392 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

This is what gets me, as Sarkeesian and co. say, "If you don't want to be like them(the trolls), don't use #gamergate"

 

Wat

 

You know what that sounds like? Let me bring it up for the third time-

 

"If you don't want to be like the terrorists, don't call yourself Muslim"

 

Sounds ridiculous, right? It is. Just as ridiculous as gamergaters looking for another name for their movement because of the actions of some crazies.

 

No, your analogy is ridiculous. There is something quite different about a religion that has existed for over a thousand years that is completely unrelated to what an infinitesimally small minority did in a few years in the 21st century and a random smattering of dudes on the internet whose genesis was an event that, on the face of it, was really sexist, and whose public contributions have often (without quantifying) been pretty sexist rants, some of which aren't even thinly veiled. 

 

So, yeah, if the Islamic faith didn't exist for over a thousand years, have over a billion adherents worldwide, and didn't  involve beliefs that have nothing to do with terror laid out in an ancient book, but instead literally sprang into existence in 2001, maybe this parallel would be something other than nonsense. But since none of these things are true, your parallel is nonsense. 

[Treacherous J Slither]

Probably because s/he's trying to get you to develop your own views instead of telling you what you should/should not believe?

 

Develop my own views on her views? What?

 

If she thinks video games are sexist and says so, how can I form another conclusion from that?

 

If she states her views, the individual that I very nicely asked to share them with me can do so.

[In Exile]

We should also tell murderers not to kill and thieves not to steal. I think you might be onto something here.

 

We do exactly those things. We tell people not to murder and steal all the time! One of the fundamental reasons behind criminal punishment is deterrence, which is just a fancy way of saying "Look how this guy is in jail! Don't do that thing or you'll be there too!" 

[LPPrince]

No, your analogy is ridiculous. There is something quite different about a religion that has existed for over a thousand years that is completely unrelated to what an infinitesimally small minority in in a few years in the 21st century and a random smattering of dudes on the internet whose genesis was an event that, on the face of it, was really sexist, and whose public contributions have often (without quantifying) been pretty sexist rants, some of which aren't even thinly veiled. 

 

So, yeah, if the Islamic faith didn't exist for over a thousand years, have over a billion adherents worldwide, and didn't  involve beliefs that have nothing to do with terror laid out in an ancient book, but instead literally sprang into existence in 2001, maybe this parallel would be something other than nonsense. But since none of these things are true, your parallel is nonsense. 

 

Its not ridiculous, you're just misinterpreting the point of what I said. Don't look so strongly at the example of Islam and terrorism, clearly this gamergate thing isn't nearly as important, what matters is what they represent-

 

Islam is Gamergate-completely innocent of the wrongdoing of a select few who claim to be part of it.

 

Terrorists are to trolls-the few that gave the whole a bad name by doing what they did in the name of that whole.

 

And people are, just like with anyone who's muslim, painting gamergaters as all being like the trolls that are causing trouble.

 

That's how its been going, which is why I bring it up.

[daveliam]

I think Anita's goal is to point out the misogyny, and anti-female whatnot, in video games in general to get devs to take a second look at the art they are creating. I think her specific examples are kind of cheap and off the mark in some cases, but if you take the industry as a whole, she probably has a point.

 

Could not agree with you more.

[BroBear Berbil]

Why do you mention Shianni attacking Vaughn? 

 

 

 

 

Because it establishes that Shianni isn't 100% powerless. She did something brash that ultimately made the situation worse, but she tried to stick up for her cousin at least. She's almost useless for the rest of the game however, except for the battle of Denerim.

 

In all honesty I'm not a fan of the city Elf origin, because in trying to establish a gritty medieval fantasy it uses a primae noctis type of situation that as far as I'm aware has never existed in feudal Europe. So in some small way I agree with Anita that it's not great, but because I see it as DA's writers actually trying to show the bad old days for women, using a falsehood.

[Treacherous J Slither]

I think Anita's goal is to point out the misogyny, and anti-female whatnot, in video games in general to get devs to take a second look at the art they are creating. I think her specific examples are kind of cheap and off the mark in some cases, but if you take the industry as a whole, she probably has a point.

 

I see no misogyny or anti-female whatnot in video games.

 

If someone wants to complain about the abundance of scantily clad women in video games, i'll simply bring up the abundance of scantily clad women in real life. Short shorts, tank tops, and flip flops. The uniform of the summer. Skin everywhere and i'm not complaining.

