[Mr. Vega]

Drop the Gamers vs outsiders rhetoric and I'll listen. Gamers are not a monolith.

Dropping the formal noun and putting gamers in lowercase would also be appreciated.

[Flipside]

Fixing that problem is going to require going far deeper into the male psyche than simply telling them it is 'wrong', it's hard-coded into us genetically and I can understand why men feel it is a threat to their masculinity as easily as I can see what is wrong perpetuating the meme that women exist to be rescued by men. It's lizard-brain stuff, and it's going to take a heck of a lot of work to untangle it properly.

Even if it's not true that you're overreacting in thinking male anxiety towards women is hardcoded based upon the transient problems we're facing now, the moment we mastered language the lizard brain stuff didn't matter to us as much. Culture is by its very nature not just based upon our genetic heritage. The same genes can produce wildly different social organizations and hierarchies, thought patterns, gender and age roles. We've already violated whatever how we were "programmed" to behave a billion times. Why stop now? What's so special about gender inequality?

The whole point about Lizard Brain stuff is that it doesn't involve talking, or even much thinking, they are largely automatic responses that are beyond our control. We don't violate that base programming, we simply alter society to approach it in a different way. The simple fact that in thousands of years of development it is only relatively recently that most (though far from all) of the world has come to terms with the concept of Feminism and what it is attempting to achieve.

Remember, a vast chunk of the world still doesn't even let women vote or participate in society on an equal basis, and still places them very much in a subservient role in relationships. That's why there WILL be a response to people pointing out these problems that equates with feeling challenged, overcoming the problem requires a little more than shouting at them until they change, that much has been made more than obvious in the several threads on the subject.

Edit, oh, and you are correct it is not true that I'm 'over-reacting' purely because I said something that you don't agree with, which is kind of my point, automatic defensiveness of our perceptions is built into all of us, not just the 'bad guys'. Every time you read a comment you don't agree with and think 'I'll start this reply with an attack on the posters motives or ability to understand the problem', you're listening to the Lizard Brain.

[Mr. Vega]

I wasn't actually accusing you of overreacting in that way. There's always something about our current place and time that we believe is rooted in "human nature". Absolutely everyone does it and it just something we have to deal with. What I meant was that it's not outside the bounds of possibility, but for the remainder of this discussion let's just assume you're right. My point is that human nature is in reality is an incredibly amorphous thing due to the peculiarities of our intelligence and social nature, so be wary of what our current situation suggests about what's actually possible. It's just another variation on nature vs nuture, and in this I'm in the nuture camp.

[DeepSpace9er]

Personally I think it comes down to this: We are OK slaughtering people by the millions in ever more gruesome and heartless ways in video games. Games by their nature are fantasy and myself and many other people are OK with it. We know its not reality. Neither are movies. They are fantasy worlds where impossible things happen and things that nobody would do in the real world. I dont see a problem with portraying men or women in any way in these things. I can see where this whole thing is coming from but it is what it is. People will make what sells, and sex sells to the male brain.

[Bobboau]

you know what's real funny about this whole situation, I cannot tell you how many times I've stumbled halfway into a conversation between two groups of people and I can tell it's about GG, and I can tell the two sides are on opposite ends of it, but I cannot for the life of me tell which side is pro and which side is anti. I can go pages and pages, weeks into the history of the argument, see insults and threats and allegations, and it still won't be clear what either side is actually fighting for other than the destruction of the other side.

[deathspeed]

you know what's real funny about this whole situation, I cannot tell you how many times I've stumbled halfway into a conversation between two groups of people and I can tell it's about GG, and I can tell the two sides are on opposite ends of it, but I cannot for the life of me tell which side is pro and which side is anti. I can go pages and pages, weeks into the history of the argument, see insults and threats and allegations, and it still won't be clear what either side is actually fighting for other than the destruction of the other side.

Thank you for putting words to my thoughts!

[Mr. Vega]

This is going nowhere, so I'm going to post a very well written statement of a Boston Globe reporter in the gg subreddit subreddit on what GG is and isn't and call it a day.

[karajorma]

I've never bothered paying much attention to the GG/Anti-GG nonsense but I don't doubt it Bob.

You could say it, but it would be stupid and have no basis in the real world and be a logical fallacy to boot.

That's exactly the kind of response that ensures this nonsense will go round and round. Don't bother looking at the argument anyone not on your side makes, just try to defeat it. Let's just dissect why the analogy isn't perfect. Just try to prove you're right to ignore it. There's no possibility you could actually learn something from examining viewpoints that are different to yours.

What is the threshold between "it may have started out bad but it has potential" and "it's hopelessly infested with misogynistic  scumbags"? What would have to happen for you to consider the latter to be the case?

Proof that it's hopelessly infested. So far you've just asserted that and assumed that because you can point to what is basically anecdotal evidence of large numbers of scumbags and expect everyone to accept that means you can safely ignore everyone connected to the movement. Once again I could point at ISIS and say it proved bad things about Muslims everywhere. It wouldn't make it true though.

[SypheDMar]

What is the threshold between "it may have started out bad but it has potential" and "it's hopelessly infested with misogynistic  scumbags"? What would have to happen for you to consider the latter to be the case?

Proof that it's hopelessly infested. So far you've just asserted that and assumed that because you can point to what is basically anecdotal evidence of large numbers of scumbags and expect everyone to accept that means you can safely ignore everyone connected to the movement. Once again I could point at ISIS and say it proved bad things about Muslims everywhere. It wouldn't make it true though.

