Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1

    Twitch Starter Kit?

    Being a gamer is a broad thing. It’s like being a boxer, a runner, a football player. Should football players stop calling themselves such because some of them are beating women and children? I feel that is a very poisonous mentality: instead of fixing it, just distance yourself from it. And it is a very hypocritical thing. I see wave after wave of posts from the pro-inclusion camps telling some GamerGate supporters that they should "own it" and correct their fellow supporters when they get out of line, but then, instead of doing the same for fellow gamers, these pro-inclusion just decide to distance themselves from the word, try to find a new word for what they are.

  2. #2
    A new word won’t change anything. Eventually, everyone will call themselves whatever the new word is, and we will be back at the same place, dishing the then-old term to distance once more from a poisonous environment.
    TLDR: GamerGate disgust me, but I’m a gamer and I can’t change that. It is who I am, and if anyone dare judge "how dare I identify myself with a hobby so much (I seen it come up)" then I will have to kindly tell whomever says that to go !% @#%%^ #% @#%$^. I play games, I make games, I grew up with games, and I will be a gamer for as long as this body of mine can keep me going. Now let’s stop arguing semantics and word usage and start trying to fix the real issue!

  3. #3
    Quinn and Sarkeesian, while their practices are questionable, are mere irritants and are not a focus of Gamergate at this time. The allegations against Quinn were merely the straw that broke the camels back, the shot heard round the world. There are far greater issues that have been uncovered and changed already because of this movement.
    The tag may be a bit over the top, but that doesn’t degrade the core issues of the movement.

  4. #4
    The discussion about what the focus of gamergate is has changed, at the time, when Adam Baldwin coined the hashtag, Anita and Zoe were pretty relevant.
    The fact that GamerGate people want to try to shift what the conversation is or was about speaks volumes to just how rigorously abusive it is as a movement. The history of Gamergate is both fluctuating AND irrelevant to the conversation.
    In short, it’s an excuse to abuse. And abuse. and abuse. and abuse. And never, EVER, take serious criticism.

  5. #5
    First off, when Quinn and Sarkeesian were, relevant, (Sarkeesian still is to an extent since she is a public figure, and continues to create criticism) most of what was leveled at them was not harassment, but criticism. Critique is not attack. I am not trying to dismiss harassment she has received, but ignoring honest critique of hers is wrong.
    The discussion has never changed, it has, and always has been, about corruption in the gaming press/media/Indie Scene. Something that has been apparent for a while.
    Most of the movement wants to move on because the issues around Quinn are settled, there are bigger things being uncovered. How is trying to get away from one point and move to another being "rigorously abusive". First you complain that we talk about her at all, and then you complain that we try to move past it? This argument makes absolutely no sense.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts