Quote from: Sacrosanct;798732Who knows if she's typical.  But most importantly, why does it matter?  Why does her being more attractive than Zoe (I'm assuming that's what you're trying to imply) somehow make GG more right?


it doesn't.  Not relevant.  Making attacks on Zoe's appearance, like you've just done*, only proves that there's merit to the argument the antiGG have been making.  And it just hurts the proGG side.


*saying someone's "not totally hideous" and "plain and overweight" are attacks on an appearance.  I'd like to think we'd all agree on that

Weird, you were the one who said:

"Originally Posted by Sacrosanct  View Post
Man, Pundit's been doing all the wrong reviews. Just think of all the sweet ass he could have been getting..."

Which I took to be a joke. Should have known better than to respond with a joke to a SJW.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;798732Who knows if she's typical.  But most importantly, why does it matter?  Why does her being more attractive than Zoe (I'm assuming that's what you're trying to imply) somehow make GG more right?


it doesn't.  Not relevant.  Making attacks on Zoe's appearance, like you've just done*, only proves that there's merit to the argument the antiGG have been making.  And it just hurts the proGG side.


*saying someone's "not totally hideous" and "plain and overweight" are attacks on an appearance.  I'd like to think we'd all agree on that

I think i'm a bit bigoted.

It is weird, I found S'mon's stab at Will's looks when S'mon posted the other GG-femme, yet when I read this(the quote above), I think "So much this!"

So where does that leave my reaction towards S'mon's stab at Will's looks?
Or even my view on the second femme vs the Syrian Girl?
Not in a happy place, that's for certain.
I'm, as I would call it "off"(in judgement, I recon).
S'mon is perhaps more off for posting it, but I need to look over my own reactions too, or i'm not really better.

Justin says it too, and even Snowman!

Now, I do not feel ashamed for thinking S'mon's stab at Will's looks was fun, but I do not feel shame as such normally anyway.
But.
It is important, as the joke was ... not really that fun, and it do show at what some feminists would call misogyny.

It is interesting, really.
To some, it seems like a harmless(?) joke, yet to some it is a massive affront.
So, is it wrong to joke about looks?
I think Groucho Marx said something to this effect in a movie:
"Madam, I rarely forget a face, but in your case i'll gladly make an exception."
Now, the movie was a comedy, and Groucho is a comedian.
Also, i'm not sure when he said it(the situation in the movie).
So, the joke part may be ok.
However.
The situation concerning GamerGate is one of debate at best, and flamin' toxic at worst.
That situation is what makes a joke like S'mon's stab at will, and general looks on women ... not a good thing to flaunt.

That goes for my reaction, too.

...I think I need to think more about this.
For now, I agree fully with that commenting on people's beauty or lack thereof, when it comes to GamerGate is a no-no.
Perhaps it should be a no-no at all times, but that is perhaps a later question.
Or is it?

Quote from: S'mon;798777Weird, you were the one who said:

"Originally Posted by Sacrosanct  View Post
Man, Pundit's been doing all the wrong reviews. Just think of all the sweet ass he could have been getting..."

Which I took to be a joke. Should have known better than to respond with a joke to a SJW.

You do have a point there, I guess you just ran with it?
Perhaps you ran a bit too far?
Yeah, as I just wrote above: I'm not really better myself.
However, I doubt Sacrosanct can be classed as an SJW.

I think judging people by their looks is not only natural , but utterly unavoidable.

No its not fair.
No, it shouldnt affect things like a person's ability to earn a living, personal liberties, and basic etiquette.

But, nonetheless the idea that looks don't profoundly affect a person's life and shape their worldview? I think its too "ostrich with its head in the sand" to just pretend that's not the case. I was called out a while ago for bringing up Andrea Dworkin's appearance in relation to her views on sexuality. At the time, I apologized, admitted it was crass, and felt suitably guilty for stooping to that level. But in the time since I've thought about it for a while and in the end I don't think I was wrong. People who are attractive lead different lives than people who are average looking who lead different lives than people who are ugly. It shapes all of our social interactions profoundly. I don't think that ignoring that to maintain some pretense is actually ,well, honest.

