Slashdot Mirror


Combating Recent, Ugly Incidents of Misogyny In Gamer Culture

ideonexus writes: 2490 gamers, developers and journalists have signed an open letter supporting inclusiveness in the gaming community after indie game developer Zoe Quinn received backlash and harassment when her ex-boyfriend posted false accusations that she traded sex for favorable reviews of her game and feminist critic Anita Sarkeesian was driven from her home after receiving death and rape threats for her videos illustrating the way some mainstream games encourage the commoditization of and violence against women. The harassment has prompted geek-dating advice columnist Harris O'Malley to declare the backlash the "Extinction Burst of Gaming Culture," the last reactionary gasp before the culture shifts to become more inclusive.

620 of 1,134 comments (clear)

  1. "Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well said, whoever came up with that.

    1. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sad thing is that there's so much truth to the allegations against Zoe that has been drowned out by the idiots and trolls who want to offend or think that their way works. She even admitted flat out on twitter to having sex for publicity, and yet not a single time has the issue journalistic integrity of video game reporting been raised. There exist obvious and blatant conflicts of interest in several of her endeavors and the media that actually cares to report this ignores this fact. That slashdot plays along is not surprising, this website has a long reputation of pandering to that crowd and backing down on real facts cases like these. It's much easier to just play along right?

      Consider also that Zoe Quinn was outright accused of sexually harrassing a fellow dev at a wedding, whereupon she immediately began the process of what they call "victim blaming" and riled her army of fans/supporters to berate and verbally assault him. There is a huge double standard for the controversy surrounding zoe quinn, and everything she's done wrong is being swept under the carpet because "omg internet bullies".

      I don't care if she had sex with fucking 10,000 guys; that's not the issue at heart here. The 'allegations' are actually facts, and what I care about is that she slept with those people for publicity she did not deserve, that was taken from more deserving games. AAA devs don't care because money, but for indie devs this is extremely important because if it becomes a good ol' boy system in video game journalism then good games that deserve the spotlight will miss out even more than they do. And, also, bad games that don't deserve shit will continue to flood steam and make the front page. Stop supporting videogame-political machines.

    2. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Reference-less accusations seem to prove the article's point.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Xaedalus · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Bullshit. If you're man enough to post accusations, you're man enough to post links referencing actual facts to back yourself up. Posting accusations without evidence is just a smear job, and indicates the lack of character of the poster rather than the accused.

      --
      Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    4. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by dugancent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The accuser produces the evidence.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    5. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Khyber · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "She even admitted flat out on twitter to having sex for publicity, and yet not a single time has the issue journalistic integrity of video game reporting been raised. "

      You can thank Reddit for that. They deliberately censored everything they could on the subject no matter what, even conversations on the integrity of gaming journalism.

      Don't like it? You'd better speak up. Oh, wait, you're an AC, you have no balls to do so.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    6. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Khyber · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Reference-less accusations seem to prove the article's point."

      What, have you had your head buried in the sand this entire time? Plenty of references down to the one being accused admitting it publicly.

      Imbecile.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    7. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Kielistic · · Score: 2

      You mean like all the great references from the article? Hey let's ask the people that are trying to downplay this situation what their take on the whole thing is?

      But here you go: reference. He didn't review it. He just gave it title spot and listed it as a stand out.

      I found this by actually following one of the references from the article.

    8. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by rasmusbr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The inability to go look for yourself means you're the kind of person who doesn't care at all about the facts. The facts are all over the place. Stop being lazy.

      Making potentially defamatory claims without evidence is not just lazy, but possibly also illegal depending on where you live. Show your work.

    9. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Informative
    10. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Informative
    11. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Kielistic · · Score: 2

      That was written by one of the people she slept with. The one that the article said claimed never wrote a favourable review of her game.

      Personally I would count "There are thousands of these games and this one stands out the most" to be a pretty favourable review.

    12. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      None of which seems to prove the claim that the woman in question was having sex with lots of people.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    13. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Misread the thread. I was targeting the ones about Anita.

    14. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Kielistic · · Score: 2

      How the hell do you demonstrate that? Do I need to find her on video stating she was purposefully sleeping with people? She slept with this guy and "coincidentally" her game floated to the top of his list. At the very least it is a conflict of interest.

      The only people focusing on Zoe is the gaming media. Most of the gaming community is trying to focus on the gaming media. People are saying the media is being dishonest. Dishonest like giving their close personal relationships very favourable reviews. Funny how that never seems to get addressed. Just endless repetition of how everyone is attacking this woman. Also focusing solely on her personal sexual relationships is all the gaming media involved in the scandal will cover. None of the other things the gaming community has been accusing her of. Almost like they're trying to spin a narrative.

    15. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by dugancent · · Score: 1

      Hear hear. I had no idea who she was until I googled her.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    16. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by towermac · · Score: 1

      "and what I care about is that she slept with those people for publicity she did not deserve"

      So they owed her? She's not allowed to have sex? Or just not with reviewers?

      Don't get me wrong, I think the OMG internet bullies thing is being way overplayed. But the only thing here to care about is the journalistic integrity thing, and she didn't do that; the journalist did.

    17. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Well, here's some evidence about Anita.

      First of all this is not the evidence that I was asking for. I believe Zoe != Anita.

      Secondly, this screen cap merely shows that some tweets were either posted by someone who had prepared themselves, or by a fast typist. Nothing more, nothing less. Very unimpressive.

    18. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Uh, yea, every site with her fucking quote on it. If you can't be half-assed to do legwork of your own, you have no business debating.

      As in, you have a perfect opportunity to discredit me. You don't take it because you know you'll be fucking wrong and you're scared.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    19. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That slashdot plays along is not surprising, this website has a long reputation of pandering to that crowd and backing down on real facts cases like these. It's much easier to just play along right?

      I first heard about Slashdot when I was still dependent on AOL, a dial-up modem and an affordable toll-free regional calling plan.

      Then and now when the geek speaks about women, I can't escape the feeling that I have been teleported back to the high school locker rooms of 1964. The only pandering on this site is to the geek's own adolescent sense of manhood,

    20. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      It shows the account was specifically created for this, posted everything in 3 minutes, and was discovered and screencapped 12 seconds later without being logged in or doing a search. In other words: whosoever took the screencap knew about this the moment it was done.

    21. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by stdarg · · Score: 5, Informative

      In this thread, the "accusation" is that the accusations against Zoe have truth to them. The accusation takes the form of a comment, not an article in its own right. Your "[citation needed]" post is out of place.

      If you're curious about it, look it up. If you dispute it, dispute it. This is a website where people comment about the article, and often about things completely unrelated to the article. Some work on your part is required, the comment thread isn't a place for you to whine about not being spoon-fed. For your [citation needed] comment to be taken at all seriously, you have to at least add that you searched for it and couldn't find it, so you don't believe it's true without more work on OP's part, thus [citation needed].

      As it turns out I was curious about the accusation as well so I searched for some more information. Took me about 10 seconds to find some interesting things:

      http://www.escapistmagazine.co...
      http://thezoepost.wordpress.co...
      http://imgur.com/a/4VOcx
      http://pastebin.com/Ph22THkJ

    22. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by rasmusbr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It shows the account was specifically created for this, posted everything in 3 minutes, and was discovered and screencapped 12 seconds later without being logged in or doing a search. In other words: whosoever took the screencap knew about this the moment it was done.

      Or maybe Anita Sarkeesian saw the first tweet from that account in her mentions, navigated to the tweeter's Twitter stream, decided to take a screencap, copied the URL, opened up a private tab and took the screen cap. She would have had 3 minutes to do that, and it only takes a few seconds to do.

      (The reason why one should always take screen caps in private tabs or private windows is that it minimizes the risk that your screencap will inadvertently reveal any personal information about you.)

    23. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then and now when the geek speaks about women, I can't escape the feeling that I have been teleported back to the high school locker rooms of 1964. The only pandering on this site is to the geek's own adolescent sense of manhood,

      I am a geek, and I am not a misogynist. It is wrong for you to engage in prejudicial stereotyping.

    24. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Anonymous Cowards, or perhaps the same Anonymous Coward, keeps repeating these claims over and over and insisting that there is proof. They/he never provides any proof though, just insists that everything has been settled and there is no argument any more.

      It's actually easy to see that this person is lying though, because the review of Depression Quest that they claim was written by Quinn's lover doesn't exist. It isn't online anywhere, not in any cache or archive, has never been seen. Kotaku confirm they never had it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by ultranova · · Score: 1

      But the only thing here to care about is the journalistic integrity thing, and she didn't do that; the journalist did.

      If journalistic integrity is worth caring for, so are attempts to subvert it. You don't get to give a bribe and then claim you're blameless for corruption.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    26. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Jack9 · · Score: 1

      > She even admitted flat out on twitter to having sex for publicity,

      Am I the only one who doesn't think this is wrong?

      Prostitution is all but legitimized in modern culture. The social morays have shifted, I feel. Mad Men had an entire subplot dealing with this AS ENTERTAINMENT. This is just a spotlight on what practices are regularly hidden. If not, it's just standard defamation, but I'm not sure why people would be outraged.

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    27. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      First and foremost, The boyfriend did not make that claim.

      But also, corruption does not work that way. What do you want, an invoice? "One sex for so and so"?

      If a politician takes money from a special interest, you don't say "but we can't prove it affected his decisions in any way!". So also with a reviewer who sleeps with people he's paid to pass judgment on.

      Infidelity is especially bad, because it gives you extra reason to not disclose your conflict of interest.

      Isn't it suspicious how little people care about the power dynamics of this? If a student sleeps with a teacher, that may be wrong by the student, but it's especially wrong by the teacher, who has the power in that unequal relationship. Same with driving instructors, parole officers etc. If you get too intimate with someone it is your job to judge, you're a tremendous ass and possibly a criminal. The dependent party also has a responsibility if they're adult and of sane mind, since they create a climate where improper relationships become the norm. Saying this doesn't matter is a slap in the face to all indie developers who wouldn't get that intimate with people judging their work.

      So you see, we don't need an itemized invoice at all to say that this reflects extremely poorly on the gaming industry.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    28. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Talderas · · Score: 1

      In this case publicity is referencing "having sex with a reviewer in order to get her game reviewed". If the only way you can solicit a reviewer to review your product is to pay them to do it, then I think that is wrong regardless of what you're paying with to obtain the publicity.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    29. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      What proof? Be specific. Show me the actual proof.

      And no, a favorable review is not evidence of sexual favors.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    30. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      There's "no actual evidence"? I'm sorry but do you even understand what that word means? Guy was sleeping with her while promoting her work and didn't disclose that fact. That is clearly against the ethics of journalism.

      The two of them were using their close personal ties to promote her "interactive novel" to the top of the list of indie games.

      It strikes me as being purposefully obtuse to continually refuse to acknowledge evidence because you are trying to define it as "confession" to derail the conversation.

    31. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Who's an MRA? What the hell are you talking about?

    32. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Bob9113 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Making potentially defamatory claims without evidence is not just lazy, but possibly also illegal depending on where you live. Show your work.

      There is a fair bit of editorializing here, but also a lot of evidence: Quinnspiracy on KnowYourMeme

      At a quick perusal, it seems like; a) she has been subject to some abuse by misogynists, b) she has been engaged in some conflict of interest regarding reviews of her games, and c) she has both benefitted from and promulgated the misogyny aspect of her story.

      The misogyny part is obviously bad. But if Zoe is taking advantage of -- and thereby harming -- the movement to advance the equality of women in gaming and technology, then she is bad too. If that is the case, then we who seek equality should reject her as an icon. Backlash is a perilous thing to progressive movements.

    33. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      What we need is... Geekism!
      *ducks*

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    34. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by narcc · · Score: 1

      Power dynamics, bro. How do you think it (might) have went down? "I'll bend over for a review" or "I can do a lot for your project, what can you do for me?"

    35. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      "She even admitted flat out on twitter to having sex for publicity"

      Citations please, Because I could not find one written word of your claims, none of them.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    36. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by vux984 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      She slept with this guy and "coincidentally" her game floated to the top of his list. At the very least it is a conflict of interest.

      Whose conflict of interest? I can see how it would be a conflict of interest for the journalist to single out the game like that. I'm not sure what the developers conflict of interest is though.

      So lets jump off the deepend straight to accusations that she is a manipulative woman willing to have sex with a journalist to get exposure. Even if that were true, so what? She's not the one required to maintain journalistic integrity. That's on the journalist.

      Or maybe the journalist was using his position in the industry to try and get laid. Why aren't we calling him out as a total creep, with no integrity, selling female indie developers exposure for sex? Perhaps he initiated the offer by hinting he'd plug her work if they hooked up?

      Or maybe its neither? Maybe two people got together out of some sort of mutual attraction. And the journalist, clearly holding her and her work in some regard makes a bad judgement call to make favorable mention of her work without disclosing the relationship. End of story? Why do we know its not that?

      Is there any evidence this was a deliberate attempt to get a favorable review, as opposed to being merely a deliberate attempt by both parties to get laid with the subsequent favorable mention as nothing more than a poor judgement call by the journalist?

    37. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      I always like it when the gays come out. That's always their first thought.

      It's like Fred Phelps and his obsession with gays. I mean gees guy, give it a rest (technically he is because he's dead). We understood you were a closeted gay, but did you have to overcompensate so much?

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    38. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by aitikin · · Score: 1

      Scrutiny is not hard evidence. At best, it is circumstantial evidence. And it is not at all associated with the aforementioned situation.

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    39. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Video game journalist never had that sort of integrity, nor is it really even applicable. Everyone who knows anything about video game/indie journalist knows that it is extremely chummy with the devs and they like it that way. It is not a secret, and in my mind it is not even a violation of their journalistic integrity. "Real" journalists write about facts, game journalists write about their opinions. There magazines and blogs are basically just a series of editorials, not news articles. Now I am know almost nothing about journalistic ethics, but to me it seems that the sort of job that game journalists do, it is less of or completely not an issue to have personal relationships with the people you are writing about. And regardless of the ideal, it is currently industry wide, and completely accepted. And if you want to launch a game dev career it absolutely would be invaluable to go to PAX and buy a beer from some guy from RPS. And if you wanted to sleep your way to fame, I am sure you could. Have you seen pictures of these people, they are the farthest things from professionals.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    40. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "and what I care about is that she slept with those people for publicity she did not deserve,"
      except the person she allegedly slept with didn't actual review the game.

      Game reviews are all crap anyways.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    41. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Mikawo · · Score: 1

      Curious. How is that a meme? Other than to refer to the actual Quinn controversy, I have never seen the term Quinnspiracy used in any noticeable capacity.

    42. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by julesh · · Score: 1

      She even admitted flat out on twitter to having sex for publicity,

      Link please. This information is missing from most accounts I've seen that I consider credible, so I would certainly like to know more about it. Preferably including precise phrasing and context.

      and yet not a single time has the issue journalistic integrity of video game reporting been raised.

      And in all the analysis I've seen of this, nobody has pointed out a single published article that appears, based on the timeline published by Quinn's ex, to have been unduly influenced. Which is probably why journalistic integrity isn't being raised in many places: it just doesn't look like anyone has actually done anything wrong.

      There exist obvious and blatant conflicts of interest in several of her endeavors and the media that actually cares to report this ignores this fact.

      Like? Please provide actual examples, rather than allusions to the existence of such things along with unjustified claims as to their obviousness.

      The 'allegations' are actually facts, and what I care about is that she slept with those people for publicity she did not deserve, that was taken from more deserving games

      Please provide a link to publicity she received from somebody she was sleeping with at the time of publication, or in any reasonable period of time prior to publication. Note: this article doesn't count, as by the most reliable accounts available she didn't sleep with its author until 4 months after it was published.

    43. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by julesh · · Score: 1

      Evidence.

      1. GGGGP was talking about Quinn, which is not what this image is about.
      2. The analysis here is in any case somewhat dubious, as the supposed problems noted can be explained quite simply. Really, an average of 26 seconds per tweet to write correctly spelled and punctuated messages is not even slightly difficult, so I don't suspect advance scripting was necessary. The speed of reaction to get the screen shot can be explained by the capturer noticing the first few tweets, then opening the sender's timeline to take the screenshot, during which time additional tweets will have been sent. If the early tweets were noticed on a mobile device and the capturer then moved to a PC to perform the screen cap this also explains the lack of search terms and the fact that they are not logged in.

    44. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by julesh · · Score: 1

      That was written by one of the people she slept with. The one that the article said claimed never wrote a favourable review of her game.

      Personally I would count "There are thousands of these games and this one stands out the most" to be a pretty favourable review.

      Yes, but according to the account written by her ex, it was written 4 months before she started sleeping with the reviewer. It's hard to see how, given this information, it is even slightly relevant.

    45. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by julesh · · Score: 1

      You mean like all the great references from the article? Hey let's ask the people that are trying to downplay this situation what their take on the whole thing is?

      But here you go: reference. He didn't review it. He just gave it title spot and listed it as a stand out.

      I found this by actually following one of the references from the article.

      What I found out by following those references: she started sleeping with him in May. This article was published in January. To quote Gjoni's account:

      To be clear, if there was any conflict of interest between Zoe and Nathan regarding coverage of Depression Quest prior to April, I have no reason to believe that it was sexual in nature.

      (source)

      It is therefore irrelevant.

    46. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      Anyone who has ever accidentally revealed some private information by sharing a screen cap would have done that as a routine, especially if they know that thousands of people are standing in line to take proverbial shots at them.

    47. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by dskzero · · Score: 1

      You won't likely remember who she is after this all blows over.

      --
      Oblivion Awaits
    48. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      The Reddit censoring was because people kept posting links with her home address. That's all that was to it. Admins have to delete that stuff. It is Reddit's #1 rule, and just makes good sense for legal reasons. If people are constantly making new accounts and throwing up links faster than they can delete them, then the only solution is lock the thread (all new comments get auto-deleted) or delete the entire post. Not understanding this, people took it to be evidence of some great conspiracy.

    49. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Power dynamics, bro. How do you think it (might) have went down? "I'll bend over for a review" or "I can do a lot for your project, what can you do for me?"

      This has already been debated out by professionals. Giving a bribe makes makes you just as guilty whether you offered one or the other party requested one.

      Trying to reframe a clear case of bribery as a helpless victim of teh patriarchy being unjustly blamed for submitting to the greesy gasp of a dick-wielding overlord for desperately needed publicity doesn't work for the simple reason that sure she would had gotten all the advertisement she wanted simply by publishing such advances. And I suppose you know this too, hence you tagging "bro" there.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    50. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by narcc · · Score: 1

      Giving a bribe makes makes you just as guilty whether you offered one or the other party requested one.

      I'm thinking more coercion than bribery. Hence, "power dynamics".

      "That's a nice game you've got there, it would be a shame if I had to give it a shitty review..."

    51. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Was this screen-shot taken exactly 12 seconds after the last tweet, or do we see that a number of them persist beyond that last referenced date? If the latter, then it's just a screen capture taken in the middle and the timestamps mean nothing. If the former... well that IS quite a suspicious coincidence, isn't it?

      The "perfect spelling, capitalization, punctuation" charge is ridiculous. Many of us aren't so brain-fried by online communications methods that we can't quickly dash off sentences with valid spelling, capitalization, and punctuation. Hell, it's not even that impressive a skill, or have standards fallen so low that someone who can type out a well-written sentence in 15 seconds is thought to have committed some sort of supernatural feat? The "this was clearly scripted before being written down" charge does not hold water.

    52. Re:"Death to Gamers and Long Live Videogames" by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Yeah the scripted thing is best supported by timestamps, not writing style. That's a dumb argument.

  2. Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no such thing as politically correct. There's no such thing as a right not to be offended. Both of these run counter to freedom of speech.

    Nobody's going to force me to "include" people that I don't agree with, period. If you don't like it, fuck off.

    That being said, the asshole ex-boyfriend should be turned into a eunuch and ridiculed for being such a wuss for the rest of his life.