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Vega is saying that ISIS are assholes and Muslims as a whole aren't monolithic followers that believe in the same things as ISIS. He specifically mentions that he and some members on HLP agree with Anita Sarkeesian.

To clarify my analogy.
ISIS = Gamergaters
Muslims = gamers

[666maslo666]

Vega loves to point out that not all gamers are pro-gg but then gets uncomfortable when people point out that not all pro-gg are harrassers and mysogynists (which is even more true, the proportion of harrasers among pro-gg is far less than proportion of anti-gg among gamers). Thats hypocritical.

Also, while lots of personalities have condemned gamergate, a lot of it can be attributed to the fact that they are condemning the strawman of gamergate, because gaming journalists being biased as usual almost totaly ignore the pro-gg side and unfairly paint the movement as hate movement. If that was all I knew Id condemn it too. Most people are quite sensible, which means they will happily condemn a percieved hate movement but at the same time if you showed them certain articles from our beloved gaming media they will promptly send you back to tumblr as a rabid SJW for pushing their toxic ideology where it doesnt belong. Truth is in the middle.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/

One thing we want is less Kotaku and Gawker and more Escapist. We are not against discussing feminist issues in gaming in general, in fact Escapist used to be one of the more active outlets in that area.

Also, Gamer = gaming enthusiast. A lot of people play games from time to time but they are not Gamers, neither do they tend to follow gaming media much.

[666maslo666]

To clarify my analogy.
ISIS = Gamergaters
Muslims = gamers

Nope.

Religious people = Gamers
Christians = anti-gg
Muslims = pro-gg
ISIS = gamergate associated harrassers

[Grizzly]

Also, Gamer = gaming enthusiast. A lot of people play games from time to time but they are not Gamers, neither do they tend to follow gaming media much.

Mwah. Is there also a Bookwurm and Moviegoer club?

[karajorma]

Yes, there is. Haven't you ever heard the term movie-buff? Haven't you ever noticed magazines devoted to movies and movie reviews like Empire. While almost everyone watches movies there are comparatively much fewer people who self-identify as movie-buffs.

Gamer is the same thing to games as movie-buff is to movies. What makes someone a gamer is not that they play games, but that games are a major part of their identity, A major part of what makes them who they are. To characterise that as only being neckbearded basement-dwellers is very insulting to those who call themselves gamers. It's also especially insulting to female gamers as they are basically being insulted by people who claim they are standing up against sexism.

[Grizzly]

Point taken.

EDIT: Must say that, even though gaming is a rather large part of my life, I don't consider myself a Gamer. That capitilization makes it seem like some sort of... something more then even a religion, which seems weird. I just play games, and I do find it rather odd to connect to people who feel their identity is being attacked.

Vega loves to point out that not all gamers are pro-gg but then gets uncomfortable when people point out that not all pro-gg are harrassers and mysogynists (which is even more true, the proportion of harrasers among pro-gg is far less than proportion of anti-gg among gamers). Thats hypocritical.

"Not all pro-gg are harrassers and mysogynists" <- That statement sounded a lot more awfull then you actually intended . That being said, there is a saying about "a few bad apples spoils the whole bunch". I have to repeat: Untill gamergate can find an effective way to deal with harassment within their ranks (and that is going to be hard considering the group's origins), they are going to leave awfull impressions on the mainstream media.
And I have to say, for all this talk about GG being anti-harassment, there's still quite a few people who claim that people are "doxxing themselves to get more attention". Stories like this won't help either.

[karajorma]

But that's why I mentioned other groups with extremists in them. Or do you think Christians and Muslims deserve to be blamed for the actions of ISIS or Westbro Baptist?

[Luis Dias]

There are also people who claimed that the women and minorities in #notyourshield were sockpuppets, thus absolutely ignoring and silencing actual women and minorities' voices and experiences. Suddenly, the Sarkeesian code of "believe when women share their experiences" no longer applies.

Again, it is too self-serving an issue. Believe and don't dare ask for ulterior intents, accept or be condemned for hyper-skepticism, share these stories or be guilty of maintaining the patriarchal status quo. Except when the speakers at hand are not feminists at all, and are actually quite fed up with it and happen to share their own bad experiences with it. At that moment we see white cis male feminists doxxing, harrassing, denying their voice or existence, starting hashtags that attack the #notyourshield tag, etc.

[karajorma]

There are also people who claimed that the women and minorities in #notyourshield were sockpuppets, thus absolutely ignoring and silencing actual women and minorities' voices and experiences. Suddenly, the Sarkeesian code of "believe when women share their experiences" no longer applies.

And even if they were sockpuppets it is only believable because there most likely are women and other minorities that share that opinion.

[Flipside]

It also depends on where you place your focus of interest. Most people will focus on articles that support their own position, and boy do some people get angry when they read stuff that doesn't. And that's from both sides.

Whilst I'll agree that the worst behaviour seems to be centered mostly on the part of those harassing people like Anita Sarkeesian, when I read some of the ignorance that follows Grim's article on rape as a plot device, accusing him of being a closet sex-offender who wants to watch women being raped, I start to think to myself that there are people on both sides of the debate who are doing little more than embarrassing the very cause they claim to be representing.

[Mr. Vega]

There are also people who claimed that the women and minorities in #notyourshield were sockpuppets, thus absolutely ignoring and silencing actual women and minorities' voices and experiences. Suddenly, the Sarkeesian code of "believe when women share their experiences" no longer applies.

And even if they were sockpuppets it is only believable because there most likely are women and other minorities that share that opinion.

http://m.imgur.com/zqEC8We
One can only speculate how many are sockpuppets.

[karajorma]

But once again you've decided that they all must be.