Quote from: S'mon;798777Which I took to be a joke. Should have known better than to respond with a joke to a SJW.

Or perhaps you could have not responded to a joke with "Zoe Quinn is ugly, gamergaters are pretty". The appearances of anyone involved in this topic, on any "side", are all irrelevant.

But no, keep telling us how you're the wronged party in all of this.

I see a box closing in around male sexuality. I DO believe it's a box that needed to close in a bit. BUT, as it's restricting jokes, art, and even job opportunities (the increasing assumption/fear that any male who wants to work with kids is a predator), we probably need to question the process sometimes. The problem is, simply questioning the process as a male gets you lumped in with the vicious pigs and predators, and that's a very powerful charge right now. I'm still deeply uncomfortable posting about these thoughts as a result (wondering, "Am I the bad guy?"), but I've been thinking them for a long time, and I'm clearly not the only one.

I find this news story about the comet lander relevant:

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/nov/14/rosetta-comet-dr-matt-taylor-apology-sexist-shirt

I would never wear a shirt like that, but I didn't think it was that bad. I'd certainly feel weird telling someone not to wear it. Again that sneaking thought, "Am I part of the problem?"

Where is this all going? As a straight male I feel like I'm basically waiting for some segments of feminism to speak up on my behalf. They have done so in the past, although with GG and stories like this shirt business we've now come to the point where even they are being label-and-dismissed as "misogynist feminists", whatever that means, so I don't know if that will even work.

I guess I'll just keep following my survival guidelines outside of this website:
- Never discuss gender issues
- Leave the space when gender issues that could become heated enter
- Never say anything about a woman's appearance, positive or negative
- Do not be seen publicly interacting with material where attractive female forms are too prominently featured

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;798792I guess I'll just keep following my survival guidelines outside of this website:
- Never discuss gender issues
- Leave the space when gender issues that could become heated enter
- Never say anything about a woman's appearance, positive or negative
- Do not be seen publicly interacting with material where attractive female forms are too prominently featured

"Yes, Hans, so about the Jews and Mongrel Races..."
"Uhm, sorry, I have a bus to catch."

Quote from: S'mon;798777Weird, you were the one who said:

"Originally Posted by Sacrosanct  View Post
Man, Pundit's been doing all the wrong reviews. Just think of all the sweet ass he could have been getting..."

Which I took to be a joke. Should have known better than to respond with a joke to a SJW.

That comment was a joke.  But not about Zoe specifically, but a sarcastic response to the thought that reviewers could be getting laid for their reviews in general.

And if it makes a person a SJW to think what you said is sexist, I guess most everyone is a SJW but you

That's OK though, I guess you're "not totally a moron."

Quote from: TristramEvans;798784I think judging people by their looks is not only natural , but utterly unavoidable.

No its not fair.
No, it shouldnt affect things like a person's ability to earn a living, personal liberties, and basic etiquette.

But, nonetheless the idea that looks don't profoundly affect a person's life and shape their worldview? I think its too "ostrich with its head in the sand" to just pretend that's not the case.

Yes, we as people judge people by their looks when we see them.  But to attack someone's looks and use that as a reason invalidate their position on something goes way beyond that.  Especially when the follow up is to post a picture of someone you think is prettier (I'm assuming without her permission, which would bug the hell out of me if I were her, not only because you were sharing a picture of me without me knowing it, but to completely ignore what I have to say and use me just for my looks) as if somehow that makes your side of the argument more right.

What he said and posted was clearly misogynist.  That's not me being a SJW.  That's me pointing out the obvious.

Quote from: Spike;798772None of which applies in this case. The shooter was very popular and well liked. There was no hall stalking, no apparent mental issues other than an adolescent broken heart.

Ok, fair point.

Quote from: Spike;798772I was going to punctuate this with an example personalized to you, but I can't think of a good one that isn't gratuitiously insulting, so I'm letting you off the hook there.  Its almost holiday season, doncha know?

I appreciate people actually, you know, discussing things rather than making quippy personal attacks and reading in grandiose assumptions of motive, tribe, etc. So, thank you.