    1. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why don't people have a right to be offended? What "happens" as a result of that is the threat to liberty, not being offended.

    2. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by cryptizard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What, do you think the outcome of this is that the police are going to start going around forcing you to make friends with women? You can be as much of an asshole as you want. But other people are equally free to call you out for it.

    3. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      because if people have a right not be be offended, then there is no freedom of speech

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    4. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2

      Yes, but there is common sense, isn't there? If you like going around offending people just because you can, you will probably be seen as an asshole with all the rights and privileges that entails, freedom of speech notwithstanding.

      Freedom of speech is a right, not a mandate. And that freedom doesn't mean your speech won't have consequences to you. For example, I can tell my hostess that her soup sucked. After that, I wouldn't expect to be invited back (sorry, Mom...).

      --
      That is all.
    5. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      never said there are no consequences, only that you cant legally do anything or criminally do anything against someone who offends you. The sad truth is most americans dont seem to understand the difference between a "right" and a "nice thing to have"

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    6. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as a right not to be offended

      There certainlly is, within some contexts. There is a right not to be offended in your home. There is a right to limit what asshats say on your blog.

      Now, that doesn't give you the right to shut down channels where people say what you don't like, unless that channel is too difficult to avoid. Protests in front of your house. Calls at 2am. Etc. But free speech does not give you a right to force yourself to be heard.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    7. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      because if people have a right not be be offended, then there is no freedom of speech

      Oh bullshit. There is a middle way, and the majority of nations have found it, including the USA. Don't be so dogmatic.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    8. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no such thing as politically correct.

      What's that got to do with this?

      You certainly do have the right not to have threats of violence made against you.

      You also have the right not to have slanderous and libellous claims made against you.

      Even with the laws about freedom of speech none of those things are legal. This isn't about being offended, it's about being threatened and slandered.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody's going to force me to "include" people that I don't agree with, period.

      Actually, that's exactly what will happen. There is not right not to be offended, but there is a right not to be harassed or threatened. People are starting to realize that all the "harmless" stuff is just building up to that, as it has done over and over again in the past. As such they are becoming less tolerant of it, and eventually people like you will be ostracised.

      So, maybe no-one can force you to include people you don't like (unless it's a business or government setting, in which case anti-discrimination laws apply), but I have a feeling you will when you experience the isolation that comes with being a bigot.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by cyberchondriac · · Score: 2

      The way I look at it, (whatever the topic) they have a "right" to be offended all they want (it's their opinion), but they don't have the further right to act on that and shut anyone up/down, unless it's serious defamation or the like.
      When people can shut others down simply because they become drama queens over something they find disagreeable, that's when the real problem happens. It shouldn't, but thanks to political correctness, that's how things have been rolling the past 20 years or so, and it keeps getting worse.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    11. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >tort law
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

      as a public figure, she is open to criticism.

    12. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Rande · · Score: 1

      Get back to me when you've managed to codify 'common sense' into law. Or do you want to punish people who break unwritten laws based on what is held only in your head?
      If you've manage to code 'common sense' into a machine, then I think the Nobel Committee wants to have a word with you.

    13. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by werepants · · Score: 1

      When people can shut others down simply because they become drama queens over something they find disagreeable, that's when the real problem happens. It shouldn't, but thanks to political correctness, that's how things have been rolling the past 20 years or so, and it keeps getting worse.

      It is only a problem when the law is used to silence people, and that has happened very rarely, and virtually never due to political correctness. If Joe doesn't like what Sally has to say and claims that her beliefs are offensive and ill-informed, he has every right to share his opinion and invite others to join him in ignoring what she says. This is basically what happens with "political correctness" - public figures that say stupid and/or offensive things (exercising their freedom of speech) often get criticized by their detractors (who are likewise exercising freedom of speech). You can complain that their detractors have too much influence, but that isn't due to any laws (except maybe those that protect offensive speech in the first place).

      You can't have it both ways. You can either be free to say whatever you want and accept the social consequences, or you can accept limitations on what you express and expect others to abide by those same limitations. If you insist on blaming something, all you are really justified in complaining about is that enough people care about "political correctness" that it matters. Welcome to democracy.

    14. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      >tort law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

      as a public figure, she is open to criticism.

      Absolutely. You can call someone a "stupid bitch" or a "teabagging whore" or all manner of other things as much as you like. What you may not do is threaten violence. That's not about not being offended. Do you get the difference?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    15. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      bigotry ËbÉgÉ(TM)tri/ noun intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself

      If you are intolerant of his differing views, you fit the bill if a bigot.

      This is okay, there are plenty of views out there that people don't tolerate. I sure as hell wouldn't tolerate someone who believes it is perfectly alright to come up and punch me in the face unprovoked and acts on that belief.

      The lesson to be learnt here, is that it is probably silly to be tolerant of absolutely everything and that calling someone a bigot in the process of being intolerant of someone else's differing views is a silly thing to do. The social justice crowd just needs to drop it, as a step of winding back the hypocrisy.

    16. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      I think you've failed to realise why Juries are present at a trial. You might THINK they are to strictly interpret the law. You would be wrong.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    17. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      No, that's NOT what I was saying. Did you even read what I wrote? In fact, I pointed out that freedom of speech has limits where things like defamation are concerned, as one example. What, did you need me to bullet list every single example of such limits imaginable to get the point across more clearly?

      My gripe is with all the "offense" everyone takes at every little thing these days, but especially when that leads to people being essentially harassed by others' ideologies. But I also believe people have the right to be offended if they want, by trivial things, like for example, a football team being called the Redskins, or a restaurant chain being called "Hooters" with skimpily clad women as waitresses, but it just doesn't give them the right to dictate how everyone else thinks, or in most cases, act.
      And what I was talking about was in a much broader context than this case; in case you hadn't noticed, the discussion had evolved into something more generalized.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    18. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by CityZen · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you missed the part about rape and death threats, and not just general ones, but the "I know where you live" kind?
      I believe that courts have ruled that this is indeed not free speech, but criminal action.
      But these criminals hide behind internet anonymity, so are difficult to prosecute.

    19. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      When people can shut others down simply because they become drama queens over something they find disagreeable, that's when the real problem happens. It shouldn't, but thanks to political correctness, that's how things have been rolling the past 20 years or so, and it keeps getting worse.

      It is only a problem when the law is used to silence people, and that has happened very rarely, and virtually never due to political correctness. If Joe doesn't like what Sally has to say and claims that her beliefs are offensive and ill-informed, he has every right to share his opinion and invite others to join him in ignoring what she says. This is basically what happens with "political correctness" - public figures that say stupid and/or offensive things (exercising their freedom of speech) often get criticized by their detractors (who are likewise exercising freedom of speech). You can complain that their detractors have too much influence, but that isn't due to any laws (except maybe those that protect offensive speech in the first place).

      Perhaps you are not from the US, but here, people can be legally fired for a belief or statement that is currently politically incorrect. Religious symbols get taken down (by law) because a group of atheists are offended and can't stand to see such a thing (I'm not religious, and I don't care either way), a football team must legally change their name, etc...
      It may not affect laws directly so much, but it definitely affects and controls people's lives.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    20. Re:Nobody has the right not to be offended. by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      Didn't you get the memo? This is how the law already works.

      Police: You are under arrest citizen!
      Citizen: What for?
      Police: Breaking the law!
      Citizen: What law?
      Police: I cannot tell you that, the law is a state secret!

  3. Who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know anybody who has any idea who these people are, nor do they give one shit about any of this stuff. They just play games. I don't think these "cultures" and "communities" are nearly as big as people think they are. It's limited to a VERY small set of people commenting and participating in all this high-school drama. Of course, once it's on twitter and the internet in general, everyone thinks its way bigger than it actually is.

    News flash -- It's not.

    1. Re:Who cares. by war4peace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True. I play games and never heard of those people before.
      HOWEVER.
      I also walk on the street and never got mugged or shot at, it doesn't mean it's not happening somewhere else. The fact it's not important to everyone doesn't mean it's not important at all.
      Laws are created based on events that might only have happened to a small number of people, and while the vast majority never heard of those laws, they still exist.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:Who cares. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Three words: fuck political correctness.
      People need to grow a pair and not feel offended by talk.
      Threats are a different thing.

      Example of "just talk": yo' momma sucks dicks for coupons.
      Example of threat: "I'm gonna choke yo' momma to death."

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:Who cares. by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      I don't know anybody who has any idea who these people are, nor do they give one shit about any of this stuff. They just play games. I don't think these "cultures" and "communities" are nearly as big as people think they are. It's limited to a VERY small set of people commenting and participating in all this high-school drama. Of course, once it's on twitter and the internet in general, everyone thinks its way bigger than it actually is.

      News flash -- It's not.

      Yep. "high-school drama"...nice turn of phrase.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    4. Re:Who cares. by digsbo · · Score: 1

      True. I play games and never heard of those people before. HOWEVER. I also walk on the street and never got mugged or shot at, it doesn't mean it's not happening somewhere else. The fact it's not important to everyone doesn't mean it's not important at all.

      Totally agree.

      Laws are created based on events that might only have happened to a small number of people, and while the vast majority never heard of those laws, they still exist.

      Confused here. Are you saying laws don't already exist regarding credible threats and harassment that apply in this case? Are you saying we need new laws to specifically apply in this case? I don't follow, and I might be in disagreement if you're saying we need new laws to deal with credible physical threats and harassment.

    5. Re:Who cares. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Laws dealing with online interactions are vague and confusing, well, I guess it's the other way around. Linking a nickname to a real person is more difficult, investigating what happened takes more time and resources, etc. You don't just "go talk to the neighbors".

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  4. One bad apple spoils the barrel by Frobnicator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It doesn't seem to be pervasive. We've all seen the recent stats on similar stories. Over half of all gamers are female. Less than 1/5 are under the age 18. The stereotypical teenage boy gamer is a small component of the "gamer" culture.

    I doubt this is "Misogyny In Gamer Culture". I think instead this is just a few vocal idiots.

    --
    //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    1. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by rdwulfe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the problem though. When I was in high school, not everyone in the school abused me each day. No, the problem was the 10-20 kids who decided they had to punch someone so they could go home that day, and I was apparently an easy mark. Great fun, let me tell you.

      It never requires a huge number of people to oppress an individual or group. It takes others who are willing to do so by force. Written word can be force, too.

    2. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by qbast · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I doubt this is "Misogyny In Gamer Culture". I think instead this is just a few vocal idiots.

      Who are possibly outnumbered by professional victims and SJWs.

    3. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A few "vocal" idiots, or, rather, those that act out, can really stain an entire group. It's oftentimes said that 2% of any given population cause 98% of the problems. I don't think this is just a bunch of vocal teens, honestly. One would think adults would act like adults, but low and behold how many so-called professional offices have someone who still steals lunches out of the fridge, or wipes their fucking ass all over the toilet and the stall (anywhere but INSIDE the bowl). I don't know the solution other than to have roving bands of game police who kick down doors and shove controllers up asses.

    4. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Probably, the problem is that those "few vocal idiots" are often all thats needed to scare off the not-yet joined majority.

      A large/growing population of the public play video games as a hobby quietly, sure. But "joining" the active video gaming community? Why would they do that when the community (seemingly) made up of racist/sexist/immature/dangerous people who lack empathy and think harassing/threatening/sicing the police on innocent people is fun?

    5. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by kruach+aum · · Score: 2

      "A few "vocal" idiots, or, rather, those that act out, can really stain an entire group." is what racists and other idiots who judge groups based on small subsets of their members believe. It is not what grown-up adults with a proper grasp on logic and common sense should believe.

    6. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesn't seem to be pervasive. We've all seen the recent stats on similar stories. Over half of all gamers are female.

      About half of all humans are female... and misogyny is widely documented across history and across cultures. The presence or absence of misogyny is thus not correlated with the percentage of females in the population. Not to mention the multiple incidents that have come to light recently should provide further clue that there's far more than 'one bad apple'.

    7. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Moses48 · · Score: 2

      I think this has less to do with Gamer culture than it has to do with Marketing culture. It is not unique to gaming. Beer companies and any other company that markets to men uses the same techniques. This story and many other use the response to topics involving Misogyny as a reflection of gaming culture. I'm not sold. There is no data on this that I am aware of. I imagine if they had done the same video and posts about a book or beer commercials you would have the same sort of response. People that have Misogynistic prejudices are drawn to the types of things that bring them out of the woodwork.
      Let's see problems and fix them. Let's not construe things. Objectification of women in marketing is an issue. The same goes for art (books, games, tv, movies). We don't see shows like game of Thrones and say "Tv watchers have a culture of Misogyny".

    8. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, half of console players of female.
      You are missing the point, and the fact that you think women need different types of games kind of make you misogynistic in your thinking.

      This whole thing is about attitude and attacks women get.

      Lets talk about slasher movies.

      These movies, by and large, are horrible misogynistic, and well love by women.
      When a woman points out that they are misogynistic, no one threatens to rape and kill her.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1. The allegations against Quinn are not false - there's plenty of evidence showing this.
      2. Sarkeesian has been repeatedly debunked and shown to be nothing more than a con-woman.
      3. This is being spun as "misogyny" in gaming to cover up the outright disgraceful and blatant violation of basic journalism ethics around funding and disclosure of websites like Kotaku and Polygon. This is currently the subject of a lot of publicity - that they would rather you not hear, or just dismiss.
      4. The Social Justice Warriors have all piled in... in their typical fashion on the side of women... because women can do no wrong.
      5. It's so cheap and easy to brand gamers basement dwelling vrigin men-children than it is to look at the facts. Ironically this is EXACTLY the same type of stereotyping and harrassment that the SJWs call complain about (upto and including online bullying, doxxing and death threats). None of them have the basic self-awareness to realise what a bunch of hypocrites they really are.

      In short... it's about time gamers started kicking back against the constant politicisation of their hobby and the abuse/harrassment that THEY recieve. As for gaming keeping people out - none of these fucknuts seem to consider that gaming has often attracted the socially excluded precisely because it will take anyone... it's NOT exclusive!

    10. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yes. This is clearly driven by money. You pander to your audience. If it drives someone else bonkers, you don't really give a sh*t. All of the recent statements in the media is just meaningless lip service directed at a particularly noisy faction of nitwits.

      They're the yin to the trollish yang that they are whining about.

      Nothing will really come of this because American corporations are first and foremost about the bottom line. They aren't going to turn down the money. It doesn't matter if they genuinely despise the customer or not.

      So this little tempest is nothing more than professional trolling and confirmation that real journalism is dead.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    11. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Only if you count games like Candy Crush and Farmville. Let's face it, gaming consoles and expensive video cards are being sold to teenage boys, you know, the ones that actually buy big game titles. If women are such a big market, they'd be pandered to. Or maybe women can make their own games. They should. Obviously these misogynist devs hate money. It's right there for the taking.

      I accidentally read that as "buy big game titties" and then realized... that's true, too.

      Wait, did I just argue one of Anita Sarkeesian's points for her?

      Anyway, one of the things about games: You don't necessarily know who makes the games. For all I know, Alison McWarlover is heading up Call of Duty: Yet Another One... much like Kim Swift was the Project Lead on Portal.

      That second one was name dropped to prove a point. Most people probably didn't know know Portal was lead by a woman because it wasn't relevant to the game's success.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    12. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      About half of all humans are female... and misogyny is widely documented across history and across cultures.

      True. We really should start to throw out those damn Ferengis. They can do with their women on their planet whatever they want, but here on Earth? Our grand-grand-grand.........grandfathers should never have allowed them to land here.

    13. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It gets even better. Marketing that panders to girls is no less misogynistic. It's actually even WORSE. Marketing for women is all about making women feel like sh*t, especially about their bodies. The stuff is more caustic then genuine porn.

      This is just more of the "nerds bad" narrative that the media has been trying to feed us lately. In truth, "gamer culture" is no worse than anything else including the women's magazines that claims to be feminist.

      Anything going on in video games is the tail end of the problem.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    14. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      I doubt this is "Misogyny In Gamer Culture". I think instead this is just a few vocal idiots.

      ... who have apparently figured out that they can make fat bank claiming misogyny is far more prevalent than it actually is.

      Unless you were talking about some other group of vocal idiots.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    15. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      "Written word can be force, too." You mean like people who exaggerate things in their blogs to slander you?

    16. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most people probably didn't know know Portal was lead by a woman because it wasn't relevant to the game's success.

      Most people probably don't know who the lead developer was on any video game, because that shit doesn't fucking matter to 99.99% of the goddamn population.

      It's not because 'misogyny,' or a 'boys club' or '[insert BS label]' - it's because it doesn't matter. We (by which I mean most gamers) aren't buying games because of who made them, we're buying games because we want to play that game.

      Now, was this rant misdirected? Perhaps. But I've got to say something, because I'm tired of narcissistic bitches* saying that I'm a bad person for no reason other than the fact that I have a dick and disagree with their philosophies.

      * If you're sitting there assuming I am referring to all women as narcissistic bitches, you're exactly the narcissistic bitch I'm talking about. Get over yourself.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    17. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Most the gamers I know are not teenage boys, but grown men and women. I do believe you're pulling that "you know, the ones that actually buy big game titles" out of thin air.

    18. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, there is no incentive to solve the misogynistic trolling "problem" (assuming it even exists. There is ample evidence Zoe Quinn is a lying sociopath who made the whole thing up). The only thing that's ever done about situations like this is articles and calls to "raise awareness." But those articles are golden clickbait that drive ad revenues. And it's easy, easy writing because it's all been done before. Just open up the "gamers are hateful boys" folder and repost the same hand-wringing crap we wrote last year. Collect the money and wait for it to happen again.

      It's all about the money. Quinn profits, the 2000 blogs that have written breathless articles about her plight profit. Nothing actually changes, assuming there was anything changeable to begin with. And now we wait for the next episode.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    19. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by westlake · · Score: 1

      We've all seen the recent stats on similar stories. Over half of all gamers are female. The stereotypical teenage boy gamer is a small component of the "gamer" culture.

      The majority of gamers may be female ---- but the majority of gamers who post to Slashdot are male --- and much more easily stereotyped as arrested adolescents than adults.

    20. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Wait, did I just argue one of Anita Sarkeesian's points for her?

      No, you argued one of her critics' points against her: a series of poorly-researched and inflammatory rant-videos accomplishes precisely dick other than to serve as a rallying point for similarly-aligned identity politics, who recursively make their own poorly-researched and inflammatory rants, feeding the current paradigm: a loud, incestuous echo-chamber on one side, convinced that their MO of using shame tactics to make other people do things their way, might someday work, if they can just reach that elusive critical mass of obnoxiousness; until then, they'll keep beating on the status quo like wind against a mountain that (rightly) doesn't give a shit.

      The whole approach of Anita et al is fundamentally contradictory: you don't demonstrate "equality" or "agency" by demanding that other people do for you, rather than doing yourself.

    21. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you have ever been on XBOX Live in a game like Call of Duty or Battlefield with a female name you will very quickly realize that it is pervasive. Similar for comment threads on a number of prominent gaming web sites.

      More over it definitely is a consistent and widespread problem in games. Almost all adult "open world" style games feature prostitutes, for example. Okay, they exist in real life so they are just being realistic, right? The reality is that they add them in as a cheap way to add "grit" and faux-realism, and then give them the same gameplay mechanics as other objects like vending machines and hotel rooms (usually restoring health in exchange for money). The player is encouraged to use them as disposable, generic tools to further their progress in the game. It's just lazy and unhelpful.

      War movies could show realistic violence and the effects of weapons, but that would give half the audience PTSD so despite it being an easy way to make them real and edgy they tone it down. It's about using the medium responsibly.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by hendrips · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Interesting - the more people pick on a victim, the more it becomes the victim's fault? Quite the logic there.

    23. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      "...the fact that you think women need different types of games kind of make you misogynistic in your thinking..."

      Slow down there sparky. It's a common complaint that there aren't enough female main characters even though half the gamers are female. So who's the misogynist now?

    24. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you angry at specific people, or a class of people? The people who abused you, was it a particular skin color, sex, age?

