I am unsure that is a good, or bad thing you posted about me so I have to ask for clarification.  Though while my attitude had been shitty in this thread I am just sick of the double standards that the anti-gg have.  I mean it is one thing if they actually practice what they preach, but the sad fact is they don't.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794360Bunch of incoherant rambling.

If you have a point, you can get around to making it at any time.

But you don't have a point, do you?

Also, one problem with 'both sides' and culpability--
GGers chose to associate with a brand/hashtag/identity.

There's not another 'side,' just a slew of people who disagree with GamerGate or find it objectionable.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;793925But what I haven't seen is an actual effort by pro gamergate people to denounce this behavior whenever they see it.

Last I saw, people were re-tweeting to "FBI" and "DHSgov" on Twitter, whenever it crops up. I'm told there's also "GamerGate Harassment Patrol", and they'll dogpile the Report function to get them banned.

Quote from: Will;794010The vast bulk of GG is essentially anti-feminism. Ethics in gaming journalism is a symptom of this perceived problem.

Well, the problem there, is that Radical Feminism is the "special protected class", that games journalism has gone to lengths for. I mean, you don't collude and slander for no reason; it's meant to be for someone's benefit.

Quote from: WillThe number of people who are GG and not anti-feminist is vanishingly small (I assume there are some, but I haven't actually seen any yet)

Geez, Will, I love you too!

Quote from: Will;794054Anti-feminist: Don't agree with or like Feminism and is working against it.

This ranges from flat-out misogynist privileged dillholes to more nuanced 'equality is great but the Feminist movement has become isolated and reactionary and stupid.'

The common factor, though, is being opposed to Feminism.

That definition is broad enough, the Panama Canal couldn't let it through!
Literally you've just moved nearly everyone, even people who honestly believe themselves Feminists, to the "anti-" side, unless their willing to brook no criticism whatsoever with the movement.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794360Novastar links to article about Sarkeesian's cancellation of talk. http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=792127&postcount=50 I'll let Novastar explain the comment after it.

My comment is that Sarkeesian canceled the appearance, because the University staff & police were unwilling to do an illegal search and seizure for her, to confiscate weapons from all lawful citizens engaging in concealed carry.

In Utah, if you have a CCL, you are lawfully in possession of your firearms (2nd Amendment); you have a right to not be unlawfully detained, and more importantly, your property seized, if stopped by Law Enforcement (4th Amendment). Anita has...vigorously...pursued pulling criticism of her on the internet, often by shady means of content reporting (or outright accusing critics of harassment). I do not think she is a friend of the 1st Amendment.

Hence my comment:

Quote from: NovastarMy first thought is decidely unkind:
"I trample over your 1st Amendment Rights all the time! Who would have thought you'd be so protective of your Second and Fourth, amiright?

Quote from: Will;794373Also, one problem with 'both sides' and culpability--
GGers chose to associate with a brand/hashtag/identity.

There's not another 'side,' just a slew of people who disagree with GamerGate or find it objectionable.

I believe that the journalists who colluded on"Death of the Gamer" represent a side, with Anita as thier very vocal spokesperson.

Quote from: jeff37923;794372If you have a point, you can get around to making it at any time.

But you don't have a point, do you?

The point being that no one had ever mentioned Literally Who's sex life or implied a belief that she exchanged sexual favors for positive reviews. So Will's initial charge that GG and it's sympathizers are a hate group is clearly bunk. So is his attempt at pretending that what you posted is somehow representative of everyone else here or in the GG side generally.

And let me be clear that what you posted does not  automatically mean you are  a mysogynist; it means you were misinformed. I was also a misinformed anti-gg'er until I heard about #notyourshield and saw the nastiness of self proclaimed moral crusaders.

Quote from: TristramEvans;794384I believe that the journalists who colluded on"Death of the Gamer" represent a side, with Anita as thier very vocal spokesperson.

 I think that by definition, if one takes a stance for or against something, one has picked a side, so that includes the vocal crowd too.

Quote from: Snowman0147;794368I am unsure that is a good, or bad thing you posted about me so I have to ask for clarification.  Though while my attitude had been shitty in this thread I am just sick of the double standards that the anti-gg have.  I mean it is one thing if they actually practice what they preach, but the sad fact is they don't.

I don't think it was a bad thing. The Outrage Brigade is not beyond criticism. Supposedly being for justice does not mean they get to use it as a shield against criticism. And they're not the arbiters of decency or morality.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794401I don't think it was a bad thing. The Outrage Brigade is not beyond criticism. Supposedly being for justice does not mean they get to use it as a shield against criticism. And they're not the arbiters of decency or morality.

They certainly would disagree with you. And since they tend to be louder than most folks, and in several cases in control of the media sites where this sort of thing happens, its hard to make shit stick to them.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794399The point being that no one had ever mentioned Literally Who's sex life or implied a belief that she exchanged sexual favors for positive reviews. So Will's initial charge that GG and it's sympathizers are a hate group is clearly bunk. So is his attempt at pretending that what you posted is somehow representative of everyone else here or in the GG side generally.