[daveliam]

Develop my own views on her views? What?

 

If she thinks video games are sexist and says so, how can I form another conclusion from that?

 

If she states her views, the individual that I very nicely asked to share them with me can do so.

 

The individual could very nicely tell you to go and watch the videos yourself and then you will understand her views as well as I do.  Especially since, as I've said numerous times, I'm not a fan of hers, but I think she makes some valid points in her own sloppy and abrasive way.  Just watch her videos and you'll be able to figure it out.  In the meantime, either you are posting about a woman who you have admitted to not understanding or you are trying to manipulate me into something and I've no time for games.  Either way, it's probably best for you to just watch the videos yourself if you are really interested in learning more.

[SlottsMachine]

Whatever ruggly said. 

[Cassandra Saturn]

That is the thing about a creative outlet. It gives everyone an opportunity to express themselves in whatever way they would like. At this moment, I can create the most offensive game ever and there would be no restriction on me. I am just creating the game. Which I mean freedom of expression is one of the most important aspects when it comes to creative expression. 
 
The other layer comes when this product is subjected to public opinion. If I release my product to the public, anyone has the right to criticize my body of work. This is for the sole reason that I do not have anything against Anita criticizing games, I have a problem with Anita cause she does not know what she is talking about 9/10ths of the time. None of her opinions are contextual and she tries to emulate a classroom setting while disabling dialogue between her and the audience. 
 
Oh yeah also this : 

 
Did I mention she advertised her book after this statement? This was after the Canadian shooting. Anyway , I do not like what Anita's product. I would rather listen to Christina Sommers.
 

 
Off Topic : I am also a firm believer that white cisgendered males are not the enemy(which is something that has been going around). People preach this idea of expressing themselves but get offended when white males do it. If I can say I am proud to be of a certain color, so can anyone else. That is the idea behind equality right? Which is weird because most topics today start off by listing all the labels one single person has it is ridiculous to me. It's like cool I understand you are a trans-demi-sapio-pan-pot-tablecloth sexual but I really do not care what you are. If you are good then you are good.

the post by anita was quite wrong, and that's to counter this, here's tweet on that same day.
https://twitter.com/...049617558110210

[Treacherous J Slither]

The individual could very nicely tell you to go and watch the videos yourself and then you will understand her views as well as I do.  Especially since, as I've said numerous times, I'm not a fan of hers, but I think she makes some valid points in her own sloppy and abrasive way.  Just watch her videos and you'll be able to figure it out.  In the meantime, either you are posting about a woman who you have admitted to not understanding or you are trying to manipulate me into something and I've no time for games.  Either way, it's probably best for you to just watch the videos yourself if you are really interested in learning more.

 

Uh...so that's a no?

 

Dang. I asked nicely too...

[In Exile]

Its not ridiculous, you're just misinterpreting the point of what I said. Don't look so strongly at the example of Islam and terrorism, clearly this gamergate thing isn't nearly as important, what matters is what they represent-

 

Islam is Gamergate-completely innocent of the wrongdoing of a select few who claim to be part of it.

 

Terrorists are to trolls-the few that gave the whole a bad name by doing what they did in the name of that whole.

 

And people are, just like with anyone who's muslim, painting gamergaters as all being like the trolls that are causing trouble.

 

That's how its been going, which is why I bring it up.

 

Again, the analogy doesn't work. There are lots of reasons to believe that the vast, vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists. There's no necessary link between the genesis of Islam and terrorism. The list goes on. 

 

On the other hand, Gamergate was created to attack someone in some incredibly sexist circumstances. Even if we acknowledge in the abstract that the motivation - hack gaming journalist should stop being on the take in reviews - has some merit, the fact that the whole thing basically sprung up in defence of a really sexist situation is pretty colourable as a motive. Then we have the fact that, of this "movement" that has existed for pretty all of the last five minutes, a substantial number of its public adherents have outed themselves as incredible sexists. 

 

There's nothing to Gamergate beside (a) their attacking the victim of an incredible sexist situation; (b.) an ostensibly unrelated, public purpose (i.e., gaming journalism integrity); (c.) a substantial number of self-identified gamersgate followers going on thinly-veiled and openly misognistic rants; and (d) absolutely no real progress, organization, or action on the purported goal of the organization, i.e., integrity in the gaming media. 