      When is it OK to blame other people than the ones who did it, on account of such characteristics? Always, never, or sometimes? If sometimes, which characteristics are OK to generalize over, and which aren't?

      Ps. Zoe's ex accused her of being horribly emotionally abusive, cheating on him with five guys in the gaming industry and gaslighting him to cover it up. He never said anyone traded sex for reviews, although it's obvious from his (heavily documented) accusations that all the men involved (as well as ZQ) broke a ton of professional ethical rules.

      Ideonexus and the Slashdot editors are playing social justice telephone.

    25. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      "Almost all adult "open world" style games feature prostitutes"

      Not sure GTA and Saint's Row account for "almost all" open world games.

    26. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Asmodae · · Score: 2

      I feel compelled to point out that having more female leads/characters doesn't change the array of game TYPES at all. An FPS with a female lead is still an FPS, NOT a different type of game. Carry on.

    27. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Talderas · · Score: 1

      The only people that has a guiding hand for development of video games that I know by name is Naoki Yoshida and Hideo Kojima and I think they're both exceptions with Naoki Yoshida being the steering force behind the effort to relaunch FF14 (a stunning success) and Hideo Kojima solely due to Metal Gear Solid.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    28. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Name one that doesn't.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    29. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      It can certainly be evidence that the person you are labeling a "victim" is antagonizing people. For instance sometimes a group of people stand up to a bully and what is the first thing that bully does? Plays victim.

      That said, 10-20 people is not enough for that. That's a sports team. Or a group of friends.

    30. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Okay, fair enough, but I think the overarching point is relevant. People/journalists, that argue about the misogyny in games bring up that there aren't enough (good) female characters or story themes that appeal/cater to women. But if gender doesn't matter, why does it matter that the Master Chief is male. If men and women were really no different, why does it matter that most of the big titles are FPS or action games?

    31. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Just Cause 2, and I assume Just Cause. Don't remember seeing any prostitutes in that one. I don't think I've ever seen a prostitute in any of the Elder Scrolls game.

      So that's seven games there.

      Oh and we can't forget one the most popular ones... Minecraft.

    32. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1. The allegations against Quinn are insinuations with no evidence behind them.
      2. Sarkeesian has been loudly contradicted and claimed to be a con-woman by people that can't take criticism and are annoyed by the success of her Kickstarter.
      3. This is being called "misogyny" in gaming because it is directed specifically at women.
      4. The Social Justice Warriors have all supported these women because they oppose misogyny.
      5. It's so cheap and easy to brand gamers basement dwelling vrigin men-children than it is to look at the facts. This is stereotyping, but it is nothing like the harrassment, online bullying, doxxing or death threats made by some gamers against feminist critics.

      Fixed that for you.

    33. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Cederic · · Score: 1

      the fact that you think women need different types of games kind of make you misogynistic in your thinking

      No it does not, and for two reasons:
      1 - showing empathy for female gamers and trying to identify their needs is clearly not a display of hatred
      2 - unless you have evidence that all game types are played in equal proportions by both genders, he's probably right

      "the typical Candy Crush Saga player is a woman aged 25-45"
      -- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/maga...

      Incidentally why are slasher movies misogynistic? Men die too. In fact, it's usually a woman that survives. Clearly they're feminist movies.

    34. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i take issue with the classification. boys and girls play different games. girls tend to prefer the "casual" games. boys tend to prefer the hardcore games. As far as i'm concerned, girls can have those shitty games. God, i'm elitist, and i'm fine with that. because Q3A is was and will forever be the best fps. the gender ratio among "real gamers" is probably 80:20.

    35. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      GTA and Saint's Row were the only one's I could think of that had prostitutes. Besides, maybe Red Dead Redemption. Did Fall Out have prostitutes? Not something I typically associate with Bethesda, but given the setting it'd seem plausible.

    36. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Arguing those people should get accounts on IMDB and other movie-related sites in order to be more broadly consistent in their rape and death threats in an intriguing idea, but I think not ultimately a good one.

    37. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      You mean like those same feminist chicks who were harassing a 10yo boy by doxxing him on twitter not that long ago ? Hypocrite.

    38. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by narcc · · Score: 1

      1.) Which no one seems able to provide...
      2.) Not really. Do you mean Phil Mason's ramblings?
      3.) It's not much of a "cover up" if it's "currently the subject of a lot of publicity". Try not to disprove your own point before you've finished making it.
      4.) Evidence? Didn't think so.
      5.) Only in your imagination. We have the numbers. Perhaps you should get your facts from someone other than a know liar like Thunderf00t.

    39. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by narcc · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware, for example, that Minecraft predominantly features adult themes and content.

    40. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by tylikcat · · Score: 1

      10-20 being in a school, and one person being one of the easy marks seems pretty plausible to. I wouldn't read it as being 10-20 people picking on any one person at one time. I would suspect that there were more than that number of people in my middle school who didn't feel satisfied with their day if they hadn't hit anyone.

      (I believe my middle school had about 800 people. I wasn't a great target, since I was perfectly happy to fight back if faculty weren't around, but I was quite tall, part of the gifted program, did not dress to fit in, and was fairly outspoken. At least three people were suspended for attacking me while I was there. But then, the school was generally pretty fucked.*)

      * So, take a school from a poor mostly black neighborhood and then put a couple of magnet programs that attract mostly more affluent white and asian kids... and then keep all the classes for the different programs separate. Yeah, that's a great idea.

    41. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Suicide bombers seems pretty adult themed, imo. And the "adult" descriptor seemed redundant or meaningless. They either meant, sexually themed or for adults. The former seems redundant, as it seems fairly normal that sexually themed anything would feature prostitutes. And the latter seems so meaningless, particularly since most of the games we're talking about don't have the "Adults Only" ESRB rating. In fact, I can't think of a popular game in recent years that had the AO rating.

      None the less I'll grant I misspoke for Minecraft. But that still leaves seven games, when I was only asked to name one. Anything past the first one was just gravy.

    42. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Asmodae · · Score: 1

      I think you're conflating two points. From what I've seen, misogyny in games is described where a female character is portrayed with extremely negative female stereotypes.

      I think this is a vastly different issue than commenting on the lack of representation in games. Those comments are saying 50% of the population is female, 50% of gamers are female, but only a few percent of characters in games are female. The gender of a specific character is irrelevant (and not typically discussed in that context), but in the aggregate there appears to be something out of place. Commenting on that dramatic difference is not calling developers misogynistic. People wanting that difference reduced to a fraction closer to something representing the actual people playing the games is also not calling developers misogynistic.

      Issues of Gender Representation and Misogynistic representation are both gender related, and often discussed together. But you can't lump them into the same thing as they have very different consequences. You could have 100% of games with female leads but still be a horrible representation of women, and you could have no games with female leads and have no outright misogynistic representations. However, I think the point people are trying to make about gender representation is this: "An overly imbalanced representation of gender in the aggregate (towards either gender) has consequences and implications which are at best neutral and at worst quite negative. Given this, can we make things better?"

    43. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      If he got such a large number of people to hate him, in all likelihood he was an arrogant ass. Looking back, in high school I was a complete arrogant ass-hole, who could not stop myself from rubbing my superior intellect in everyone face. I am continually surprised how everyone treated me so well. But I think people need weakness to exploit, to bully.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    44. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by geekoid · · Score: 1

      There are many public server run by private individual.
      of course there are adult themed minecraft server.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    45. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      They're busy redefining gamers into a dirty word, so I don't know how long parroting the half of gamers thing will be PC ...

    46. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Anonymous Cowards keep banging on about how everything is proven and every argument debunked, but never offer any evidence or any specific arguments.

      Come on, post some detailed rebuttals of Sarkeesian's videos. I've seen the replies on YouTube, they are full of obvious logical fallacies and blatant attack pieces. If you have an actual argument, make it.

      Otherwise it's obvious you are just hoping that by repeating these things over and over again they will become "facts" in people's minds. I'm calling you bluff, because I'm sure you have nothing.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    47. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      The majority of gamers may be female ---- but the majority of gamers who post to Slashdot are male --- and much more easily stereotyped as arrested adolescents than adults.

      Gaaawd. I don't believe this! Everybody hates me! I hate everybody! Especially my parents! Gaaaawd!

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    48. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      And yet games seem to be a very effective way to draw light to the subject and get people on board to change things. Even if what you say is true and they are the tail end of the problem, using them as an effective platform to point how how sexism and poor depictions of women are pervasive seems to be working.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    49. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by denzacar · · Score: 1

      About half of all humans are female... and misogyny is widely documented across history and across cultures. The presence or absence of misogyny is thus not correlated with the percentage of females in the population. Not to mention the multiple incidents that have come to light recently should provide further clue that there's far more than 'one bad apple'.

      The mere "presence" of X does not describe sample or population as X.
      A certain concentration/percentage of X is needed to make X typical.

      The presence of radioactive material on planet Earth does not mean that entire planet is radioactive.
      The presence of sociopathic murderers in human population does not mean that the entire human population IS or that it SHOULD BE labeled as sociopathic murderers.

      So, besides the fact of apparent absence of correlation of misogyny with the percentage of females in the population (as you state), the "multiple incidents" are NOT proof of pervasive misogyny.
      They are what is called "anecdotal evidence" - i.e. not evidence but amusing stories.
      Compare the number of "multiple incidents" with number of... say... diabetics, Jews, Chinese, guitar players, smokers...
      Would you label the entire gaming culture as "Jewish" or "diabetic"? Would it make any sense to do that?

      On top of that... you are comparing apples and oranges AND working from a foregone conclusion of misogyny, despite evidence to contrary.
      For one, historical cultures are NOT related in any way to gaming culture other than both being HUMAN cultures.
      Same way most of those cultures are not related to each other.
      I.e. Gamers are not ancient Egyptians same way neither of those groups are 19th century France.

      Secondly, that's a generalization which ignores matriarchal cultures, and cultures ruled by women.
      I.e. Entire British Empire (which basically ruled the world) for quite a while, even having entire eras named after their queens and not their family names, which should be assumed practice if those cultures were inherently misogynistic.
      In fact... Such assumption of misogyny as historical and cultural default "because it's there" is not just implicitly misogynistic on its own - it is WRONG.

      Because... The mere "presence" of X does not describe sample or population as X.
      Assuming that it does is a hasty generalization.
      Assuming that, based on anecdotal cases, entire culture is the same as those singular cases is an entire other kind of fallacy of its own.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    50. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      don't think skyrim does.

    51. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Skyrim has prostitutes. One of the side quests involves working for them or something, I forget exactly what now. Don't know about Just Cause, never played it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    52. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Bob9113 · · Score: 1

      It gets even better. Marketing that panders to girls is no less misogynistic. It's actually even WORSE. Marketing for women is all about making women feel like sh*t, especially about their bodies.

      And have you seen the tough-guy themed marketing for automotive products that pander to men? It's all about making men feel inadequate if they're not manly enough. (not to mention hair club, boner pills, beer, cologne, and just about every other male-targeted product)

    53. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Secondly, that's a generalization which ignores matriarchal cultures, and cultures ruled by women.
      I.e. Entire British Empire (which basically ruled the world) for quite a while, even having entire eras named after their queens and not their family names, which should be assumed practice if those cultures were inherently misogynistic.

        Matriarchal cultures and "cultures ruled by women" (which are the same thing, women ruling the state != women ruling the culture) are, especially in the West, quite the exception. (As anyone educated, which category you are not included in, quite well knows.) In fact, the culture of the British Empire was heavily misogynistic. For further insight into this, look into who served in Parliament, as Ministers, etc... etc... during the reigns of those queens.

      And that's the least of the logical, factual, and historical errors your ignorance and imbecility leads you into. You haven't a clue what you're talking about.

    54. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by ChainedFei · · Score: 1

      Minecraft.

    55. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Could not agree more. Also, there is rather good indication that Sarkeesian has orchestrated the "threat" incident herself and pretty much none that it is genuine or a valid reason to run. Has she by now filed a police report? My bet would be that no, because falsely reporting a crime is a crime itself. Go figure.

      My take is that these hate-mongers figured the gaming community was an easy mark and then proceeded to exploit it. As the reaction shows, they were right, there is almost no active intelligence in the reaction and their claims are taken universally at face value, despite their ridiculous and deeply manipulative nature. It seems they are right about one thing: many gamers are morons. Gamers certainly have proven to be an easy marks for this scam.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    56. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      there is no incentive to solve the misogynistic trolling "problem" (assuming it even exists

      Well, that depends on who is solving the problem. Certainly, some games do in fact see a drop in subscriber base. These companies have incentive to stop the problem.

      For instance, XBox saw a lot of women not re-upping their XBox Gold accounts.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    57. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I remember that Ultima 6 had prostitutes. Oh, wait, it was one male and one female one. Does that still count?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    58. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Name one real human community that is not fundamentalist, that has none? Prostitution is a fact of life and most prostitutes are self-employed and chose this job (despite blatant baseless hate-propaganda to the contrary). Do you really want to live in a community that is so repressive it has no prostitutes? Or play an open-world game that is so decoupled from reality that it does not have them?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    59. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, neo-feminism has so far been immune to that effect. They have more than their fair share of those.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    60. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      There are really only two options
      1) There was a _single_ person threatening Sarkeesian. In that case there is no indication that this is part of a larger problem.
      2) There was no person threatening her and she made it up.

      There are actually some pretty strong indicators for 2), but even if it was 1), all the "interpretations" that get derived from the incident cannot hold water as there is no realistic sample size. Of course, she blows it up tot the maximum, as she stands to gain a lot.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    61. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Same for Sarkeesian. If she did not fake the threat (and there is good indication that she did), then what she has is one single deranged individual. One single individual is not enough to derive anything about a whole community. Hell, if the threat was real, this may even not have anything to do with gaming and may just have been an ordinary stalker. If it was real. However, she blows this all out of proportion as she has a lot to gain economically.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    62. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Good summary. And you do not get respect or appreciation by claiming "stop hating us, you evil hater scum" as is basically all she does. The level of misandrism and cheap emotional manipulation she employs is truly repulsive. The fascinating thing is that this unsophisticated strategy seems to be working.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    63. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Bob9113 · · Score: 1

      Almost all adult "open world" style games feature prostitutes, for example. Okay, they exist in real life so they are just being realistic, right? ... War movies could show realistic violence and the effects of weapons, but that would give half the audience PTSD so despite it being an easy way to make them real and edgy they tone it down. It's about using the medium responsibly.

      I think you've got a non-sequitur there. The prostitution that I have seen in games is toned down far more than the war violence in movies or games. War violence typically shows at least some blood and the person dying, with some critically acclaimed movies like Saving Private Ryan going way more real. Video game prostitution often doesn't even show the participants during the event, and if it does, what is shown is usually PG-13, and only R in a very few cases.

      Misogyny exists and it is bad and we need to continue to improve. But when you misrepresent the case, it makes people skeptical of the entire message. Backlash is harmful to our cause. So unless you are trying to stir up antagonism, get a grip on your anger and make sure you are creating an accurate portrayal of the situation before you hit "Submit".

      This is especially important for you, specifically, because you are well spoken and I've seen your posts on this topic hit +5 before. You are one of the big voices in this community. That voice can be used to build consensus or to drive a wedge. The latter will not help further the cause of equality.

    64. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. She cheated on her boyfriend with a game reviewer. That never [before or after] reviewed her game. That claim is entirely and verifiably false.
      2. What, a researcher has been debunked? On every point? Citation needed. Also, I totally get it now, you are allowed to abuse and harass researchers that are wrong my mistake!
      3. Turns out women have sex. Sometimes with people they meet that share a love of videogames. (Remember: that journalist never did a game review of that developers game). There is no question of ethics here.
      4. Women do plenty of wrong, she cheated on her boyfriend for fucks sake! but having sex with this particular journalist [other than the cheating] is not wrong . Just because you claim she somehow got a good game review out of someone entirely different, doesn't make it true.
      5. OK, so I am going to pose you a question about this situation, and see if you can answer it.
      If I post research, that says pigs really can fly.
      Does that mean that other people, whilst trying to refute my argument (or point out why I am stupid) can print my home address, my parents home address and threaten to rape and kill me?.

      In short, you are basically wrong on every point! Well done!

    65. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      You know they never specified if it was female only prostitutes or not. If it's the former, well their being kind of sexist to assume that prostitutes are only women. If it's the latter, well what's the relevance? Prostitutes are real, they are male and female. So what's sexist or more specifically misogynistic about that?

    66. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      You're going to have to remember which side quest, because I can't think of any in that game. Even so, it's not a game feature like in other games. Or more specifically, "the same gameplay mechanics as other objects like vending machines and hotel rooms..." If it's specifically part of a side quest and you're not actually using the NPC by the PC for prostitution, I'm not really sure it counts as to your original point. And it wasn't really used for "faux-realism" either.

    67. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by julesh · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem to be pervasive. [...] Over half of all gamers are female. I doubt this is "Misogyny In Gamer Culture". I think instead this is just a few vocal idiots.

      Sure, we've now reached the point of equality in terms of the actual market for games. But there's still a horrible lack of equality in:

      * People who develop games (only 4% female). This is much worse than the general software developer situation, despite that being bad enough in itself (29% female).
      * People who write about games for magazines, etc. I can't find any good stats on this, but thinking about the magazines and sites I read, I'm going to guess the figure is probably somewhere in the 15-20% range. For other fields of journalism, the figures are usually around the 30% sort of range, so again I *think* the gaming press is doing worse than average here.

      These statistics show that this is much worse than a "few vocal idiots".

    68. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by julesh · · Score: 1

      1. The allegations against Quinn are not false - there's plenty of evidence showing this.

      The allegations are quite serious. I hope the evidence against her is good. Please provide links, because I haven't seen any that amounts to more than rumours.

      2. Sarkeesian has been repeatedly debunked and shown to be nothing more than a con-woman.

      I haven't watched her videos, but the impression I get is that they are typical feminist fare: slightly exaggerated, maybe even overreacting to minor points. Perhaps even some of the things she says are untrue, I don't know. How this translates to it being reasonable to figure out her home address and send her death threats, I'm not entirely sure.

    69. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by jwdb · · Score: 1

      Or maybe he was a foreigner with a funny accent.

      Like I was...

    70. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      This is why I never cared to much about gaming journalism outside of a few YouTube channels I trust. Everyone is either bought out, or pushing an agenda that offends me. Hell, I stopped reading PCGamer around the time I saw a banner ad for the ME3 Review. You know what it said? "Reviewed on PC". NO SHIT, I'd hope that PCGamer is reviewing things on PC.

    71. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      Unless you count me joking around about being a hooker on DayZ, well, DayZ.

    72. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      More over it definitely is a consistent and widespread problem in games. Almost all adult "open world" style games feature prostitutes, for example. .

      How is this misogynistic? Does the existence of prostitutes, whether in a game or in real life, make the culture woman-hating? If anything, the non-ostracised presence of prostitutes signifies *more* freedom for women (and men, if they choose the job).

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    73. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Which of course highlights the underlying hypocrisy of the feminist discourse, rather than encouraging women to take their own agency it removes their agency by characterising them as victims. Yes, you are weakening and harming women.

      Take my girlfriend for example, a gentle creature who wouldn't hurt a fly, and I mean that literally, but put her in whatever game and she shifts gears into some sort of terrifying Godfather/Mad Max/Viet Cong/Leon mindset and kicks ass with the best of them. That's a woman, not a child as feminists would have her be, a woman who earns respect rather than expecting it because vagina.

      But hey, keep pushing that narrative, you crayon eater. "Moreover" indeed.

    74. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem to be pervasive. We've all seen the recent stats on similar stories. Over half of all gamers are female. Less than 1/5 are under the age 18. The stereotypical teenage boy gamer is a small component of the "gamer" culture.

      I doubt this is "Misogyny In Gamer Culture". I think instead this is just a few vocal idiots.