Quote from: S'mon;798777Which I took to be a joke. Should have known better than to respond with a joke to a SJW.

There's a stereotypical type of conservative who sees everyone who disagrees with him as being clearly a feminazi/radfem.

This is you demonstrating that stereotype.

Quote from: Rincewind1;798793"Yes, Hans, so about the Jews and Mongrel Races..."
"Uhm, sorry, I have a bus to catch."

So is this an accusation of cowardice on my part?

If so, you're probably right to an extent, but I really, really doubt that the stakes are ever going to get raised to anything like men being oppressed and exterminated, so forgive me if I don't feel like risking too much of my reputation on this issue at the moment.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;798792The problem is, simply questioning the process as a male gets you lumped in with the vicious pigs and predators, and that's a very powerful charge right now. I'm still deeply uncomfortable posting about these thoughts as a result (wondering, "Am I the bad guy?"), but I've been thinking them for a long time, and I'm clearly not the only one.

I agree, but I think at least some of the blame should be laid at the extremist men's rights organisations - it's them that have poisoned the well, basically, by approaching it as "counteracting feminism", rather than "helping men".

QuoteI find this news story about the comet lander relevant:

When I wore a tshirt to work with a Batman character done as a (Pretty tasteful, very clothed) 50's pin-up, a (Female) colleague said to me "if I couldn't wear it to work, you shouldn't have it on someone on your shirt"... which seems like a fair rule to me.

I'd be very surprised if nobody had said to the scientist "is that really an appropriate shirt to wear on TV?"; it was a poor choice for a public-facing role, in general.

QuoteI guess I'll just keep following my survival guidelines outside of this website:
- Never discuss gender issues
- Leave the space when gender issues that could become heated enter
- Never say anything about a woman's appearance, positive or negative
- Do not be seen publicly interacting with material where attractive female forms are too prominently featured

Hmm.

I think we need to fight back against the extremist "men's right's" groups, but it's kinda hard to start a moderate pressure group. What do we want? To discuss issues that affect us as a gender, without trying to discredit those of a different gender who wish to discuss issues relevant to them! When do we want it? I don't know, sometime soon, I guess!

Quote from: Justin Alexander;798766You have still completely and utterly failed to explain your "reviewers must not review games they preordered" maxim here.

This is pretty straightforward: In order for a conflict of interest to exist in the absence of a personal relationship, the reviewer has to be receiving some form of compensation from the subject. If the reviewer is instead giving money to the subject of their review, there is no quid pro quo and there is no conflict of interest.

What you are seriously proposing here is a situation in which the designer is either directly or indirectly saying, "If I let you give me money, you'll give my game a good review." And you're claiming that this is a statement which is something other than total nonsense.

I've said it twice and I'll say it again - PROFESSIONAL reviewers will receive copies of the game to review so they play it first. Preferably, the COMPANY they work for will receive the game, then distribute to the assigned reviewer(s). But if you don't think a professional game journalist/reviewer giving money to a game developer, in absence of a product to review, is ok, then that's your opinion.

Quote from: Ladybird;798785Or perhaps you could have not responded to a joke with "Zoe Quinn is ugly, gamergaters are pretty". The appearances of anyone involved in this topic, on any "side", are all irrelevant.

She's not ugly, IMO. Google her nude pics from a couple of years back and she actually is pretty dang cute (or was back then), not that it really matters. That said, how many of you get all dolled up for your Youtube chats (if any of you do that)? Most people are just in their day-to-day garb from what I've seen, if they even use a cam to record their 'casts.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;798798Yes, we as people judge people by their looks when we see them.  But to attack someone's looks and use that as a reason invalidate their position on something goes way beyond that.  Especially when the follow up is to post a picture of someone you think is prettier (I'm assuming without her permission, which would bug the hell out of me if I were her, not only because you were sharing a picture of me without me knowing it, but to completely ignore what I have to say and use me just for my looks) as if somehow that makes your side of the argument more right.

What he said and posted was clearly misogynist.  That's not me being a SJW.  That's me pointing out the obvious.

Yes, sorry, not disputing that just sort of philosophizing on the subject.