 

So, no, I don't think the parallel between a legitimate IRL organization who happens to have a few nutters and what looks to be a front for a lot of sexists to be sexists is at all meritorious. I'm sure that there are people who identify as being part of gamersgate or aren't sexists, who don't want to promote sexism, and who are very much against hack gaming journalism. But those people should get the hell away from the tainted label that they're a part of, and rebrand into something positive that lets them make real progress on their issue. 

[LPPrince]

*snip*

 

So, no, I don't think the parallel between a legitimate IRL organization who happens to have a few nutters and what looks to be a front for a lot of sexists to be sexists is at all meritorious. 

 

Well, it may look that way to you, but it doesn't look that way to me. I see innocent people being lumped in with a few nutters and then things like this happen-

 

 

Because apparently, the idea that gamergate is about games journalism is a "scary" thought. :/

[Clover Rider]

Again read that Hulk article.

 

For people who do care about game journalism find a different banner.

 

We can do much better than this.

[Dermain]

I think Anita's goal is to point out the misogyny, and anti-female whatnot, in video games in general to get devs to take a second look at the art they are creating. I think her specific examples are kind of cheap and off the mark in some cases, but if you take the industry as a whole, she probably has a point.

 

Exactly. 

 

Which is probably the point behind John Epler's tweets, as well as Gaiders blog post.

 

I see no misogyny or anti-female whatnot in video games.

 

If someone wants to complain about the abundance of scantily clad women in video games, i'll simply bring up the abundance of scantily clad women in real life. Short shorts, tank tops, and flip flops. The uniform of the summer. Skin everywhere and i'm not complaining.

 

I recall a story in 2013 or so when Gaider (or one of the other writers) mentioned that they were talking about a romance plot in DAI. One of the female writers looked at the plot and commented that the scene could be interpreted as the Inquisitor raping the female character. All of the other writers did not see the plot that way until it was pointed out, and they ended up rewriting the entire plot because of it. 

 

The point being, that just because you do not see it does not mean that it isn't there. 

 

What would have been the response towards BioWare had they left in a romance plot that could be seen as the player character raping a female character?

[Dio Demon]

Again read that Hulk article.

 

For people who do care about game journalism find a different banner.

 

We can do much better than this.

Out of curiosity do you think feminists should abandon the banner feminists because of a few hateful women that believe that if you aren't like them or male you are pathetic and scum?

 

For those who support LGBT should they abandon their banner because of a few people that bash on others that do not have the same sexuality as them?

 

No matter the group, no matter the origin there's always going to be those few who taint it. It just means those who aren't tainting it have to work that much harder to ensure they're voices are heard.

 

Just as you all know, I do not support #GamerGate mainly because I find the idea of hashtag movements on twitter of all places an exercise in futility. I do support the idea of weeding out unethical journalist practices. Listen to Totalbiscuit's latest podcast on his channel he actually has a discussion with the head editor of Kotaku about this whole matter.

 

[In Exile]

Well, it may look that way to you, but it doesn't look that way to me. I see innocent people being lumped in with a few nutters and then things like this happen-

 

 

Because apparently, the idea that gamergate is about games journalism is a "scary" thought. :/

 

I don't really see much evidence of it really being about ethics in game journalism. Just what exactly has gamersgate actually done about their supposed core issue? 

[Treacherous J Slither]

 

Exactly. 

 

Which is probably the point behind John Epler's tweets, as well as Gaiders blog post.

 

 

I recall a story in 2013 or so when Gaider (or one of the other writers) mentioned that they were talking about a romance plot in DAI. One of the female writers looked at the plot and commented that the scene could be interpreted as the Inquisitor raping the female character. All of the other writers did not see the plot that way until it was pointed out, and they ended up rewriting the entire plot because of it. 

 

The point being, that just because you do not see it does not mean that it isn't there. 

 

What would have been the response towards BioWare had they left in a romance plot that could be seen as the player character raping a female character?

 

 

I would rather see this romance plot for myself and judge for myself whether or not it could be seen as the player character raping a female character.

 

To me rape is pretty simple. If the individual does not or cannot consent then to go any further would be a violation of their person and be rape. Kinda hard to miss in my eyes. Maybe this person that spoke up about it saw something that wasn't there. Or maybe she was right. Like I said i'd rather judge for myself. I'm so curious now as to what this "rape" plot was lol.