      This is exactly the point. Vocal idiots can be vocal idiots all they want. The problem is that it's not cool (and in many cases, illegal too) to threaten others with violence. Those who make such threats should be shamed, ostracized and, if appropriate, prosecuted.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    75. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by simplypeachy · · Score: 1

      I can't even remember the last time I witnessed or suffered any prejudice, sexist or otherwise, or harassment in multiplayer games or the community that I partake in. However, when I visit friends' places and get a taste of other sorts of games people play, particularly those which lean towards lots of strangers playing together, it's horrifying. I can assure you this problem exists and is at the scale that is claimed.

    76. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      There are laws against slander aren't there? If you feel you have been I'm sure you can test your case in the courts.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    77. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And her defenders who are crying sexism and misogyny do so while they, completely without irony, take the actions of ONE individual and extrapolate from that that men who play video games are ALL like that.

      Sexism absolutely exists. There is a segment of the population who, upon hearing that Steve is bad at math will say "Wow Steve, you suck at math," but when hearing that Amy is bad at math will say "Girls suck at math."

      However, if a woman (or man!) threatens a man with sexual violence and death ("I'm going to cut off your penis and murder you"), we say the attacker is a deranged psychopath. But if a man threatens a woman, it's because MEN are deranged psychopaths.

      Fuck that shit.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    78. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by phorm · · Score: 1

      When a woman points out that they are misogynistic

      When has this happens, and moreover, what were the proposed changes?

    79. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by CityZen · · Score: 1

      No, rather like people posting your home address and telling you that they plan to harm you.

    80. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      watchdogs has a sex slave ring... i don't think that's a very good example

    81. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i think all the fallouts had prostitutes. wasteland setting and all.

    82. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      console gamers barely qualify as gamers... maybe for games that require two analogs, but not FPS...

    83. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i still think women are not eligible for the draft. go figure.

    84. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i want to know the percentage that are pc FPS players.

    85. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by nctritech · · Score: 1

      The "social justice" crowd's solution is to punish the entire class for the behavior of that tiny group of individuals. Are you attempting to justify this sort of lumping together an unrelated majority under a broad category and attacking them as a group?

    86. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by nctritech · · Score: 1

      What I'm observing is that every time someone tries to use games as "an effective platform to point out blah blah blah" they rightfully get their asses handed to them by people who don't have such a damaged world view of perpetual offense and victimhood.

    87. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I would call Skyrim (land) an oppressive patriarchy. They've had and have Queens. There are plenty of leadership roles or close to it filled by women. Marriage in Skyrim while straight forward, requires consent of both the involved people. Add on these two contributing points and I don't think you could call it an "oppressive patriarchy." First, Skyrim is based off Viking/Norse society and culture. Women in said culture were probably one of the most free and equal during the middle ages (http://sciencenordic.com/don%E2%80%99t-underestimate-viking-women). And second, same gender marriage is possible in the game.

    88. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by neoritter · · Score: 1

      This is a better article on women's roles in Norse society. http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

    89. Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I remember that Ultima 6 had prostitutes. Oh, wait, it was one male and one female one. Does that still count?

      Were they gargoyles?
      I honestly don't remember too much about that one except it had a lot of gargoyles in it.

  5. More than the article states... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It wasn't just "false accusations" from her ex-boyfriend. It was accusations from many of her boyfriends and other people that she slept with coupled with her story not making any sense and having plenty of holes in it. Oh, and also no proof that any of it took place.

    As for Anita Sarkeesian? Well, after seeing how lying about being a victim worked out so well for Zoe, it's not exactly a big stretch to say that maybe she did the same thing. I mean, all those tweets coming in, from only one user, faster than anyone could type them, and immediately after receiving them we're supposed to believe that Anita logged out of her account and just so happened to search for those exact tweets, then took a screenshot of them as proof that she was "stalked and driven from her home by a raid."

    There's a few things that aren't adding up here.

    1. Re:More than the article states... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, and also no proof that any of it took place.

      Exactly. We don't know what happened, but let's just assume she is a cheating whore in all discussions of her professional work.

      As for Anita Sarkeesian? Well, after seeing how lying about being a victim worked out so well for Zoe, it's not exactly a big stretch to say that maybe she did the same thing.

      So you think one woman might be bad, and thus other women who claim to be victims of a crime are probably just the same. I mean, all women are this one generic personality, right? It's not like there is any significant variation between them, so the (imagined) actions of one speak for them all.

      we're supposed to believe that Anita logged out of her account and just so happened to search for those exact tweets, then took a screenshot of them as proof that she was "stalked and driven from her home by a raid."

      a) She never claimed she made the screenshot, and could have multiple computers/tablets anyway.
      b) She never claimed she was driven out by a "raid", only credible threads that included her home address.

      Somehow these "facts" have become part of the legend now, repeated over and over until they become true in the minds of the not-really-oppressed.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:More than the article states... by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, unfortunately, I feel that in the case of Anita, some of it was brought on herself. Her videos she has been using to show how games are portraying women in bad ways were in most cases taken completely out of context and twisted to fit her preconceived opinions. In one case using a section of Hitman which took place in an adult entertainment club, and saying that the women in the level are there only to be beaten/killed and used as distractions, when in fact, that is absolutely not the case. You LOSE points for beating on them. You are meant to AVOID them, just like most other people in Hitman, as they are not your target, you are not to kill people who are not your target, and yet, she makes a video of her own play-through where she intentionally kills them, and then says that is the only purpose for them being there.... Its like saying TV's are bad because you can bash someone over the head with a TV and demonstrating that you can do that fact, when in reality, the only behavior that is bad is doing that specific behavior.

      And when she gets called out on that fact, she doesn't want to hear it, and disables comments so that it isn't shown what a load of crap she is spewing forth.

      --
      We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    3. Re:More than the article states... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      setting your interesting take on thing aside, if true, none of it means anyone has a right to threaten to beat, rape and kill her.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:More than the article states... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Things are adding up just fine. But just with other cons, any reasonable con-woman will have her story focus-tested before and made pretty sure there are enough useful idiots that will believe anything. As such, I applaud these two for having gotten a tremendous supporting echo for a set of mediocre lies. People are even far more stupid and blind to facts than I realized.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:More than the article states... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Sarkeesian also seems to not have made a police report. Care to explain that one? Because this only makes sense if making said report would be "falsely reporting a crime".

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:More than the article states... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So you think one woman might be bad, and thus other women who claim to be victims of a crime are probably just the same. I mean, all women are this one generic personality, right? It's not like there is any significant variation between them, so the (imagined) actions of one speak for them all.

      Yeah, that's an offensive argument no matter which gender is the target. Sadly, both sides in this argument feel free to use it.

      a) She never claimed she made the screenshot, and could have multiple computers/tablets anyway.
      b) She never claimed she was driven out by a "raid", only credible threads that included her home address.

      Well, at least we're on the same page here. These are the only facts available so far.

      I vote we not give a shit until we see the police report. And I'm going to vote by doing that.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:More than the article states... by mod+prime · · Score: 1

      Well, it's not all that big a deal as you are making it.
      1. There are three ways to interact with the women, should you encounter them in play. 1) Kill them. 2) Render them unconscious 3) Voyeuristically watch and listen. so she was right in that they are there to be beaten/killed or distract you.
      2. The points you lose by knocking them out you can get back by hiding them, I think you also sacrifice an end of level bonus in points. The points are meaningless metrics that most people only care about in a transient way - having a good time being more important.
      3. They serve no narrative purpose, and are not involved in any solutions for the level and are trivial to avoid (so provide no additional challenge). Their reason for being there is to only to add a background texture and a semblance of 'life' to the club, and as such they are indeed there as Background Decoration, her general thesis.

      The female characters in Hitman Absolution:
      Diana: Mostly a disembodied female voice, strong intelligent woman.
      Boo: A former erotic dancer now dead assassin / sexy nun cosplayer.
      Lilly S. Dukes: A sexy country girl that can shoot
      LaSandra: Former high achieving black female cop. Now wears a sexy nuns outfit and kills people.
      Mrs. Cooper: A dominatrix
      Paxton: Another sexy nun, with a gun
      Moorhead: Another sexy nun, former cop
      Dijana and Agnija sexy Balkan nuns
      sister Mary: An actual nun

      I've seen youtube comment sections. They are not generally locations of reasoned criticism and I fault nobody who chooses to disable them - and if I had a youtube channel and gained some degree of notoriety, I'd disable the damnable things too. I believe Pewdiepie did likewise recently.

    8. Re:More than the article states... by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      So then we should only allow games like the Smurfs from Colecovision because that is the only game where nobody gets injured and lacks any kind of moral choice? You're really stretching for a point here.

    9. Re:More than the article states... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      So you think one woman might be bad, and thus other women who claim to be victims of a crime are probably just the same.

      Certainly women who've been caught lying on camera when large amounts of money were at stake, yes.

      b) She never claimed she was driven out by a "raid", only credible threads that included her home address.

      Oh don't worry I'm sure the fat bank she'll receive through donations will more than make up for the distress etc.

    10. Re:More than the article states... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      She said that the authorities have been notified. Obviously they are not going to post the content of the police report online, because it contains her personal details.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:More than the article states... by phorm · · Score: 1

      So you think one woman might be bad...

      But it's fine when we're talking about men/male-gamers, right?

  6. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Either that or you're some kind of uber-paranoid idiot savant sans savant...

  7. Writing about gaming vs. gaming by kruach+aum · · Score: 1

    People who write about things often have a different perspective and different expectations than people engaged in the things being written about. They also forget that most of "gamer culture" literally doesn't care about the perceived issues and just plays games. You can't argue with or change someone who just plain ignores you.

  8. Stop complaining and debating and do something by Kohlrabi82 · · Score: 1

    It's easy to complain, but difficult to do something yourself. Wouldn't it be nice instead of signing "open letters" or some other meaningless paperwork that developers and their supporters actually create the games they dream about? If there is the supposed conscience of the inclusion issues, I'm sure there is a market for their games, too. What's stopping them from developing them? And please act like a democratic and tolerant citizen and not tell the other part of the gaming community which games they are allowed to like or don't like, or developers which games they are allowed to develop.

    1. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by qbast · · Score: 1

      Where this notion that women can't do anything until there is some 'outreach' project comes from? If feminists spent more time actually *doing* something useful instead of endless whining, game developers would be already much more diversified.

    2. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Kohlrabi82 · · Score: 1

      So we should assume that women cannot achieve something on their own? Sometimes I'm confused who the real misogynists are in this discussion.

    3. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      Well, there was that gamejam to support games by women. However, it was shut down by... Zoe Quinn!!!

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    4. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      No, no, no, you don't understand at all. We are supposed to assume that women can do everything. And of course they can do everything better than men. Only to ask them to prove it and actually do is misogyny.

    5. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      And there we have the Scotsman camouflage. Many of those original and "true" feminists do exactly the same thing as your "masked" ones.

    6. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Actually that is exactly what the no true Scotsman fallacy is. The whole point of it is just because you think someone shouldn't be lumped in your group at this moment doesn't mean you get to exclude them for being not a "real" feminist- er I mean Scotsman.

    7. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't a Scotsman fallacy.

      A Scotsman fallacy is when you say a person born in Scotland doesn't count as a real Scotsman because he doesn't drink.

      To point at an American in a kilt ans saying 'he isn't a real Scotsman' is an accurate statement.

      There are people who are not feminist claiming to be feminist. Excluding them is not a Scotsman fallacy.

      If I said I was a world class golfer, and was excluded for the list of world class golfers in Golf magazine, that wouldn't be a Scotsman fallacy, what would be accurate.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by geekoid · · Score: 1

      There is a culture that makes it so women can't do things they want.
      IT's not as bad as the 60/70s but it's still there. THAT is what it is about. opportunity.

      When a girl gets put into a easier math class because she is a girl, that's a problem.
      When a women can't get a promotion in the gaming industry because 'women don't game' that's a problem.
      When a women is trying to point this out and then has her personal life dragged into the public and is threatened with rape and death, that's a fucking problem.

      And guess what? IN those situations society needs to make an effort to level the playing field.

      I heard that same damn argument you made, and most of slashdotters seem to be making, in the 60s and 70s. It didn't hold water then, and it doesn't now.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Stop complaining and debating and do something by Kohlrabi82 · · Score: 1

      When a girl gets put into a easier math class because she is a girl, that's a problem.

      I have never met any girl which was sent to an easier class. Quite the opposite, most girls (and so did most boys, actually) during my school day tended to say "math is hard" and chose to avoid the higher level classes. It's not the society's job to question that decision by a person, nor is there anything wrong with it. People decided they didn't want to do math at a higher level, so it's fine. It's time to treat grown-up people as grown-ups and accept and tolerate their decisions without using them to further some social engineering goals.

      When a women can't get a promotion in the gaming industry because 'women don't game' that's a problem.

      There are women in prestigious designer jobs, and they got there by hard work, effort and dedication, not because of their boobs. And you know what? I don't care about the gender of the person who created the game(s) I play, and I guess most gamers don't even know the gender of the members of the development team. So why exactly do you want and need more women in gaming development? What is the ulterior motive? Why do you care so much about the gender of game designers? Why don't you just let people who want to become game designers become it and let the others live as they want? Stop making this a gender thing and let people choose jobs because they're skilled and dedicated, not because they have a certain flavour of genitals. It's really that simple.

      When a women is trying to point this out and then has her personal life dragged into the public and is threatened with rape and death, that's a fucking problem.

      I agree. Those are criminal offenses, and should be treated as such. People who are on the internet and publish things can get attacked for it, and we have laws to deal with it. I fail to see how there is a bigger problem with the "gamer society" in general. Some absent-minded idiots did an idiotic thing. That's it. It's still valid to criticize the feminist faction and not accept that every critic is a supposed misogynist, or object that the videos by Sarkeesian are ridiculously skwed and one-sided. It's an opinion, and I'm not a "women-hater" because I don't agree with what she shows in her videos.

      And guess what? IN those situations society needs to make an effort to level the playing field.

      It gets down to the very simple fact that feminists and all the other social engineering types are NOT working to even out the playing field or the rules of the game, but to manipulate the result.

  9. Or.. by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 1

    ...the obnoxious, stupid, piggish behavior will just take on a more inclusive veneer, as it does with other forms of commercial art (music, movies, tv, etc.)

  10. Re:I predict by rdwulfe · · Score: 1

    Or not even that long, apparently, since the political conspiracy has already been trotted out.

  11. Nobody knows the truth. by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

    How the fuck is anyone expected to know what the truth is here? Maybe he lied, maybe she whored herself out.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    1. Re:Nobody knows the truth. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      People who slept with her might bring some light to the matter. If they did, that is.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:Nobody knows the truth. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Usually a good indicator is who tries to blow things up in the press. While there are some attention-whores that actually had bad things done to them, most are liars.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  12. Re:I predict by Z80a · · Score: 3, Informative

    Given the fact this is a quite heavily biased story not looking at the actual complaints of the other side, pretty much made by "the ones that arrived first", i don't think it will last even seconds before the shitstorm begins.

  13. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's ridiculous, and you're a troll. The reason people hate Anita Sarkeezian is not because she is a woman, but because she purposefully misrepresents facts in games and posed as someone that enjoys games when there is video evidence of the contrary. She lied to the people that financed her videos and then did not even deliver, not to mention that it's such poorly made crap that a high school student could have done better. Zoe Quinn got backlash because she is a morally bankrupt scumbag that slept with other people in her industry and journalists that promoted her game. She also made up the Wizardchan incident and basically got a bunch of lonely virgins to take the heat for something they did not do. In both cases the hate they received is due to their actions and character, not because they are women. Oh, by the way check out that list of "developers" most of them aren't developers themselves and are only tangentially connected to those companies. These people are actively trying to ruin gaming as a hobby. They politicize everything and try to make an issue over the smallest things. They deserve all the hate they get.

  14. Accusations by Whorhay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So TFS says that the accusations regarding Zoe Quinn were false. I hadn't heard this bit yet, is the article linked to actually confirmation of that? Sorry, I'd read the articles for myself but work filters are a PITA. The last I had heard was that the guy who writes for RPS and Kotaku had confirmed their sexual relationship.

    I honestly don't care about her sex life or lack there of. The only thing of interest to me is a "journalist" possibly sleeping with a person with whom he should have a more professional relation ship with, and not disclosing that fact when making mention of her work, whether positive or negative.

    1. Re:Accusations by Khyber · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "So TFS says that the accusations regarding Zoe Quinn were false. I hadn't heard this bit yet, is the article linked to actually confirmation of that?"

      Nope, not in one bit. Besides the fact Zoe herself admitted to being a whore publicly kinda ruins any and all chances of those rumors being false.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:Accusations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      People fuck, get over it. People in development fuck people in marketing, or even journalists. So fucking what? It's none of your goddamn business. Nobody "discloses" in a game review that they slept with one of the people on the team. I mean, have you ever seen that in your life? There is no journalistic standard for disclosure of private sexual relations because they're fucking private.

    3. Re:Accusations by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      He says billions of new games come out every day. Then gives a picture of her game as the only picture in the article and lists it as the number one stand out. You call that "in passing"? I call that "favourable".

    4. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Besides the fact Zoe herself admitted to being a whore publicly

      Really? I don't remember reading anything about her admitting to taking payment for sex.

      Or do you mean that she merely has a lot of sex? In which case take your sexist (I'll recant that accusation if you've ever levelled similar insults at man who has done comparable things), puritanical attitudes somewhere where you might find fellow people who are jealous of others sex lives.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:Accusations by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      TFA points out that the journalist in question never actually wrote a review of Depression Quest. If you can find one send them a link so they can add a correction to their article. Google doesn't turn up anything.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Wait, aren't you being sexist by assuming that only whores are women?

    7. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Did you actually read my post?

      You know the bit about how I would retract if he had ever levelled such an accusation at a man?

      Yes men can be whores too. In almost all cases, however a person using the insult "whore" is sexist.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    8. Re:Accusations by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

      I see the words "objectivity", "mpartiality", and "fairness" all included as part of the second paragraph as common parts of established journalistic codes. I'm pretty sure when you have had a sexual relationship those are going to be very difficult things to maintain when speaking about that person or their work. I wouldn't actually expect anyone to say in their article "We shagged and they were awful in the sack, but the video game was pretty great." I would instead expect the journalist to either state that they had a more than professional relationship with that person, or most likely just abstain from writing about them or their game. He should have told his Editor that he had a non-professional relationship with her and had someone else write any articles regarding her or her work, or including plugs for her work.

    9. Re:Accusations by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      He didn't write an article specifically written as a review of her game. What he did was write an article about how there were thousands or more new indie games. Then in that article he said that her game, was the big standout and the only graphic in the article was for her game. That isn't exactly a review but it sure is a ringing endoresment. And while that can sound like nothing of consequence a mention like that on some of these gaming related news sites can make or break a game in a huge way. Just look at how Minecraft went from something no one had heard of to an incredible success in the course of a single weekend, arguably because of a silly web comic.

    10. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Right, just because you're aware of the error doesn't mean you're not still in error. At some level, you're assuming whore woman. Honestly, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't prejudge another person and assume some negative attribute about them based on little to no information about said person. Next time, I'll just assume you're unfairly characterizing another person.

    11. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Edit: between "whore" and "woman" there should be a

    12. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      GAAH! "If and only if" !!!!

    13. Re:Accusations by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Well, it would appear that she may have used sex for personal gain. She had sex with people in positions to help her career, and did so while in a relationship with another person without his consent, which is immoral according to her. While that isn't direct monetary payment for sex, I can see how some people would consider it a form of prostitution.

      There is a difference in the minds of many between having sex with a person because you want to for physical/emotional pleasure and having sex with a person because you wish to gain something from it. Also these is the issue of being in a relationship that has been set out as monogamous and then not adhering to that.

    14. Re:Accusations by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Would you dense nitwits take your strawmen and go home? No one gives a damn how many men she slept with. It's the journalistic integrity involved in a situation in which people are promoting each other and secretly sleeping together.

    15. Re:Accusations by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      It was right in the twitter feed linked as a reference. He was definitely promoting her work.

