obviously a 'Bloke in [appliance/ enclosed space]' countertrope- so all you have to do is find a case study for it.

 

 

Well this will probably be ignored then but I know of several recent studies that show Male victims of abuse outnumber female victims.   One is the 2011 joint study by the CDC and Justice department.   

 

My sister is part of a long term study group here with a big questionnaire/ interview every seven years and that study* found the rates to be almost identical; though one from a second city did find that women were considerably more likely to hit their partner or children than a man was. Having said that, the rates found were significantly different (70% for the first vs ~30% for women and just over 20% for men in the second one) so there's clearly a big variation in classification- one included verbal 'violence' and the other didn't, IIRC.

 

*Pretty sure the relevant paper is this one though I'm not buying the article to confirm, it's certainly based on the right study group at least and is consistent with what I remember of it.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Zoraptor

[kgambit]

 

 

 

Well this will probably be ignored then but I know of several recent studies that show Male victims of abuse outnumber female victims.   One is the 2011 joint study by the CDC and Justice department.   

 

My sister is part of a long term study group here with a big questionnaire/ interview every seven years and that study* found the rates to be almost identical; though one from a second city did find that women were considerably more likely to hit their partner or children than a man was. Having said that, the rates found were significantly different (70% for the first vs ~30% for women and just over 20% for men in the second one) so there's clearly a big variation in classification- one included verbal 'violence' and the other didn't, IIRC.

 

*Pretty sure the relevant paper is this one though I'm not buying the article to confirm, it's certainly based on the right study group at least and is consistent with what I remember of it.

 

 

Just to clarify, the study I referenced wasn't outrageously skewed to the male victim side - but it was tilted in that direction. 

[licketysplit]

And not one anti-gg person on these forums has condemned the bomb hoax. Quite telling.

Indeed. Not much coverage from the usual suspects in the media either. No problem here folks. Really.

[Meshugger]

Even if the GG meetup in DC was disturbed by threat of bombs, it ended up with love:

 

 

https://twitter.com/Nero/status/594512068969103360

Edited May 2, 2015 by Meshugger

[Meshugger]

Such hate speeches in DC: 

 

Edited May 2, 2015 by Meshugger

[Volourn]

"women at home has to survive knowing her son, husband, father or any other male in her life is now dead...gone for forever, killed on the battlefield. And the dead person doesn't feel any more sorrow..they dead

 

Of course this is true, the grief of family members will always be severe, real and implacable. But I would think this extends to all family members, like dads, who have lost family members"

 

You don't see how insane this comment is? That's like saying if a woman is murdered that the men in her life are the real victims not her? If  someone tried to spin that they'd be labeled as sexist and devaluing the female victim. That is a sick and twisted attitude you have but not surprising since you don't value males at all.

 

 

"You can't compare the dead soldier to the grief of surviving  family members..the dead soldier is now dead and no longer has feelings, you accept that right?"

 

\But he is still the primary victim though.  COME ON.

 

 

"Hilary Clinton is making figurative point that is relevant, the families of dead soldiers are also victims. Of course they are, she is not saying the soldiers who get killed are now suddenly not victims."
 

She's claiming that the female famly are the true victims. Ignoringt he actual victims the soldiers. Also, ignoring the fathers, brothers, uncles, grandpas, and sons male family who are also victims. Its sexism. It's also very evil of Hilary and all who agree with her.

 

 

"The speech is from a rather long one at a domestic violence conference in 1998.  The use of the word primary is sloppy, and I doubt you will catch her saying something like that in her current campaign."
 

Are you REALLY making excuses for her evil hateful pathetic words? No better than Bruce. Just another anti GGer SJW showing their intellectual dishonesty.

 

 

\

"So when Anita Sarkeesian received threats, did you leap to her defense and say she deserves to speak?  I'm not being facetious, you may have and I simply don't remember, as it has been a long time.  

 

I believe both sides have the right to speak.  But I also think both sides are crazy."

 

\You are  SJW. Stop pretending that you are 'neutral'. You side with Hilary Clinton  and Bruce after all. You are fine with female devs being harassed by anti GG. Why is that? You hate women in gaming that's why.

 

 

\"Doesn't mean it cannot be a trope in any case."

 

Sure it's a trope but it's not a trope made out of an anti woman stance which is what the creator of was trying to push with their agenda. It's also not limited to women either.

 

 

 

\

[Hurlshort]

Why u lie volo?

 

Honestly if anyone thinks I am a fan of Hilary or Bruce, they arent paying much attention.

 

But Volo does love his you are with us or a nazi speeches.

[Volourn]

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

[BruceVC]

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

 

I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive

[Namutree]

 

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

 

I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive

 

That's what censorship is Bruce.

[Meshugger]

 

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

 

I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive

 

 

 

That's what censorship is.

[BruceVC]

 

 

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

 

I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive

 

That's what censorship is Bruce.

 

 

 

 

 

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

 

I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive

 

 

 

That's what censorship is.

 

 

Sure but my description just sounds more palatable 

[Namutree]

 

 

Sure but my description just sounds more palatable 

 

That made me laugh.