Actually, in post #218, S'mon posted,

Quote from: S'mon;793118

Quote from: jhkimNot everyone is going to like a short story about a character with depression, which is fine. Tastes differ. That doesn't mean that someone who likes a short story about someone with depression is part of a conspiracy, or is a danger to the latest action movie or fantasy novel.

I think the conspiracy was among the game journalists who pushed her 'game', although I suppose maybe having sex with her caused them to genuinely like her 'game'.

What I'm seeing with GamerGate is a grass-roots rebellion against the journalist-media class, who seek to serve as arbiters of opinion. In a way I'm not sure the particular values of that class matter so much, except in influencing who rallies to them/is willing to accept their message.  But even a lot of people who share their political values seem to be against their attempt to control the information-flow. Obviously this rebellion makes the journalist-media class angry.

Novastar then followed up on this in Post #222, where he cited Grayson's positive coverage of Depression Quest in reply to me, and added,

Quote from: Novastarthey're ok with enabling an emotionally abusive woman, who allegedly sleeps with multiple partners without benefit of protection

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794399The point being that no one had ever mentioned Literally Who's sex life or implied a belief that she exchanged sexual favors for positive reviews. So Will's initial charge that GG and it's sympathizers are a hate group is clearly bunk. So is his attempt at pretending that what you posted is somehow representative of everyone else here or in the GG side generally.

And let me be clear that what you posted does not  automatically mean you are  a mysogynist; it means you were misinformed. I was also a misinformed anti-gg'er until I heard about #notyourshield and saw the nastiness of self proclaimed moral crusaders.

A couple of things....

I'm pro-GG because they are against the pseudo-activists who want to push their SJW/Cultural Marxist agenda on everyone. I'm also tired as fuck of the meme that white males are the origin of everything bad in life. I'm also tired of these stupid shits hijacking legit causes and running them into the ground with their partisanship.

Will has been kicked out of tBP, but he sure did drink their kool-aid.

As far as anything automatically meaning that I'm a mysogynist, I appreciate the vote of confidence, but if I ever get really worried about that I'll ask someone who knows me.

(For the curious, I did ask and was told repeatedly that it wasn't that I disrespected women, but its that I have little respect for anyone of any gender.)

Quote from: jeff37923;794409A couple of things....


As far as anything automatically meaning that I'm a mysogynist, I appreciate the vote of confidence, but if I ever get really worried about that I'll ask someone who knows me.

Just pre-empting any spat about me accusing you of anything. The main reason for my post was  pointing out that your expressions are yours and not necessarily anyone else's.

Quote from: jhkim;794407Actually, in post #218, S'mon posted,

I'll set aside the fact that I mentioned no one had said anything of the sort prior to Will jumping in with wild accusations.

So you got me there, you found 3 out of [delete]51[/delete] 49  posters who've mentioned LW's sex life in the negative. And it took approximately 164 posts to get the first one.

Do you think that supports Will's apparent point about the supposedly widespread slut shaming of LW at present?

Quote from: jeff37923;794409Will has been kicked out of tBP, but he sure did drink their kool-aid.

As far as anything automatically meaning that I'm a mysogynist, I appreciate the vote of confidence, but if I ever get really worried about that I'll ask someone who knows me.

Speaking of judgements of people who don't know someone...

Slam me all you want, but my views of feminism aren't based on TBP.

Novastar:
Yes, it's broad. People are slamming me for saying all members of GGers are one narrow definition. I'm not saying that. (I DO still maintain it's a hate group)
I'm saying the topic of GGers is anti-feminism, however members decide to take that.

I mean, if you are looking at a rally about taxes, I'm sure there are a lot of folks who take feminism to task there, too. But it's not what the rally is _about_ (probably).

It's not about ethics in gaming journalism by itself. GGers are only (generally) concerned about journalistic ethics except as a tool or symptom of the efforts of some feminists.
Which is one reason why the GGer thing is spreading to other, similar stuff (tabletop gaming, culture in general). Because it's not about the journalism, it's about the feminism.


And, again, I think the notion that 'I don't like/disagree with X' is a coherent 'side' is really fucking stupid, guys.

There's a difference between positively selecting a banner to march under and being a critic.

You can certainly identify groups of people who have an ideology and disagree with GG. But lumping 'Doug's grannie who thinks it's awful what those boys did to Felicia Day' in with radical feminists quoting theory about gender dynamics as one 'side' is goofy.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794418I'll set aside the fact that I mentioned no one had said anything of the sort prior to Will jumping in with wild accusations.

So you got me there, you found 3 out of 51 posters who've mentioned LW's sex life in the negative. And it took approximately 164 posts to get the first one.

Do you think that supports Will's apparent point about the supposedly widespread slut shaming of LW at present?

Like I said, no point bothering with evidence with a dishonest conversant.

Oh, those don't COUNT. Oh, that's not representative. Oh, they meant something else. etc. etc.

Part of the standard bullshit internet argument toolchest.