    16. Re:Accusations by Cederic · · Score: 1

      a person using the insult "whore" is sexist

      So Jane sleeps with Bob, Bob's wife finds out and slaps Jane while calling her a whore.

      How is this sexist?

      Anyway, why do you think Khyber was using the word 'whore' as an insult? He believes Zoe exchanged sex for something of value, that sounds like prostitution to me. 'Whore' would be an appropriate description.

      Maybe more emotionally loaded than 'prostitute' but hardly a reason to rant at him. Shit, it's Khyber, there're plenty of better reasons to rant at him.

    17. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Right, just because you're aware of the error doesn't mean you're not still in error. At some level, you're assuming whore woman.

      The phrase "whore" is most commonly used as a pejorative directed at women (as it was in this case) who are having (as defined by the person using the phrase) too much sex. It is almost never dirceted at men, because very many people have double standards about sex when it comes to men and women.

      Next time, I'll just assume you're unfairly characterizing another person.

      Anyone using "whore" is an insult is at best a puritan. Unless they use similar things for men as well, they're also a sexist puritan. There's a very high chance that the person is a sexist puritan, because puritanical attitudes usually come with all sorts of fucked up assumptions about sex and those fucked up attitudes while by no means exclusively sexist, contain a fair dose of sexism.

      So yes: if someone uses the insult "whore" it does indeed tell me a fair amount about the person. Certainly enough for me to characterize some aspects.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    18. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      a person using the insult "whore" is sexist

      Where did I say that? In fact I specifically included a line in the original post to forestall such comments. Please go back and read the post.

      Anyway, why do you think Khyber was using the word 'whore' as an insult?

      Because it's almost always used that way? These days it's a derogatory term for prostitute. Even if she was a prostiture it's still an insult.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    19. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Whore is not a phrase, it's word. The looseness that you are using words is very questionable here.

      According to Merriam-Webster

      whore - 1 : a woman who engages in sexual acts for money : prostitute; also : a promiscuous or immoral woman

      2 : a male who engages in sexual acts for money

      3 : a venal or unscrupulous person

      So if you assume first definition, he's using the word correctly. And there's not much to say. If you assume, which is the thrust of your argument, that he meant someone who has lots of sex, then you're improperly conflating the first and third definition. As the third one makes no distinction of gender. To assume sexism on his part is telling of yourself really. And quite ironically makes you a whore (i.e. an unscrupulous person).

    20. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And according to http://www.oxforddictionaries....:

      derogatory
      1A prostitute.

      see the derogatory bit there?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    21. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Who's contending the derogatory part? Derogatory != sexist.

    22. Re:Accusations by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I know. Is he being threatened with death because he slept with her, giving up any journalistic integrity?
      Classic double standard.

      You got laid? That a boy!
      You had sex? You Whore!

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    23. Re:Accusations by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "That isn't exactly a review but it sure is a ringing endoresment."

      A ringing endorsement would have been a whole article and a 9.9 rating.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    24. Re:Accusations by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Where is the link?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Who's contending the derogatory part? Derogatory != sexist.

      Are you simple or are you only capable of holding half a sentance in your head at one go.

      I *SPECIFICALLY* said way back in the beginning that I wouldn't considerit sexist if he's ever used similar terms for men. If he only uses it for women then yes, it is sexist.

      moron.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    26. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Do....you...know...what...the....English...language...is...

      And I specifically said you're sexist because you seem to think only women can be whores.

    27. Re:Accusations by julesh · · Score: 1

      At some level, you're assuming whore == woman

      That's probably because the word's most common meaning is gender-specific:

      whore n.
      1.a A woman who prostitutes herself for hire; a prostitute, harlot.

      (source: OED 4.0)

    28. Re:Accusations by julesh · · Score: 1

      He didn't write an article specifically written as a review of her game. What he did was write an article about how there were thousands or more new indie games. Then in that article he said that her game, was the big standout and the only graphic in the article was for her game. That isn't exactly a review but it sure is a ringing endoresment. And while that can sound like nothing of consequence a mention like that on some of these gaming related news sites can make or break a game in a huge way. Just look at how Minecraft went from something no one had heard of to an incredible success in the course of a single weekend, arguably because of a silly web comic.

      Yes, but according to her ex's account, she only started sleeping with him in may, and this was published in january. So, it's hard to see how this would be evidence of any kind of malfeasance.

    29. Re:Accusations by julesh · · Score: 1

      He says billions of new games come out every day. Then gives a picture of her game as the only picture in the article and lists it as the number one stand out. You call that "in passing"? I call that "favourable".

      Fine. It's a favourable, if brief, review. But as it was written 4 months prior to there being any kind of relationship between the two of them (according to her ex's account) it's quite tricky to see what, if anything, is wrong with it.

    30. Re:Accusations by julesh · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

      I see the words "objectivity", "mpartiality", and "fairness" all included as part of the second paragraph as common parts of established journalistic codes. I'm pretty sure when you have had a sexual relationship those are going to be very difficult things to maintain when speaking about that person or their work. I wouldn't actually expect anyone to say in their article "We shagged and they were awful in the sack, but the video game was pretty great." I would instead expect the journalist to either state that they had a more than professional relationship with that person, or most likely just abstain from writing about them or their game. He should have told his Editor that he had a non-professional relationship with her and had someone else write any articles regarding her or her work, or including plugs for her work.

      You see, that's the interesting thing about this story: everyone assumes that he wrote about her games at some point while they were together. But he didn't. As far as I've been able to discover, he last mentioned one of her games in an article he wrote in January (link). He also mentioned her on a personal level, but didn't discuss any of her games, in an article he wrote in March (link). Yet according to her ex's account, he only started sleeping with her in May. So what exactly is unethical here?

    31. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And I specifically said you're sexist because you seem to think only women can be whores.

      Yes and you said that because you're a total block-head who is apparently unable to read.

      Allow me to explain one last time, though I doubt you'll be able to comprehend anything consisting of more than four or five words.

      Whore is a perjoratave (it means insulting) term. I said he's sexist if he only uses that term on women.

      How the hell you got from that to "lol u think nly womens can be teh whores lol u r sexist lol trolololol" I have no idea. That I think is an accurate representation of your thought process and mental capacity.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    32. Re:Accusations by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Tell me, did your ears get sore from having your fingers jammed in them so hard? The link can be found from the article and numerous times in this thread. Constantly demanding a link after it has already been provided is pretty asinine.

    33. Re:Accusations by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Defending a strawman argument with a strawman argument isn't a great choice. Not a single person has said that. In fact, pretty much everyone wants that guy fired. So "That a boy" was said by no one ever.

      Evidence that Zoe got death threats? Link? Reference? How's that for a double standard. You just take her word for it but demand unrealistic evidence for anything else.

      sig: The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

      Yours at the very least.

    34. Re:Accusations by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I had an unprofessional relationship with my spouse for more than 2 years before we ever had sex. And I can definitely tell you I gave her preferential treatment more than a couple months before we ever had intercourse. In my experience sex wouldn't be the first sign of a relationship.

    35. Re:Accusations by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Whore is a word which has a definition that specifically applies to women. It's not sexist and it being a pejorative has nothing to do with it. I'm sorry you can't read a dictionary properly.

    36. Re:Accusations by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You're a bit thick really.

      I specifically stated that I would retract the accusation of sexist if he'd ever used levelled similar insults at men.

      Note how I didn't very specifically did NOT specify the exact word. Since you seem either unwilling or unable to actually read my post, let me spell it out in excruciating detail:

      use of the word whore != sexist

      Insulting only women and not men for having too much sex == sexist.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  15. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by cryptizard · · Score: 1

    "Wow, that is some high level paranoid thinking...like Hitler, or Willy Wonka." -Jack Donaghy

  16. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First articles here, then a new policy on Fark, and now yet another story about misogyny. It's a constant, subtle pressure in the background for Millenials that women are oppressed

    Or, you know, there's a lot of men who are childish assholes and misogynists.

    Because, really, death threats? Threats to rape her? The crap I've seen in the coverage about this pretty much means this isn't hand-wringing and moralizing ... this is a sign of some pretty terrible (if not criminal) behavior.

    Some people get online and become complete and utter sociopaths. Others don't seem to need to be online.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  17. Re:I predict by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The hypocrisy of third wave feminism should, at the very least, be pointed out, and it's a straw man to call doing that misogynistic.

  18. Re:extinction? No, bifurcation -- the military tra by qbast · · Score: 1

    I doubt it. According to feminists, any male-dominated groups are inherently misogynist and have to be destroyed or forcibly 'feminized'. Of course women-only communities are just fine and example of woman empowerment.

  19. So, where is ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... the code of chivalry? So there are a few asshats who make things tough for women. Where are the guys who should be calling them out on this bad behavior?

    Yeah, its an old and outdated concept. But its practically instinctive male behavior. Stepping up and confronting a threat to prove your machismo. Not necessarily violently, but I'd expect at least a few guys to step up and tell the dickheads to shut the f* up.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:So, where is ... by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Strange, I have the feeling this constantly happens. These 'discussions' are full of mangin...erm... white knights these days.

    2. Re:So, where is ... by Kohlrabi82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you argue that some men in shining white armor should come to the aid of the damsels in distress? Isn't it ironic how the harassed women are now used as a damsel-in-distress plot device in some gamer misogyny story?

    3. Re:So, where is ... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      ... the code of chivalry? So there are a few asshats who make things tough for women. Where are the guys who should be calling them out on this bad behavior?

      Yeah, its an old and outdated concept. But its practically instinctive male behavior. Stepping up and confronting a threat to prove your machismo. Not necessarily violently, but I'd expect at least a few guys to step up and tell the dickheads to shut the f* up.

      The very feminist you would ride to the rescue of would call you a misogynistic bastard for thinking she needed to be rescued.

      Chivalry isn't dead, but the chivalrous among us know better than to waste time helping someone who's going to call us assholes for doing it.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:So, where is ... by mbkennel · · Score: 1


      Chivalry was also a man qualifying himself to the upper-class, powerful, father of the bride. Wealth and power that he would inherit for his own benefit should he marry the daughter. There was something in it for the man.

    5. Re:So, where is ... by tylikcat · · Score: 1

      So much depends on what you mean by chivalry. I mean, for all the good press it gets - and for all that it could be honestly better than many alternatives - you are talking about a system that encodes some major inequalities in class and not a hell of a lot of mobility* - and some major discrepancies in power between men and women.

      For some folks, it means being a decent, honorable individual. For others, there notion is all wrapped up in ideas of having the woman be weaker, and be supported, and protected, and for the man to be in charge. ( And for the woman never to be smarter, more accomplished, or god help you stronger or a better fighter.) (Yes, I'm a tall muscular martial artist, and a lot of guys think they are attracted to that... But in fact are only attracted to that if they are stronger and can fight better. Though don't seem to want to put in the decades of training, and, seriously. Other guys? Are totally fine, and her, sex and soaring go together great.)

      These are inherently different things. I have a pretty strong personal sense of decent behavior and honor, though I don't end to talk about it much, and seriously I need that in a partner. So if a guy who is that short of chivalric, hey, that might work out.

      A guy whose self image is dependent on me being weaker, making less money, not as good in a fight... Yeah, not so much. (I have no problem with someone opening doors for me. I open doors for people all the time. Someone who freaks out about that... Yeah, no.)

      * no serfs or peasants welcome here, this only applies to the gentlefolk

    6. Re:So, where is ... by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      Reddit to the rescue :

      http://www.reddit.com/r/whitek...

    7. Re:So, where is ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      and some major discrepancies in power between men and women.

      All of the social inequities and power differences of the past aside, men and women do think differently*. Women don't like confrontation whereas men live for it. Even if its good old boy poking and tough talk between friends, that's a guy thing. Women are more likely to shun or ostracize a misbehaving member of their group (or society). But that doesn't work for men. No guy who hasn't had his testicles repossessed (sorry for that image) would dare play any kind of 'behind the back' trash talking game. So a guy that makes a rude remark (or does something else) and gets away with it at the time has 'won'. Subsequent punishment some time after the fact is, in guy's minds, acknowledgement of success.

      Guys are like dogs. When you catch them doing something wrong, you've got to smack them with a rolled up newspaper right on the spot. Or it doesn't register as punishment for the bad behavior.

      *Demonstrated recently by fMRIs.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    8. Re:So, where is ... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Chivalry is a crock. ISIS is chivalrous.

      Believe the Church's teachings and observe all the Church's directions.
      Defend the Church.
      Respect and defend all weaknesses.
      Love your country.
      Show no mercy to the Infidel. Do not hesitate to make war with them.
      Perform all your feudal duties as long as they do not conflict with the laws of God.
      Never lie or go back on one's word.
      Be generous to everyone.
      Always and everywhere be right and good against evil and injustice.

      I'll replace 'chivalry' with 'kind', any day.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:So, where is ... by tylikcat · · Score: 1

      Oh, bloody hell, of course this comes in as I'm heading out the door. But this is rather in my field, so at least a short reply.

      So, first off, please be very careful when generalizing from studies of gender differences. They are generally smaller in effect than most people understand (and this is often not well characterized in popular reporting) and there's a long history of confounding factors being ignored (for instances, differences that have to do with body size rather than gender). Even when you can say that there is a statistically significant difference between the means of different populations, that doesn't mean that there isn't a lot more overlap than difference. ...and then you go on make a number of assertions about behavior, without citation, and without talking about origin. Because, yo, culture. (And, of course, the situation in Medieval times, when there wasn't much in the way of reliable birth control also presented a very different social picture. Pregnancy and lots of kids can mess the hell out of your social options.)

      So, I'll leave you with this, because I thought it was a fairly brilliant discussion of one of the more decent studies of gender differences in brain structures, which is still accessible to the layman: https://theconversation.com/ne...

    10. Re:So, where is ... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Stepping up and confronting a threat to prove your machismo. Not necessarily violently, but I'd expect at least a few guys to step up and tell the dickheads to shut the f* up.

      Yeah, lots of guys do that, all day. But it doesn't stop it. It's going to take a lot more than that. The misogyny is a sign of a sick culture, specifically one in which the genders have been convinced that the other is the enemy instead of balancing.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:So, where is ... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Why do you think people deserve special treatment because they happen to have a vagina?

  20. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by ganjadude · · Score: 2

    the media would have you believe there are millions of people out there raping women and whatnot, thats the issue with the non stop coverage. Sure there is a problem with a sub culture of a sub culture, but the way the media is ramming it down everyones throats you would think every last women who picks up a controller will be raped by a gamer. its journalistic dishonesty.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  21. Re:Again?! by geekoid · · Score: 1, Troll

    we can, but we should not.
    She isn't whining. She isn't talking about nerds at all. She is talking about the gaming culture; which is in a horrid state for women right now. perhaps you should stop whining and try to understand women get a lot of harrassment from the gaming community. And ant just kids calling them names in a MMORPG chat.

    Frankly, I think it's a result of 'bros' getting into gaming in the 90s.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  22. Re:Man, nerds have changed by Zigget · · Score: 1

    I'm a dickhead because I play video games? Sounds like sound logic. And all Catholics are lunatics because of Westboro baptist church.

    --
    We are the tech savvy, and should be the guides for those who aren't. Us creating or fueling techno-panic is irresponsib
  23. Re:I predict by cryptizard · · Score: 5, Funny

    How can there be video evidence that she doesn't enjoy games? Does it show a video game killing her parents?

  24. promoting violence against women? by Cederic · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I have big issues with suggestions that games promote violence against women.

    Most games promote nothing. Collectively they involve a lot of violence.

    Some of that violence is against women. Most of it is against men. For instance earlier today I launched a major offensive against a 28000 man army, slaughtering around 79% of the enemy and losing a third of my own men. No women were harmed.

    Perhaps someone standing up in public screaming 'me me me' shouldn't be surprised when some fuckwit goes 'yeah, you'. Just keep the rest of us out of it.

    1. Re:promoting violence against women? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's more to do with the way women die in these games. Male characters usually have, well, a character, a personality and some role in the story. Their deaths have meaning and relate to them, and are at least somewhat realistic.

      Female characters tend to be so 2D they often don't even have a name. Their deaths are typically a cheap plot device to provide motivation for a male character, or show just how evil the bad guy is. When they die they are often wearing skimpy outfits or end up in suggestive poses. Hitman was actually advertised with female cadavers in sexy underwear posed suggestively on a bed, with a little neat bullet hole in the head so as not to spoil your fapping.

      In Mario games Peach is almost always kidnapped at the start, and then Mario and Bowser fight over her. She isn't a player in the game, she is the ball. Why not maker her playable along side Mario, like Luigi is? She is a prop, utterly generic in every way (pink clothes, lipstick, high heels, eyelashes, utterly helpless) and only there to provide a smooch of victory at the end.

      Your simplistic "body count" mentality is part of the problem.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:promoting violence against women? by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      Is it pre-1997? Aeris/Aerith?

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    3. Re:promoting violence against women? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      So your issue is that they die while badly dressed?

      Challenge the way they're dressed, sure. I have no problem with that. But don't go pretending that this somehow promotes violence against women.

      Shit, in your example game Peach gets kidknapped but Mario gets attacked, assaulted, killed multiple times. You're suggesting that the woman suffering loss of freedom is worse than the man suffering loss of life?

      You're not really convincing me.

    4. Re:promoting violence against women? by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

      It's more to do with the way women die in these games. Male characters usually have, well, a character, a personality and some role in the story. Their deaths have meaning and relate to them, and are at least somewhat realistic.

      They do?!! Really, what FPS/TPS have you played lately where all the fodder have personalities and roles in the story beyond being guys shooting back at you? Let's be frank, the GRAND majority of all characters in a game are empty shells used as obstacles or background decoration, regardless of gender of the character. You bring up Princess peach, but how much personality does Bowser or Mario have, nearly none, hence why it is so easy to swap pretty much any of them with other characters without having any major impact on the game.

      Now, there are definitely examples of terrible usage of female characters in video games, but don't grossly over generalize. That's one of the biggest issues in this situation, one side or the other taking this as an absolute across the board, and when you do that, yeah you'll tick people off as that's a pretty bad misrepresentation of the situation.

    5. Re:promoting violence against women? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      If more women than men were dying in games you wouldn't be calling it a "simplistic" mentality. You just have a myopic attitude of anything that happens to women (or imaginary women) is bad and you try to rationalize it after.

      The female body is used as an attention grabber in literally every thing ever done by humans. Even feminists use this.

      Who cares? Men have their little "save the woman" fantasy- women have their little Twilight, 50 Shades, etc, etc, fantasies. There are plenty of stories and games that don't fit that mold and women are free to play and create what ever they want. Just because not everything panders to certain insufferable women (remember that plenty of women have been playing and loving these games for ever) doesn't make it misogynistic.

      If you shove your way into a group and say "you gotta do things that I want because I don't like what you're doing now" nobody is going to like you. That isn't misogyny.

    6. Re:promoting violence against women? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " No women were harmed."
      how do you know? how come no women could sign up to die for her country? Or are you just assuming they are men?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:promoting violence against women? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Death in Mario is temporary, the imprisonment is forever.
      So, would you rather be trapped in a room for all eternity? or outside where death means you get to come back?

      Did you really miss the posters point so badly? Do you really not realize the Peach is a helpless victim with no choice and Mario has a choice?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:promoting violence against women? by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      mario 2

    9. Re:promoting violence against women? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      When that group is society, yes, it is misogyny.

      So ti wasn't racism that caused people to be angry becasue black people want to be treated fairly in society?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:promoting violence against women? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Mario Bros 2 is an interesting one because it's the only core Mario game where Peach isn't kidnapped at the start, and she is in fact a playable character. The thing is, it isn't really a Mario game.