[Volourn]

"I have always hated the word "censorship", I prefer seeing it as just removing content that isn't suitable or is considered offensive"

 

L0L

[Calax]

Sure but my description just sounds more palatable 

 

Isn't that like the difference between saying "I killed somebody in cold blood because they bumped into me" and "I dealt with a disrespectful **** who invaded my personal space"?

 

Censorship is a nasty subject. We all want to perform it when our particular side is the one who's in power and can censor, but when somebody else tries to censor us, it's a bad thing. However, if you begin to censor what can and can't be said based solely on your personal view of how the world should work and react, you begin to cut down on the scope of knowledge that can be legitimately learned by the future members of society. Sure, I want to censor people like the Discovery institute (who pushed for intelligent design in the schools) because I think their ideas are garbage, but they still need to put forth the idea so that the world can also see the rebuttal from the scientific community about their topic of choice.

 

In the modern era of the "entitled millenial" we live in a world where people are more connected than ever, but ultimately it allows people to reaffirm their own biases that much more. Politically and socially it is much easier to find a website or twitter feed that will do everything to affirm your beliefs as they were taught to you, and only through serious upheaval will you end up seeing things from another point of view without the viewpoint feed from your "side" providing color to it.

 

The Baltimore Riots are a perfect example from this. On one end of the political and philosophical sphere you have several people declaring that what's happening is the ultimate outgrowth of a broken justice system and these riots were the only way to draw attention to this bias and abusive system. On the other you have people who've never been in those conditions seen within Baltimore, saying that ultimately there's no reason to commit arson, riots, and violence against anyone becasue we have a democratic system that works. Neither side is going to give up their ideals because they haven't been in the other persons position. The Rioter feels like there's no way for him to change the world without explosive action that causes a huge ripple, while the outsider feels that the world can change because it happens every day within their life.

 

To get this back to GamersGate, the problem is that a lot of the people on either side are having their bias reinforced. Early on it was all about Anita and Zoe being bullied, with news feeds being filled with different reports about this or that fringe element being responsible for this threat or that one, which made those who supported the "GamersGate is fake and people are looking to establish sexism in the industry as standard!" people ammunition to keep right on trucking believing in the garbage that Anita was spilling and the tales that Zoe tossed out, while ignoring the fact that the other side was stating (That games journalism was an incestuous mosh pit of reporters who will push foreward a narrative to suit their needs and sell the most products rather than actually try to provide the news without that specific slant). Now it's starting to skew the other way where the Anti-GamersGate are having THEIR fringe elements used to demonize and steretype the entire movement (As with the DC bomb threat). 

 

Part of our interconnectivity via Facebook and Twitter means that we can "quote mine" people and movements rather than just what they said. Taking what fringe elements say and use that as an example of what we think the majority is telling you. The fringe gets the most press because what they say is so unpalatable to most people that both sides use the other's fringe elements to try to undermine their opponent. Thus you end up with the entire GamersGate crew, and anti GamersGate crew being cast as swatting sexist(for different Genders) ****, while an actual discussion is no longer taking place.

 

And it's not going to get any better (from a sexism standpoint) because girls are being told that women should be waited on hand and foot and treated like queens by their men because they work so hard. The best example of this sort of sexism is probably Meghan Trainor's "Dear Future Husband" where she's basically going to have her "Strong independant woman" cake and eat it too. In her song (and especially the music video) She's basically saying that she's going to be the busness woman with a full time job, while the guy also holds one down. But the hubby is gonna have to cook, not see his family as much, apologize for everything, and basically worship his wife if he wants to have a chance in her bed.

[Hurlshort]

You are about power and control always trying to censor people. So were nazis.  So are SJWs and feminists. So, it seems to fit.

 

Nazi's and SJW's also like to label people, and then repeat the same tired mantra's over and over again.  

[Meshugger]

Volourn simply cannot stay neutral on injustice. 

[Calax]

http://kotaku.com/gamergate-meetup-evacuated-after-apparent-threat-1701761645

 

Relevant due to Kotaku, Bias, and GamersGate.

 

Specifically the fact that according to them, GamersGate is FIRST about harassing feminists and also might be about ethics in journalism.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://kotaku.com/gamergate-meetup-evacuated-after-apparent-threat-1701761645

 

Relevant due to Kotaku, Bias, and GamersGate.

 

Specifically the fact that according to them, GamersGate is FIRST about harassing feminists and also might be about ethics in journalism.

https://archive.is/ijDnG

 

We tend to archive links around here, both to save and to avoid giving clicks.

 

At any rate, I'm not going to hold this blogger's opinion in high regard.

[Zoraptor]

GamersGate is FIRST about harassing feminists and also might be about ethics in journalism.

 

Gamersgate is mostly about ethics in selling you steam keys- it's Gamergate, no s, that is mostly about saturated leg joints/ harassing honest hard working journalists and doing them out of their just rewards.

 

(Seriously, Gamersgate have received threats and the like from people- well, sjws- who make that mistake)

[Volourn]

"Nazi's and SJW's also like to label people, and then repeat the same tired mantra's over and over again. "

 

And?