[LPPrince]

I don't really see much evidence of it really being about ethics in game journalism. Just what exactly has gamersgate actually done about their supposed core issue? 

 

Example above with the video(hell of a sense of timing, damn! haha) but then again, its not paired with the hashtag(hell I don't use any type of GG hashtag and I'm still here talking about it)

 

What I usually see is discussion being done surrounding videos a select few have made regarding games journalism.

[In Exile]

Out of curiosity do you think feminists should abandon the banner feminists because of a few hateful women that believe that if you aren't like them or male you are pathetic and scum?

 

For those who support LGBT should they abandon their banner because of a few people that bash on others that do not have the same sexuality as them?

 

No matter the group, no matter the origin there's always going to be those few who taint it. 

 

Except that this isn't what's happening. Right now, the preponderance of evidence isn't that we've got a small minority of insane sexists co-opting a well-established and valuable cause about equality. What it looks like is that we have a public group who suddenly plopped into existence to defend the sexist/mysognistic treatment of a woman, and whose publicly-identified members often go on thinly-veiled (and not so veiled) sexists tangents. 

 

If ethics in gaming journalism is so important, then why did this group just happen to pop into existence when it did, as opposed to literally any other time? 

[In Exile]

Example above with the video(hell of a sense of timing, damn! haha)

A dude talking about it isn't doing something substantive about ethics in gaming media. 

[Inquisitor Recon]

If ethics in gaming journalism is so important, then why did this group just happen to pop into existence when it did, as opposed to literally any other time? 

So did they go a year into the past to create all of those videos from 2013? How did they get time travel? Why can't I use time travel?

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I am a postgraduate student, I am training to be an academic and what Anita Sarkeesian does is in no way, shape or form, academic.

 

Discussing things in an academic manner and being academic means these things:- 

 

1) Having credibility as an academic.

 

2)Having credible sources.

 

3) Being able to view the sources not through a specific lens or narrative but through different context.

 

4) Willing and being able to defend your thesis and your claims, with evidence and facts.

 

5) Tolerating your opponent's rational but perhaps opposing views.

 

Anita Sarkeesian does none of these things. Here is what she does:- 

 

1) She claims to play hundreds of games yet there is a video of her saying that she is not a gamer and she does not like to play games. That is the equivalent of an academic falsifying their academic credentials. You would be branded outright as a fraud. 

 

2) She has no sources that are peer-reviewed or that have been published in a journal. In academic setting this will render your argument weak and pointless.'

 

3) She views games as being inherently misogynistic towards women, cater to the male fantasy and nothing else. An academic who does this will be viewed as having a choked viewpoint on things and not a very good academic.

 

4) She has never defended her views from critique by other people, she blocked comments on her videos and blocked ratings as well. An academic will never do that, no matter what. 

 

5) She got Twitter to block people like Thunderfoot / Phil Mason who did plenty of logical refutations to her claims. She has also, to date, never seen on a public setting debating someone who holds the opposing viewpoints. This again, is something an academic should not do because it amounts to censorship and restriction of ideas.

 

6) She uses logical fallacies and strawman to make her points, like she did with the recent DA:O thing. An academic who know what they are doing would not do such a thing.

 

Those who say she is an academic either:-

 

1) Do not know what academic and academia are all about.

 

2) Have only seen academics who are not very good at being one or faux academics or academic wannabe try to be academic, fail spectacularly at it and associate that with academic. 

 

If Anita Sarkeesian was judged by actual academic standards, she would fail, she would fail badly, she would have little to no credibility and she would certainly not be given a platform to discuss or propagate her views.

 

If one wants an academic feminist soman who does what academics do, Christian Hoff Summers is the woman you should be looking to. Why ?:-

 

1) She has credibility.

 

2) She has defended herself against criticisms.

 

3) She does not cherry-pick or strawman or misrepresent things.

 

4) She calls herself as a feminist yet does not allow her judgement on issues be affected too much by it. 

 

5) She is also quite fair to the demographic that feminists typically do not cater to such as men and boys. She has published credible books on men and boys. 

 

5) She does not practice any form of censorship, be it to block her comments or her ratings or to get someone banned from a social media site for not agreeing with her. 

[Clover Rider]

What In Exile said.