      It was originally released in Japan with a completely different name and characters. Nintendo thought that the real Japanese Mario Bros. 2 was too hard for US players, so they changed the graphics in Yume Kojo: Doki Doki Panic to Mario sprites and released that instead. Peach was only playable because the original game had 4 selectable characters and they needed to make up the numbers after Mario and Luigi.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:promoting violence against women? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I have been a gamer for 30 years, I just do not see it. As far as I can tell, this is a collection of hyperbole aimed exactly at promoting the fame of two persons and an agenda that includes preaching hate against a large group of people.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:promoting violence against women? by mod+prime · · Score: 1

      It's not Peach's hypothetical suffering compared with Mario's. It's that Peach is basically a prize that the belligerents are contesting that poses the challenge.

      Consider if black men were often used to add a gritty edgy element to the game, and they were regularly scantily clad and subservient to the player's needs or were commodities that the enemy was trying to acquire from you. Or if Jews commonly turn up as financiers and usurers. Or gamers were portrayed as overweight antisocial misogynists.

      That's kind of the issue here. We know that the way groups are portrayed and stereotyped in the media can influence people's views and perspectives and some media can reinforce stereotypes with a harmful effect that isn't always obvious to those that are entrenched in that culture.

    13. Re:promoting violence against women? by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      Basically every women in a JRPG disagrees with you.

    14. Re:promoting violence against women? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Thiis is a painfully big crock of shit. I mean you haven't heard of Tomb Raider by any chance or any of the many games like it, have you? And you're SERIOUSLY complaining about two dimensional characters in GAMES?

      Ahahaha!

    15. Re:promoting violence against women? by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      luigi started off as a palatte swap... you know to save art assets. if you're going to make an argument at least include the context.

    16. Re:promoting violence against women? by Draugo · · Score: 1

      Wait... you think that all of the countless nameless mook males that die in FPS games have more personality than the woman victims that often deserve a cutscene or two before dying... you seem to have a strange definition of character, personality and role in the story.

  25. Slashdot is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I knew it was going downhill for a long time, now it's dead, because it's been taken over by the Social Justice Warriors.

    1. Re:Slashdot is Dead by sinij · · Score: 1

      It is now official - SJWcraft has confirmed: slashdot is dying. Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered /. community when recently IDC confirmed that /. accounts for more than a fraction of SJW on the Internets.

    2. Re:Slashdot is Dead by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      True. That's when I stopped caring about karma and post here only for fun. :-)

    3. Re:Slashdot is Dead by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Does this mean you are leaving? Please say yes.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Slashdot is Dead by geekoid · · Score: 1

      well, you can leave slashdot and go to reddit; which would have the added bonus of raising the average IQ in both places.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  26. False accusations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's pretty laughable given the amount of evidence. Her ex-boyfriend didn't post false accusations. Among the things that were posted were Zoe's own words, tweets, facebook message, ok cupid posts, etc. Is Slashdot also ran by SJW's that refuse to see things for what they really are?

    The author of the Vice article also has connections to Zoe Quinn, Anita, and the other white knight/SJW "journalists." Did you not even bother doing research on this before making a crap slashdot post?

    That's the beauty of facts. They still remain facts even if you disagree with them.

    1. Re:False accusations? by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mod parent up big time. Her boyfriend has posted significant amounts of evidence supporting his claims, and Zoe has not refuted them.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    2. Re:False accusations? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      The author of the Vice article also has connections to Zoe Quinn, Anita, and the other white knight/SJW "journalists."

      Of course they do. That's how they get their beak wet. They breathlessly report every incident of internet trolling (if it's against a woman) with clickbait headlines to drive ad revenue. Facts be damned. Hell, the more disagreement over what the facts are, the better, so they can write more hand-wringing articles.

      If these women are truly concerned for their safety they should call the fucking police. But they're not really concerned, they just want attention and the profits that come along with it.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    3. Re:False accusations? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Informative

      If it were true you should be able to provide a link to the review of her game written by the guy she is supposed to have slept with. Nothing can ever be erased from the internet and every cache/archive. You can't because it doesn't exist.

      Beyond that, her private life is just that, private. It has no baring on her professional work.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:False accusations? by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      Stop moving the goalposts. The accusations by here boyfriend are here:

      http://thezoepost.wordpress.co...

      Tell me, which one of these accusations is false?

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    5. Re:False accusations? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      shameless plug of depression quest.

    6. Re:False accusations? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      One screenshot in a huge list of 50 games. That's you claim that he "reviewed" Depression Quest and promoted it?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:False accusations? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The police can't do anything until something happens.

      So you whole premise is false.
      I assume this means you will calmly rethink your post and point of view on the subject.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:False accusations? by julesh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Stop moving the goalposts. The accusations by here boyfriend are here:

      http://thezoepost.wordpress.co...

      Tell me, which one of these accusations is false?

      Those aren't the false accusations referred to by the article. The false accusations are the ones that suggest that she slept with Nathan Grayson in order to persuade him to write a positive review of one of her games. These accusations were quite widespread (e.g. 1, 2, 3), and appear to be completely false because nobody has pointed out a review written by Grayson of any of Quinn's games which was published after the date she's accused of sleeping with him.

      Honestly, I'm not sure why anyone who doesn't know her personally would care what men she chooses to sleep with. It's not like it's actually any of our business, really. The one important accusation, that she used sex to get positive reviews for her game, turns out to be false. So let's just forget about the rest, OK?

    9. Re:False accusations? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      One of the most interesting things about this farce, besides the laughable declaration of the death of the gamer (in keeping with the general voodoo hoodoo postmodernistic dialectic that progressives, SJWs and feminists tend to believe actually works beyond the true believers) is the synchronicity of the response.

      http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSsuc...

      Make no mistake, this is an organised bloc singing not just from the same hymnsheet but from the same mailing list. My advice is push them out of all circles with as much vigour as possible.

    10. Re:False accusations? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Threatening someone with rape and murder is illegal. It's called "assault." Look it up. Please calmly rethink your post and point of view on the subject.

      She could also call it "harassment" and get a restraining order.

      But none of these things will happen because there is no financial incentive to seek justice.

      If Quinn were a developer for, say, Blizzard, and someone made credible threats against her, do you know what would happen? She'd report it to her boss who would say "well shit, we make money off her work! Can't have someone interfering with that!" and he'd call their security people and the cops, they'd talk to Twitter, get the IP address of the perp, talk to the ISP, find this person and prosecute him, and it would never be a story.

      But no, the people who make money off Quinn are the SJW blogs and game "journalists" who can write clickbait articles about how, because ONE supposed troll wrote mean things to her "the gaming community" has a misogyny problem.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    11. Re:False accusations? by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      considering, apparently it barely qualifies as a game, there are almost certainly superior and more deserving games, and he used a screenshot from this one when the other one he singles out he's also literally called an art project?

      you asked for positive review, and yeah, in most people's eyes, a singling out as worthy among 50 competitors qualifies. also, i don't think it'd be possible to BS a full blown review of a choose your own adventure. game while keeping any semblance of credibility.

  27. When women are killed in video games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    According to Sarkeesian, it is purely for, and because of, misogyny.
    Men being tortured, murdered, or just plain treated as being mentally deficient by the magic of a y chromosome (to be "kept in line" by a female handler of some sort) however, is seen as just a normal state of things. It's just a game after all.

    Where I'm from, we call this a double standard.

  28. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Khyber · · Score: 1

    "Can we stop the which hunt now and focus on the people that actually are the problem now please?"

    No, they can't, because slashdot and reddit are hand in hand with this.

    And there's not one single editor here that can prove otherwise, as I've got a little e-mail surprise from them (yay honeypots with one-letter off email addresses.)

    FUCKING BUSTED, SLASHDOT EDITORS.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  29. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    She somehow noticed the threats without being logged in, and captured the twitter feed within 13 seconds of the final post. The whole affair was a rapid-fire set of shifting crazy-talk across three minutes. It looks like manufactured evidence, and all explanations to the contrary are wild stretches.

  30. Re:I predict by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    I wasn't talking about the women; I was responding to the comment I replied to WRT the comments that are upvoted on Slashdot.

  31. Zoe Quinn is a self-confessed rapist by Aardpig · · Score: 1, Troll

    Having agreed with her boyfriend that part of informed consent requires sexual fidelity, she proceeded to sleep around. When she subsequently fucked her boyfriend it was therefore without his informed consent, and thus -- by modern SJW standards -- rape.

    Zoe Quinn is a rapist. There is no way around this.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    1. Re:Zoe Quinn is a self-confessed rapist by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      "Views on the ethics of infidelity. Which she maintained is inherently wrong even if the person who was cheated on never finds out, because (aside from willfully endangering their partner by way of increased STD risk) if the unfaithful party then has sex with their partner, they are doing so under false pretenses, and therefore without their partner’s consent. That is, sex with a partner who doesn’t know you’ve cheated on them is sex without consent."

      See http://thezoepost.wordpress.co...

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  32. Re:I predict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's the problem. Both women lied about events, they created their own hate campaign and claimed it was against them. You'll notice there are no police complaints for any of the things they claim. The massive conflict of interest between these two women and having sex with a number of prominent people in the gaming "review" industry is never addressed by the rags, just the fake stuff these women created. They're playing the industry to make their millions. They've openly discussed it, clearly thinking twitter to individuals is private.

    The problem is many people think they're white knights and go all out to protect these fair damsels. Personally, I'd hope someone reports the death threats to the police, they perform an investigation and once the truth comes out, we'll never hear from these two again, or their champions.

  33. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    One "side" didn't threaten to murder and rape people over youtube videos.

  34. Zoe Quinn vs. Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Instead of saying that those accusations were false, Zoe Quinn and co. proceeded to delete everything, ban everybody from gaming zine-s who talked about it. Zoe Quinn herself never said that those accusations are false.

    Attack against her was not because shes a woman, or that she sleeps around. She sleeped around with people who worked in gaming news sites that hyped her game. That`s why.
    In every thread or site or blog dissing here, there is zero hate because shes a woman, nobody cares about her gender. Gender is not the issue, it never was.

    Other things about her have also surfaced. Like she harassed thefineyoungcapitalists, who were women devs BTW. Same women who gaming news sites want to protect, but refused to publish their side of the story because "You don`t talk about Zoe Quinn`s bad behavior". Or how she sexually harassed someone in her wedding.

    1. Re:Zoe Quinn vs. Internet by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      These are the same game sites that will run full page background ads about a game right behind the review. Sex is the least of the ways they whore themselves out. Usually they're straight up accepting money for good reviews.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    2. Re:Zoe Quinn vs. Internet by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Usually they're straight up accepting money for good reviews.

      Some games are that bad, that money simply is not enough.

    3. Re:Zoe Quinn vs. Internet by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You may be on to something here.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Zoe Quinn vs. Internet by Verdatum · · Score: 1
      All the deleting I saw was due to people spamming links that included Zoe's personal information, such as her home address. It wasn't a vast conspiracy, it was just attempts to protect privacy.

      And the articles themselves might not have attacked her because she's a woman, but lots and lots of assholes were indeed attacking her in a misogynist manner; e.g. rape-threats.

  35. Re:I predict by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The reason people hate Anita Sarkeezian is not because she is a woman, but because she purposefully misrepresents facts

    What do you mean, Anita misrepresents facts?

  36. So much spin... by kick6 · · Score: 2

    They're going to create a BS tornado...

  37. Re:Again?! by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are we talking about the same Zoe Quinn? The Zoe Quinn who shut down a gamejam specifically targetted at helping women coders, because she perceived it as in competition with her own fundraising efforts?

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  38. Catchup for those outside of the circle by Karganeth · · Score: 4, Informative

    A YouTuber by the name of InternetAristocrat has 3 videos on this matter. It's worth watching these to fully understand the details of this situation. Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

    1. Re:Catchup for those outside of the circle by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's worth watching these to fully understand the details of this situation

      That, of course, begs the question. Is it really worth fully understanding the details of this situation?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Catchup for those outside of the circle by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      no, decidedly not, but as a gamer i worry for the state of gaming... and if some good indie games die because they can't get some decent coverage... you know, then i can't play some innovative games, and that'd be bad.

  39. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    http://youtu.be/gqJCCnued6c?li...

    I'm not a fan of video games.

    B-but she never said that! She did. She doesn't like games, and she isn't a gamer. It must be nice to be such a deluded idiot.

  40. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

    "Or, you know, there's a lot of men who are childish assholes and misogynists."
    A lot or a small percentage? That is the question. The internet is big and and even 1000 men acting like that is a very small number when you look at the total but if you have a thousand jerks posting that they want to rape and or kill you it seems like the whole world. That does not make it okay but the simple truth is that the internet allows idiots of all genders and orientation to seem like a large group when if fact they are a tiny group.
    As to threats I have actually gotten death threats and even a rape threat on Slashdot. I am a 49 year old straight male programmer with a beard. Maybe they where into that kind of thing but I am not interested.
    The simple truth is that bad people will do bad things. If you want to restrict that kind of speech you will have to use legal or social pressure and that will require some identity tied to the posts.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  41. Re:I predict by 91degrees · · Score: 2

    Zoe Quinn got backlash because she is a morally bankrupt scumbag that slept with other people in her industry and journalists that promoted her game

    Why does Zoe get called out here, but the people she slept with get ignored? If anyone did anything wrong, they're the ones who breached journalistic integrity.

  42. Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why do you think there are a LOT of men that are misogynists?

    I don't often encounter them in real life. Sure there are some out there, but it's a huge stretch to claim that there are a lot of men that dislike women.

    Some people get online and become complete and utter sociopaths.

    This is in fact what people are missing - a lot of online trolls are not truly misogynists. Or that is to say, they will screw with everyone equally or whoever they can get the biggest rise out of.

    In real life they may well not be misogynists at all, as you say some people get online and they turn into something different and almost inhuman in the resolve to cause pain and distress. The kind of trolls that went after Robin William's daughter after his death - that's not being a misogynist, that's being an asshole.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Asshole or misogynist, it doesn't matter. The behavior should be viewed as unacceptable. Fuck, do you go around telling people on the street that you're going to kill or rape them? And trying to shade the issue because someone used one negative term rather than the other, when no one will know what the actual motivation was, just gives cover for this obnoxious behavior. You just shouldn't fucking do that shit, mmmkay?

      Plus, idiots like these are driving us towards the day when anonymity on the internet goes away. Do you want that? Because that's what it's coming to, boys and girls. So either act like adults and figure out a way to police yourselves in a reasonable way, or get locked down - the internet is now too important to the "normal" function of our society to allow a bunch of misogynists, assholes, or whatever to disrupt it. And the powers that be certainly won't let that happen. Defense of anyone who acts like this for any reason only makes things worse.

      --
      That is all.
    2. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      If you watch Sarkeesian's videos she points out that much of the sexism isn't men hating women, it's just lazyness. Hero needs a motivation, so let's throw in a helpless princess. Game world needs some grit, let's throw in a pimp beating up some prostitutes. Let's throw in a few sexy women as background decoration, to sell a few more copies. It's not malice, it's just crap writing and the designers probably don't even realize they are doing it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      You say most men, but you are pointing to a rich elite with very small numbers. Also that guy was really old, and a lot of older people can make casually racist remarks just because that's how they grew up - it doesn't even mean they necessarily are racist.

      The truth is the majority of men on the planet would prefer to act like James Bond does towards women

      Again, where's the evidence of this? I don't see it, I see most men as being polite and respectful towards women, and it's more than just a veneer.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by mjwx · · Score: 2
      I dont often agree with SuperKendall but...

      Why do you think there are a LOT of men that are misogynists?

      I don't often encounter them in real life. Sure there are some out there, but it's a huge stretch to claim that there are a lot of men that dislike women.

      This.

      Misogynists (and misandrists) are out there but are very small in number these days, especially amongst the younger generations that grew up without wide spread misogyny or misandry.

      That being said, mysogynists and misandrists tend to be extremely vocal in order to make it seem like their POV is more popular than it really is. Its the same with any extremist viewpoint, racism, xenophobia, fundamentalism. The louder they shout, the more afraid they are of being ignored into oblivion. The misogynists and misandrists feed off each other unfortunately, trying to drag more rational people into an "us vs them" conflict. Like most people, I dont really have the patience for that kind of bollocks.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    5. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Regardless of the actual number of individuals, those who threaten and/or abuse others are worthless scum.

      Women on the Internet (gamers or otherwise) generally don't consent to being threatened with violence. That sort of behavior is completely inappropriate and should be shouted down by everyone.

      It seems to me that those who are acting as apologists for such abusive jerks, should look at their motivations. It's one thing to advocate for free speech (I support it wholeheartedly), but another thing entirely to defend the content of hateful, abusive speech and threats of violence, whether such threats are credible or not.

      Does that attitude make me a misandrist? I like me, and I'm male.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    6. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Defense of anyone who acts like this for any reason only makes things worse.

      Funny, I was just thinking the same thing about the actions of Quinn and Sarkeezian.

    7. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If you watch Anita's videos she point out that most of the problems are not due to misogynists, it's mostly just lazyness on the part of the designers.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Not a lot, just a lot of trolls. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Regardless of the actual number of individuals, those who threaten and/or abuse others are worthless scum.

      Of course they are - I'm simply saying there are not as many as you think, AND by and large they are probably not misandrists OR misogynists, even though they attack both men and women alike... instead they are (not sure if there's an official term for this) anti-humanists. They screw with EVERYONE because they can, so it does no good to get worked up over misogynists when that's not what they are.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  43. Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I generally dont keep up on this stuff, but the post by Zoe's ex was filled with actual proof that she is apparently unbelievably manipulative. I didnt see any rebuttals, either-- just complaints that he crossed a line by posting private conversations. That can be argued, but noone seems to deny the accusations.

    I didnt get to the parts about accusing her of trading sex for reviews or anything, but shes not the shining champion of feminist rights that you want.

    1. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No one thinks she is. But unless she's committing murder, this reaction is overblown. We think the people attacking her are scum for making something that would be a small deal for any male in a similar position into one of the biggest conspiracies ever.

      And that their actions reinforce the notion that misogynistic beliefs have become endemic to the "culture" of gaming, inasmuch as it has one.

      And that actually ties back to Sarkeesian's work, because science has shown that objectified media leads to this kind of hostility and discrimination against women.

      People are objecting not because Quinn and Sarkeesian are angels, on a pedestal and beyond reproach, but because there are elements of culture that are causing this problem and standing up against it is the only thing that's going to see change.

    2. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      We think...

      We think? Do you talk about yourself in the 3rd person?

      Don't answer. I know you are a representative of a professional misandristic hate group.

    3. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by tylikcat · · Score: 1

      "We" is first person plural, not third person. So the implication is that the OP identifies themselves with a group that they are aware hold similar views. (Or alleges such.)

      "They think..." would be third person.

    4. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Dude, "we" is first person plural. And it's reasonable to make inferences about other non-morons.

      And I like that you can't resist dropping a stupid hyperbolic lie on top of your "I don't understand english" red flag. I'm part of the amateur non-idiot group. I'd love for you to join us some day.

    5. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      I'm part of the amateur non-idiot group

      If you were only part of that group, you still could have been a decent and perhaps likable person.

    6. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Grammatically true. Sloppy me. I meant of course the pluralis maiestatis. Everyone in a public forum speaks for himself, or states clearly for which groups he speaks. Anything else is manipulative and dishonest.
       
      But from certain group members one cannot expect better.

    7. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Kielistic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People are objecting not because Quinn and Sarkeesian are angels,

      No, you are standing up for them because they are women. Women that, as you have admitted, have done bad things. But it's everyone else that are the sexists.

    8. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by qbast · · Score: 1

      Dude, "we" is first person plural. And it's reasonable to make inferences about other non-morons.

      Yes, however you should not try it since your psychotic rants on this page put your firmly in 'morons' camp. Or at least 'people with Tourette syndrome and serious anger management issues' camp.

    9. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've done "bad things". You've done "bad things". That objections is stupid and you knew it when you typed it.

      What they haven't done is anything justifying this gigantic shitpile of hate and threats. Which exists because of misogyny. And you have to know you're lying if you claim otherwise.

      Take your just world hypothesis bullshit and shove it. If they did something illegal, let the courts handle it. (spoiler, they didn't)

    10. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Oh, no a sexist shitheel is going to accuse me of moral failings.

      That argument might work if you'd ever done anything good for the world. Or had any sort of ethical defense for yourself, but really. You just use the idea of hypocrisy as cover. A shield for your own reprehensible beliefs.

      To paraphrase you,
      "You're a misandrist, that's the only excuse for why you'd call me out on my bullshit, using scientific observation, and the pragmatic reality that's being reported"

      It just doesn't hold up. It's become entirely apparent that real men's issues are less of a concern to MRAs than they are to feminists and the whole facade exists just to make backhanded misogynistic claims, while adopting the style, but not substance of arguments for equality.

      One doesn't have to go far into the movement to see it either. While feminists have fought for decades for the mere chance to be front-line combat soldiers, MRAs sites use the lack of a female draft requirement to bitch about women having the right to vote. It's a facade on misogyny, and a flimsy one at that. You're not fooling anyone with your bullshit tu quoque arguments.

    11. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      There's no "anger management" problems with pointing out in no uncertain terms that a lot of people here are straight up morally wrong. You are bad people. I am angry because you should stop that.

      You won't. I don't know what's wrong with your mind, but something is. So you won't.

    12. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nonsense. My exposure to this issue has been entirely through articles like this one attempting to demonize the ex-boyfriend, who by all accounts was treated in a way that would have been absolutely blasted if it had been towards a woman. She was cheating on him with the people who were supposed to be reviewing her work, all the while manipulating him into thinking he was crazy for suspecting that she was cheating. She claimed that it would be "rape" to have an intimate relationship with someone while cheating behind their back, and then did exactly that. And shes apparently a chronic liar.

      The "huge conspiracy" I simply havent seen; I literally had not heard of this issue until I saw an article on ArsTechnica on what a scumbag guys are for demonizing Zoe Quinn (What? Who?). Apparently shes so notorious that the most white knighting article on Ars and Slashdot cannot have her looking good at the end; theres just too much dirt out there for even the most heavily spun article to hide.

    13. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Including you.

      Believe it or not thats not true, and its none of your business, nor is it appropriate to project like that.

      This also isnt a "he said she said". The guy posted chatlogs, screenshots, and corroborating accounts. The relationships he alleges have been confirmed by Zoe and the "co-conspirators". NOONE is disputing the facts.

    14. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      Zoe has, by her own confession, committed rape. In the SJW handbook, that's doubleplusungood. Hence the strong reaction from the community.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    15. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      If you have to continuously repeat that you are part of the "non-idiot group" it really looks like you are just trying to convince yourself of that more than anything else.

    16. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      I have never used my integrity to promote someone that I am secretly sleeping with. Are you saying that you would do that given the chance?

      The issue is nepotism and nothing at all to do with misogyny. You can keep repeating misogyny to derail the conversation all you'd like but it's clearly not all that effective.

      Just world? What the hell are you going on about here? That has absolutely nothing to do with what was said.

    17. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm frankly exhausted with dealing with people like you, but you at least seem to be trying to frame this in an honest way, so I'll do my best to not be angry about this.

      1. It doesn't matter. You might think the details of what she did wrong matter. They don't matter. Because they're small fries to everything about the video game journalism industry. And over a free twine game. It's not that big deal. However big a deal the personal infractions might seem, they're not that big a deal. That might sound like personal opinion, but it's not. This is a case of proportionality, and the effect sex and sexism have upon the perceived severity of crimes among certain misogynistic subsets of the population.

      No one bats an eye when IGN gives for profit game companies who put ads on their site a decent review. And that is so much bigger than a link on a blogpost. Whatever crimes have happened here, they had almost nothing to do with the level and nature of the reaction.

      2. It really does matter that the nature of the "crime" was sexual. And that they originated out of a lover's dispute. That's important because, nominally, that's private. You can tell your friends. You can even complain to strangers. But when strangers start getting emotionally invested and involved, it's a symptom of something very wrong. I know, I know, you think that's not you. You're only involved because of "nepotism". Except, see point #1. It's not that big a deal, and the activities involved do not deserve any sort of defense.

      3. Gaming culture is broken. Do you really think it's okay that people get called "nigger faggots" on online games? That it's normal? The "It's just a game" excuse doesn't hold up, because that shit doesn't crop up in other types of non-video games. We've let the escapism(which is healthy in moderation) of the system capture the way we treat it each other(which isn't). Heaven help you if you happen to actually reveal yourself as female. Just ask any lady who games, that's not an understatement at all.

      And the problem with people like you isn't 1,2 or 3, it's that you're not aware of how bad it is. You don't notice the absolutely detestable levels of shittiness that permeate the behaviors. Threats on your life aren't normal. I make all sorts of strongly opinionated posts on the internet. And no one has ever threatened my life over them. Not even once. I do expect it eventually, but to normalize and dismiss it is completely unreasonable, especially with the severity and focus the threats receive.

      These kids(who lets be honest, many are probably are only children mentally) doing abhorrent behavior, they need to see an environment where they don't get an implicit endorsement of their behavior, where people will point out whatever small crime they're fixated on, when they've already done worse themselves.

    18. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      well said.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Crete a 'female user id'* on slashdot, copy that post into it. look at the different responses you will get.

      *yes it's stereotyping, but that's kind of what we need for the test.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Your "science" is about as valid as creationism, maybe less. What definitely is clear however, is that accusing whole groups of being assholes leads to push-back.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    21. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by julesh · · Score: 1

      I didnt get to the parts about accusing her of trading sex for reviews or anything

      Right. That's because they weren't in the account that you read. They were made up by other people after that account became public, and started spreading as rumours before anybody did the research and found out that the guy involved didn't review any of her games in the relevant time period.

    22. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Zoe has, by her own confession, committed rape.

      That's quoting her a long, long way out of context. The confession was to cheating, which also amounts to hypocrisy due to the fact that she's on record as stating that she considers cheating to be equivalent to rape. As the rest of us, generally speaking, don't consider these to be equivalent, however, let's keep the actual facts of what she did straight.

    23. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by maztuhblastah · · Score: 1

      What they haven't done is anything justifying this gigantic shitpile of hate and threats. Which exists because of misogyny. And you have to know you're lying if you claim otherwise.

      You're right. They don't deserve threats. Few, if any, people do.

      But they *have* done things that deserve media attention. Zoe in particular seems to have behaved rather reprehensibly in a couple different ways. (I have no idea about whether she sleeps around, and frankly I couldn't care less. I'm referring to the stores of her DMCA [ab]use, trying to muscle out competing game jams, etc.)

      Professional gaming journalism sucks for many reasons (anyone remember Gamespot axing a reviewer because he didn't review a sponsoring game well enough?), and this is one of them.

      We shouldn't give a free pass to crap journalistic standards and assholes who can't play nice in the community just because some other set of assholes threatened the first set.

    24. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are MAKING this about sex and sexism. Zoes boyfriend was (understandably) upset, and had an actual important grievance to air: that Zoe had a non-neutral relationship with the people supposed to be reviewing her games.

      It should have ended there: many such stories do, with the person violating the professional code (ie, "dont sleep with your reviewers and then pretend its unbiased") being discredited and everyone ceasing to care.

      But in this case I've seen two stories defending Zoe, and not on factual grounds, but on some bizarre allegation of rampant sexism by untold misogynist males. And then there are posts from people like you, alleging that I, too, am part of the problem because I find her behavior unacceptable (along with the implication that I somehow support men who do the same sorts of things). The entire thing was created out of air; there is no reason to be defending Zoe, and frankly noone outside of some tiny niches cared until ArsTechnica and Slashdot ran these stupid stories accusing everyone with a Y chromosome of being an immoral bastard.

      Im really not sure on what grounds youre leveling the accusations that you have been leveling, particularly at me; I've seen you on slashdot, but Im quite certain I dont generally get involved on these cesspool comment threads because theyre utterly ridiculous and usually I have the good sense to let the trolls troll. Maybe the lesson here is to just log out of slashdot and let you and everyone else who cares yell at each other until the end of time. But for your sake I'd recommend you not run around in life accusing random strangers of hating women just because they think there should be standards of journalistic integrity.

    25. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      I never defended attacks from random strangers, but Im not clear why anyone (including Zoe) should care what random people on the internet have to say. Given her familiarity with the internet (and yours) I would have thought that would be clear. I've gotten some pretty hateful things said about me on the internet from online games to message boards, attacking my political beliefs, the fact that im a guy, the fact that im a Christian, and several other things. Its not right but complaining about it on slashdot would be like complaining about winter on slashdot. Its simply a reality, and you will NEVER stop one or two people being hateful on the internet.

      The accusation that this is widespread I simply havent seen backed up, and honestly there are way more important things in the world for me to be upset about than that someone said something nasty on the internet. How about the burning of churches in India, the beheading of reporters in Syria, the ebola outbreak in Africa? We're supposed to care about some random comments made towards someone on the internet, just because shes a woman? Im sorry, that doesnt fly. If it were real life and it happened in front of me I could perhaps say something, but what do you want me to do about it? Start a "stop being jerks on the internet" petition?

    26. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Why are you taking your anger over random internet comments out on everyone? Wouldnt you do better to address the handful of people being jerks?

      I mean I dont particularly think tilting at windmills is usually a good option, but it would be better than calling the entire male population of the world "the problem".

    27. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      She should care because they threatened her life, and attempted to bankrupt her through a paypal exploit.

    28. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      She should care because they threatened her life, and attempted to bankrupt her through a paypal exploit.

      The threat is not news, at all. This literally happens every day. If she is getting threats from someone, she should take it up with the police. But why is this slashdot worthy? Would it be slashdot worthy if I came on here and said "some dude on 4chan threatened to find me and kill me?"

      I mean we do see stories of pro streamers getting SWAT'd, and it does make the news, but noone alleges sexism or accuses masses of slashdotters of being misogynistic or misandrist because of it. Why is her case special in that regard? Why isnt it just a case of a death threat, why does it have to be a story of "a death threat to A WOMAN?"

      The hacking I hadnt heard of, which is suprising to me if true because an honest to goodness paypal exploit should be pretty big news. Even if you're right: Millions upon millions get hacked every year (SOE hack 3 years ago: 78 million CC records exposed; this year, Target, UPS, Home Depot, Apple Celeb hacks.....) Again: Not a gender clash issue.

      None of these issues are tied to gender, and its frankly getting old when people try to turn it into a gender issue. I have some degree of sympathy for her being threatened / hacked, but such threats should not be taken seriously even though they may be upsetting. The internet is a crappy place with crappy people, and posting about it will not make it better.

    29. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      The people demonizing her are doing so by contacting her directly, and noting that they are going to rape her or kill her. Or posting her home address. Or posting her nude photographs in violation of copyright, or demonizing her in the comments of these articles, or on discussion boards. I've read lots of really vicious comments about what people think of her. And anyone who tries to defend her gets ridiculed as being a loser white knight, probably only defending her in hopes of hooking up with her.

    30. Re:Zoe Quinn, wait what? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      This is all pretty misleading.

      When I said "I hadnt seen......" I was thinking about review trading; certainly her relationship with guys at Kotaku was mentioned and corroborated, but I didnt connect them when I made the post. In retrospect, its clear what was being discussed (and is being discussed) is the fact that guys at gaming publications who are charged with reviewing her work have had intimate relationships with Zoe, some of them going on over lengthy periods of time.

      That WAS established in the account I read, and HAS been confirmed by numerous sources.

  44. Re:I predict by qbast · · Score: 3, Informative

    You mean this ? So far we only have accusations from professional victim.

  45. Re:I predict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hey, look this lie again.

    She never said it. Ever.

    http://youtu.be/Afgtd8ZsXzI

    At 0:13 "I'm not a fan of video games"

    Literally took all of 5 seconds to look up.

  46. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by kick6 · · Score: 1
    "Because, really, death threats? Threats to rape her? The crap I've seen in the coverage about this pretty much means this isn't hand-wringing and moralizing ... this is a sign of some pretty terrible (if not criminal) behavior." But that only matters when it happens to a woman. It's only credible when it happens to a woman. It only gets coverage when it happens to a woman.

    Do you even multiplayer, dude? I've had prepubescent boys threaten death in the most gruesome of ways from stomping them at CoD. And what about Blizzard's WoW dev team? Ever seen the shit slung at them when they make a big change that someone doesn't like? Gruesome, empty, threats are part and parcel with game dev, and everyone either deals with it as such, or cracks and quits. That is, unless it happens to a woman, then the massive MSM spin machine fires up, starts doxxing people on twitter, deletes posts and bans users on reddit, and a whole host of other bullshit to UTTERLY BURY the truth. Misandry and leftoid politicism will destroy video games. And you'll be there cheerleading it, apparently.

  47. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 2

    They are equally culpable, and they've been called out. The problem is that the media keeps focusing on her to make it seem like some fedora crusade, when in reality it's calling out all the gaming press and Quinn at the same time. Let's face it, gaming journalists have been in bed with devs and publishers for a long time, it just has gotten so out of hand that now we have journalists and devs literally in bed with each other. This would never fly in any other industry, so why do we let it occur here?

  48. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    Or, you know, there's a lot of men who are childish assholes and misogynists.
    Because, really, death threats? Threats to rape her?

    Please tell me you arent making the leap from "a few guys did X" to "men do X". If you are, is there any reason I couldnt do the same thing with women online?

  49. Re:I predict by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    Oh they do. But conveniently these journalists "miss" this backlash and so don't report on it like it doesn't exist.

  50. Re:Again?! by stdarg · · Score: 1

    If we take a page from the feminist playbook and define these gaming communities as "safe spaces" for men, then anything goes there and women have no right to complain.

  51. Re:I predict by flayzernax · · Score: 2

    After reading the article, seeing the discussion here, being a gamer myself, and also experiencing the effects of this objectification myself.

    I would say, regardless of her 'moral character' (tbh what she does in her own time).

    She is damn right about the gaming industry.

    TBH games are fairly weak and lacking in any substance that adds anything to humanity overall. But it is worse if you take them apart piece by piece out of context.

    I would be the first to argue that some as a whole are not all that bad. But her argument is that the overwhelming majority of games suffer from the curse of objectification.

    And in that she is absolutely right.

  52. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1, Troll

    She did call the damn cops.

    What is wrong with you?

    I'm going to keep getting modded down for not being part of the misogynistic hivemind that slashdot has, but seriously. I don't care. This is a case where mods are wrong, you're wrong, this shit is wrong. And I'm going to be hostile to morally reprehensible people like you because you need to know you're a bad person.

    Do you get that you're inventing arbitrary justifications for horrible shit?

    Do you just need to stop her from pointing out rather obvious things about the video game industry that much? Like you're being hurt by her videos?

    Is it so hard not to be a morally reprehensible piece of garbage?

  53. Recent? by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm guessing the article was written by someone that was just born. It has existed forever in gaming. My wife is a gamer chick and back in the 80's she had to deal with this crap.

    It's not only video games. she used to play MTG in tournaments 8 years ago (She has a 4 digit DCI number), last time she played she was harassed several times by the low IQ morons that are prevalent in society to the point that she refuses to play it ever again.

    This crap is not new, what is needed is people finding these scumbags that pull this crap on girls/women and beating the shit out of them.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Recent? by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      I think the main thing here is that it's about who Zoe purports to be vs. who she actually is. I think that we have seen multiple examples of men recently experiencing similar issues: Julian Assange, That guy from mozilla etc. The clippers owner, I'm sure if I tried I could name many more.

      I'm personally angered by your wife's story, having been a gamer from the 80s myself, but as a man didn't have to suffer such blatent harassment (although not completely with out). I'll never forget the look on her face first time my roommate's gf put on the Xbox Live headset when that tech hit. But this has nothing to do with mysoginistic gamers going after Zoe- it has everything to do with lack of personal responsibility, manipulation and pathological lying and the distrust and chaos that it precedes. People have been hurt by her real life 'game' and they are lashing out.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    2. Re:Recent? by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      Did she last play Magic 8 years ago, or play regularly 8 years ago and try playing again recently?

      The Magic community is pretty female friendly nowadays, at least in my part of the world, and all of the recent GP's I've traveled for.

      She might want to venture back in - the game is even pretty healthy now.

    3. Re:Recent? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Here is news for you: Everybody gets harassed by these low IQ morons. They will throw anything and everything they can think of at you. The mature reaction is to ignore them. Apparently that is something a certain type of woman has problems with. Others are doing just fine. Same, incidentally, happens on the male side, except that society has a far, far lower tolerance for male drama-queens than for female ones so we typically do not hear about it when a man was the target.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Recent? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      No, that is not needed. Grabbing people and beating the shit out of them doesn't solve problems, it causes stronger and stranger escalation.

      They need to be shunned. Behave like that? Out of the tournament. Do it again? don't come back.

      It's what I did when a ran a bar, and it worked great.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Recent? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This crap is not new, what is needed is people finding these scumbags that pull this crap on girls/women and beating the shit out of them.

      Right, let's take a bunch of people who feel powerless and thus act out against women, and make them feel more powerless by beating them up for how they treat women. That would never backfire ever.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Recent? by Draugo · · Score: 1

      It's funny that you brought up MtG. Did you know that Wizards has a policy that all MtG Angels are female and all MtG Devils are male?

  54. Re:Again?! by kick6 · · Score: 1

    So what if gaming culture isn't woman friendly. Does every. single. fucking. thing. in existence have to be!? Cuz that's basically what you're advocating. It is OK to have male-only spaces. No, really. This idea that everything should be either female-only (because these special snowflakes need special non-man spaces for their unicornness) or unisex is absofuckinglutely misandrous and absurd.

  55. Re:I predict by Aardpig · · Score: 1

    Jesus, you really are a shameless wankstain, aren't you?

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  56. Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Question, why do you (generally speaking) feel the need to lump all the people who disagree with you together into one group, give that group a sarcastic name, and then abbreviate that name into an acronym which you can then use as a accusatory label whenever the subject comes up for discussion?

    It sounds like the kind of thing my old paranoid-schizophrenic girlfriend would do when talking about "them", but i presume you are not mentally ill, so there must be some other reason for it. Is it some kind of bonding thing between people who feel threatened by others? Or do you believe that by creating the appearance of some kind of organized opposition that you will sway "neutral" parties toward your side? It just sounds dumb to me, but maybe i'm not the intended audience?

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Why "SJW"? by kruach+aum · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let me answer your question with a question: why do you feel the need to psychoanalyze someone you know nothing about other than his use of the abbreviation "SJW"? Surely YOU would not engage in thinking all people who use those three letters in a sequence are the same, would you?

    2. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 2

      Well as i said, my initial presumption would be that people who always resort to blaming things on groups with three letter acronym names are just crazy. However i am trying not to fall prey to the simple "well those people are just crazy" impulse, so i'm trying to understand instead. Why do you feel that's appropriate? Do you not realize it sounds... strange to people who aren't versed in your sub-culture? Or do you not care? Do you believe you're trying to educate the rest of us about what "those people" are really like?

      Even though i do mentally categorize everyone who thinks rape and death threats are cool into the same group (and just to be clear, as far as i know that is not the exact same group as the people who like to use the term "SJW") i don't feel the need to give them a name any more specific than "misogynist assholes." I don't understand the appeal of coming up with some fancy name with a three letter acronym and bandying it about all over the place. Honestly i'd think that anyone who felt compelled to do so would sound... well, a little crazy. So what's the appeal? (I'd think the people who keep going on about "MRA"s are crazy, except i had the impression the "MRA"s gave that name/acronym to themselves, which again, i don't understand the appeal.)

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    3. Re:Why "SJW"? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      They are grouped together based on certain traits. The biggest of which is that they label anybody that disagrees with them "misogynists".

    4. Re:Why "SJW"? by qbast · · Score: 1

      You got all that rant just by analysing nine words written by me? Since you are seem to be some kind of medical genius, could you also diagnose my knee pain? You have over 30 words to analyse now, so it should be simple.

    5. Re:Why "SJW"? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      All men are rapists

      Is that a straw feminist in the closet?

      I don't know why you guys need to fall back on fictional stereotypes to criticize people who are pointing out sexism. There's no world in which that doesn't prove their point.

    6. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, i got it all from three letters written by you, and the context of all the other people who have used those same three letters. I realize the definition is a bit redundant, but the group of people who use "SJW" to refer to people in a serious context just end up sounding well... to put it politely, "strange." My faith in humanity, battered though it may be, insists that they're not all just crazy and there must be some reason why they choose to do that, so what is it?

      As for your knee, it sounds like you hurt it. I can say that in just six words because in this case i can say the first thing that comes to mind without sounding like i'm trying to insult you outright.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    7. Re:Why "SJW"? by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Straw feminist... you are so funny. Too bad for you, there are so many examples of feminist hate speech on the internet that no 'straw feminist' rhetoric can hide that. But coming feminists or their manginas with facts is even less hopeless than teaching a dog quantum mechanics. :-P

    8. Re:Why "SJW"? by qbast · · Score: 1

      Funny how you don't seem to mind that every other comment on this page lumps everyone who disagrees under label of 'misogynist'.

    9. Re:Why "SJW"? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And yet a google search on the term accross several pages of results reveals exactly zero people using that phrase to do anything other than describe strawfeminists, either like you're doing, unironically and stupidly, or ironically and mockingly like the comic.

      So, good job. You have no real points.

    10. Re:Why "SJW"? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I love when people use the acronym "SJW," it's even more efficient than "misandry." It says "I am unapologetically backwards as fuck on a wide variety of issues, to the point that I am upset at the existence of people who are opposed to my backwardness."

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    11. Re:Why "SJW"? by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Even though i do mentally categorize everyone who thinks rape and death threats are cool into the same group

      This sentence alone disqualifies you and puts you in the group "Scheming lying feminists and their manginas". I have never seen anyone stating on /. or other forums that rape and death threads are cool. And no, even I don't think they are cool. But by now I don't care anymore. I would never raise even a finger for a women anymore unless I know her very good and know she deserves it. And why should I? White knighting is misogynistic. Objectifies the women and insinuates that they cannot help themselves.

    12. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      No, i have no problem with that. If you wanted to take everyone you currently lump under the label "SJW" and call them "misandrists" instead i would disagree with your definition, but i wouldn't think it sounded stupid. It's not that you disagree with those people and have a less than complimentary name for them, it's that the name you (collectively) chose sounds like it came out of a paranoid conspiracy. Why construct stupid sounding acronyms to make it sound like there's some organized group out to get you when there are so many other perfectly normal words you could use?

      It's interesting that so far there have been over a half-dozen replies in this thread and there's been a lot of dodging the question (sometimes with insults thrown in, free of charge) but no actual attempt to explain why "SJW" seemed like a good idea at the time.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    13. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 2

      Hmm,

      #1: I never said that i've seen anyone on /. or any other forum say that rape or death threats are cool. I have seen people make such threats elsewhere, and perhaps it is a bit of jump to assume that the people who made those threats think that they are cool, but i think it's reasonable to believe so until proven otherwise. If you wish to debate the point however for the moment i will settle for "i mentally categorize everyone who makes rape or death threats into the same group."

      #2: You specifically left out the bit immediately following the part you quoted, in which i clarified that i was not accusing anyone here "(and just to be clear, as far as i know that is not the exact same group as the people who like to use the term "SJW")".

      #3: The part where you say that you do not take conversations on slashdot seriously (or at least that's my interpretation of your statement) and post here "only for fun": http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

      So nice job troll, thanks for playing?

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    14. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      You're right, that was a mistake on my part and i apologize. What i should have said was "Question, why do you (generally speaking) feel the need to lump many or all of the people who disagree with you together into one group [...]"

      The "or all" part is because it's possible that the set of people that are, in general, included in the group "professional victims" is actually a subset of the group "SJWs". If that were the case my original question would still be correct, however since i don't know if that is the case or not the rewording is justified. Carry on.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    15. Re:Why "SJW"? by Kielistic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fictional stereotypes? This is a story about feminists labeling an entire group of people misogynists. They clearly don't have a problem with using the paint brush set to "wide".

      Additionally there have been and still are feminists that claim that all heterosexual sex is rape. Which would make pretty much all men rapist. So again, not fictional.

    16. Re:Why "SJW"? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      They get called that because they go on a warriors crusade for what they dogmatically consider "social justice". It's a play on words of "keyboard warrior".

      I'm not sure what about it seems like a paranoid conspiracy. Just a group of people all behaving in a similar manner, grouping together, ganging up on others and self-identifying as their own in-group. Heaven forbid they get called a name you don't like.

    17. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Though i disagree with your interpretations, that's a perfectly adequate description of how the name might have come about, however it does nothing to explain the choice at acronym-ize it.

      I have heard people complain about the War on Drugs many times (and i often agree with those criticisms.) However i can't ever recall anyone complaining about the "WoD". Certainly not for the first reference to the name in any case. In contrast i've seen "SJW" used dozens or scores of times, but can't recall "Social Justice Warrior" being used at all except on the rare occasion to explain what SJW actually stands for. (Notably in your explanation above you just assumed everyone already knew what SJW stood for when you explained the derivation.)

      So to get back to the original comment that prompted the question in this thread, why is it:
      "Who are possibly outnumbered by professional victims and SJWs."

      instead of:
      "Who are possibly outnumbered by professional victims and social justice warriors."?

      or to use your own definition, why not just:
      "Who are possibly outnumbered by professional victims and militant misandric idiots."?

      To me, #1 sounds stupid, #2 sounds a little hokey but okay, and #3 sounds perfectly reasonable (given the viewpoint of the person supposedly saying it.) I would certainly have gone with "militant misandric idiots" myself but would be boggled by the idea if anyone suggested abbreviating it to "MMI".

      (I was originally going to suggest "militant misandric assholes" as an alternative, but then realized that if you tried to abbreviate that everyone would think you were talking about martial arts. Although perhaps choosing a term that can't be acronym-ized without confusion would be a good way to help prevent that from happening.)

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    18. Re:Why "SJW"? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      But.. I've seen people use the term SJW to belittle someone they've already labelled MRA.

      I remain bewildered that there doesn't seem to be room for innocent bystanders in this discussion.

    19. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      See my above response. It's not the name i disagree with. (I disagree with the assumptions behind it, and it seems a bit over the top, but it's a reasonably adequate name for its purposes.) It's the choice to consistently use the acronym instead that seems bizarre to me.

      Saying "I don't like people who are enthusiastic about rape threats" doesn't sound paranoid. However if a bunch of people started going on about the "RTEs" and questioning what the RTEs were responsible for and if the RTEs had submitted this slashdot article, etc. Well, that would sound both stupid and a little paranoid.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    20. Re:Why "SJW"? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      An entire group of people being those engaged in the misogynistic behavior, yes?

      Oh you mean "gamers"? You misread that, doofus. Try again it says "Gamer culture." A culture can have attributes, even if they don't map to all(or even most) members of that culture, a common point you have to raise from the OTHER side when people condemn an entire culture as being bad or evil. Which is not what anyone is saying here.

      Because a culture is, by definition: "The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought."

      I'm terribly sorry to say that misogyny is a visible behavior pattern without the gaming community.

      Or if you don't like that one, and think I'm cherry picking: "These patterns, traits, and products considered as the expression of a particular period, class, community, or population"

    21. Re:Why "SJW"? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      "Misandry" is like "anti-white oppression." Completely valid as a concept, surely happens somewhere in real life if rarely, but mostly just a rallying cry of bigots in practice.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    22. Re:Why "SJW"? by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      I had no idea that the San Jose Water co. behaved like this. I believe I shall start a petition.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    23. Re:Why "SJW"? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      Well even if we still haven't cleared up the mystery of the reason for the abbreviation, and despite the fact we clearly differ in opinion on the social issues involved, i thank and congratulate you for being the only person to respond to the original question in a reasonable manner with an attempt at an actual explanation (albeit with some confusion and fumbling around on both our parts before arriving at that point.)

      Although it's a little sad that in this case an AC is setting the standard that so many of the pseudonym users ought to be aspiring to.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    24. Re:Why "SJW"? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is a story about feminists labeling an entire group of people misogynists.

      Can you point out exactly where that was said? I have read quite a few of these articles and watch many of the videos, and I didn't see anywhere that labelled gamers are a whole misogynists. In fact, Sarkeesian's videos are at pains to avoid labelling the developers as misogynists, pointing out that most of the problems are not malicious but simply due to poor design or writing and a lack of awareness.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:Why "SJW"? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      In any identity group there will exist a small cadre of genuine nutters. We can all either ignore them, depriving them of the airspace for their paranoid ranting, and continue talking to the calm, rational people from their identity group... or we can respond to them with more ranting and raving about extreme minority viewpoints. I prefer the former, because it reduces the overall occurrence of nutterism. Nutterism is a contagious disease, but our society has developed sophisticated methods of disease control

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    26. Re:Why "SJW"? by denzacar · · Score: 1

      By that same logic gaming culture is Jewish. Or gay. Or blonde. Or old. Or female. Or is made out of people called Jimbo.
      Or any other attribute anyone could name as present in the culture.

      If any attribute "even if they don't map to all(or even most) members of that culture" could be used to label any culture as such.

      In other words, you belong to a Nazi culture. Whichever culture you may consider yourself belonging to.
      Hey... it doesn't have to map to you for me to call you a filthy Nazi.
      Your rules.

      Cause clearly, there is no such thing as PRIMARY attributes.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    27. Re:Why "SJW"? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Additionally there have been and still are feminists that claim that all heterosexual sex is rape. Which would make pretty much all men rapist. So again, not fictional.

      In any self-selected group that contains more than about 20 people you'll find at least one who's a complete and utter nutcase. Using the most extreme to discredit the entire group is a very dubious tactic.

    28. Re:Why "SJW"? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Eh they tend to all come from gender studies classes and modules, would be the reason why.

    29. Re:Why "SJW"? by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      ... all heterosexual sex is rape.

      Does this include oral sex? Because, like Bill Clinton, many women don't see oral sex as proper sex. At least us men can be happy that gay sex isn't anal rape.

      Man-bashing has become so pervasive that some blow-back is appearing. Women are saying "I like fucking men" and rejecting feminist policies.

      feminism
      noun \fe-m-ni-zm\
      : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities [Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com...

      Just curious, where exactly is the part about heterosexual sex?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    30. Re:Why "SJW"? by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      In regards to the usage of the label social justice warrior

      It is used as a short hand for people who have a particular culture, generally very well meaning, nice people, who fail to see how their solutions to perceived "problems" may themselves cause differing problems for people, and that other peoples heirarchy of priorities may not necessarily be in a similar order to their own.

      Common but not necessary beliefs/traits of SJWS can include. Blaming the 'patriarchy' for all of the worlds ills. Belief in 'rape culture'. The redefining of words in such a way that the same behaviour turned in the other direction does not qualify "only white people can be racist because only they have systemic power" etc.

      Individual social justice warriors may believe whatever they like, there are only trends and common themes, common themes and tactics that lead to a common label.

      it's that the name you (collectively) chose sounds like it came out of a paranoid conspiracy.

      The name fits the behaviour commonly seen. They are for what they perceive to be social justice. They go about it in a way that is potentially/often very hostile to others interests, and are quite devout in their beliefs. They fight for what they believe in, thus the "warriors".

    31. Re:Why "SJW"? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      You keep repeating misogyny- maybe eventually you'll convince someone it's true. Most likely people will come to realize you're just making pleas to emotion.

    32. Re:Why "SJW"? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      define gamer: a person who plays a game or games, typically a participant in a computer or role-playing game.

      Herp derp nothing about misogyny.

      But thank you for the definition. I'll be sure to tell Anita and Zoe and all these gaming journalists that they aren't actually feminists. I'm sure they'll accept that.

    33. Re:Why "SJW"? by smartkid88 · · Score: 1

      "SJW" always stood for "St John's Wort" to me.

    34. Re:Why "SJW"? by nctritech · · Score: 1

      SJWs are a type of parrot. They mimic things they hear but there is no depth beyond mimicry.

    35. Re:Why "SJW"? by nctritech · · Score: 1

      How do we learn about the world? We observe it using our senses. When we observe feminists being far worse than that which they claim to want to cure, we learn that feminists are not good people. If you have a problem with that, fix the feminists that act like assholes to everyone and that think they do no wrong. If not, feel free to continue hiding behind feminist self-justification myths like "straw feminists."

    36. Re:Why "SJW"? by nctritech · · Score: 1

      That knife cuts both ways, and a plethora of evidence exists to support the fact that oppression against white males not only exists but is societally accepted and even encouraged. Feminist slogans such as "the radical notion that women are people" are mostly just rallying cries of bigots in practice.

  57. So, where is ... by kick6 · · Score: 1, Troll

    1. Chivalry was actual a battle code, and had little to do with women 2. What you're talking about is "courtship" a set of rules, written by women, about how men are supposed to act around them to gain their favor (favor defined as vaginas) 3. "courtship" was an unwritten social contract for BOTH sexes. Ergo a man acted like a gentleman to win the favor of a lady. HOWEVER, it required women to ACT LIKE A GODDAMN LADY. 4. Acting like a goddamn lady includes not taking nude selfies, not being a slut, and realizing that you're not a man's equal and you need his protection because he possesses, at all times, the physical capability to take what he wants from you (yes, rape). 5. Modern, slutty, women have broken this social contract by virtue (or lack therefore) of their sluttiness, and push for equality. Therefore men are no longer beholden to it. So where are the chivalrous men? They're lying atop the dustbin of history. Although, sadly, their are some idiots who still hold to their half of the bargain while women REFUSE to hold to theirs. We call these men betas. They're so pathetically ego-invested in chivalry that they can't see that it's null and void. Sounds like your'e one of them...or you're a lady who desperately wants men to hold their half of the bargain up because it's hella-advantegeous to you.

  58. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    It looks like manufactured evidence, and all explanations to the contrary are wild stretches.

    I haven't actually seen any "explanations to the contrary" myself.

    All I've seen are people like I kan reed going full retard, foaming at the mouth with hatred as they scream how you're some sort of woman-murdering monster because you won't just take her word for it.

    Which, besides being hilariously ironic, doesn't really do anything to dispel people's suspicions.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  59. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 1

    You are so cute. You really believe the shit you spew, don't you? Anita Sarkeezian is a scumbag and a class A liar and manipulator. "Wahh you're a bad person." If holding people accountable for the shit they say and do is bad, then yes I'm as bad as they come. I'm not hurt by her videos, but I choose to call her out when she's being a cunt, and we know that she is a liar because she's not even a good liar. She deserves all the hate she gets. http://youtu.be/57tXyqPCOCM

  60. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Nope. Enjoy siding with the worse people.

  61. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Or...

    Just try this out.

    You could not be a piece of shit for no reason.

  62. Re:Oh god ... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Wow, this has to be a record for most spam replies in a row.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  63. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by entrigant · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, but just about "every last women who picks up a controller" will be threatened with violence or rape by a gamer.

    http://fatuglyorslutty.com/category/death-threats/

    That ^^ ... is a fucking problem. I sure as shit don't have to deal with crap like that when I'm online.

    Even if not a single person ever followed through on their threats, it creates an incredibly hostile atmosphere that few would want to endure therefore creating a cultural divide and effectively excluding women from the activity.

    And, somehow, even if that was deemed acceptable, even if we all said "ok fine gaming is to be a sausage fest for all time", do you really think the attitudes given voice by these in game messages somehow vanish once the sender puts down the controller and joins the rest of us in the real world?

  64. Re:I predict by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Most of it looks explanatory to me. "We don't hate Zoe because she's a woman; we hate her because of her actions, and that she tried to play the 'gender' card." (I have no idea who she is, so I have no bone in this -- I'm just paraphrasing the comments I've seen.) That a woman has hatred directed toward her does not automatically make it misogyny, even if sex-related insults are used. Using insults of any kind to belittle someone is, of course, wrong (although I'm certainly guilty of that from time to time), and using threats is wildly inappropriate, and perhaps illegal. I'm not defending any of that.

    What I am trying to say is that the people disagreeing do not seem to be misogynists -- literally people who hate someone just for being a woman -- and calling then that is both a straw man and doing a disservice to actual cases of misogyny. If there were death threats against a man (politicians get them all the time), do we call that misandry? Even if words showing hate for men are involved? We don't. (And we shouldn't.) We can focus on the wrongness of the actions without creating a false narrative.

  65. Re:I predict by Khyber · · Score: 1

    The best part about this, half of your sentences do not parse in an online grammatical check.

    Which means you're the one spewing words in a futile manner.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  66. Hate to break it to ya, but.... by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

    ..MOST mainstream games encourage the commoditization of and violence against EVERYONE. Men, women, small pets, inanimate objects.....

  67. Re:I predict by qbast · · Score: 1

    Lynching? Dude, you are the one here doing raging and lynching. Take a good look at yourself before you start spitting on others.

  68. Re:There are two kinds of people... by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

    So you're saying you have a vagina then?

  69. Re:Again?! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    Are we talking about the same Zoe Quinn? The Zoe Quinn who shut down a gamejam specifically targetted at helping women coders, because she perceived it as in competition with her own fundraising efforts?

    How dare you point out a woman's shortcomings, what are you, some kind of misogynist? /sarc

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  70. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 1

    That's good advice. Go tell it to Anita and Zoe. They need it the most.

  71. Re:extinction? No, bifurcation -- the military tra by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    I doubt it. According to feminists, any male... [is] inherently misogynist and have to be destroyed or forcibly 'feminized'.

    FTFY.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  72. In fact, the opposite might be true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just came across this on The Daily Beast. Basically it's a myth that women get more abuse than men online, and it may in fact be the opposite.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/04/men-are-harassed-more-than-women-online.html

    Without knowing about any of the original controversies, my first impression was uh oh, more extremely vocal feminists claiming their shit smells more than everyone else's. Reading some of the above comments, I feel pretty comfortable with that assumption. Just checked out some of the linked videos, and man, I'm sorry, but getting lessons on misogyny from a feminist who shaves and pencils-in her eyebrows, that's just about worthless to me. It's a bit hypocritical, I think, and I have no sympathy for her plight.

    Here's the thing: there are male tropes too. If you want to pick apart pop culture, TV, games, movies, and say women aren't pictured accurately, well, try looking at the men too, and you'll find different but equally dumb tropes.

  73. Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by eepok · · Score: 1

    Is there any evidence that it's a such concentrated effort to imply a genuine, heartfelt hatred of women (misogyny)? You would really have to stretch your rationale and ignore massive amounts of evidence to the contrary to assert that there's a pervasive vein of misogyny growing throughout nerd/gamer culture.

    Yes, some male gamers will use derogatory words to intentionally offend women. And men. And transgendered people. And dogs. And the dead. And the not-yet-living. And mythical characters.

    If there's any cultural bias against any one group, it's the group that "pissing us off right now". And "women-as-a-whole" have never been that group.

    It has nothing to do with women as a whole, but a targeted hatred at people who happen to be women.

    It doesn't matter who you are. Male, female, man, woman, gay, straight, asexual, black, white, brown, Asian, American, French, German, Argentinian-- if you piss off nerds and they come after you, you can be fairly certain it has nothing to do with your immutable characteristics and everything to do with your actions. You can try to hide behind immutable characteristics as a means of suggesting some sort of irrational bias, but nerds, by their very nature, are too damn smart to fall for that.

    1. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by eepok · · Score: 1

      Translation A: I don't like what you've said and I'm showing it by saying things that I hope to make you angry.
      Translation B: I'm a random troll.

      And by the way, I wish you hadn't capitalized all those words. Now I can't help but imagine what a culture of reptilian Mexicans worshiping at Temple would look like. And now I'm imagining the combination of cultural dietary habits. Great! Now I have a novel!

    2. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It's also worth considering that if you play online, you'll get called a faggot, a nigger, and receive rape & death threats even if you're a straight white guy. If you give these pissed-off manchildren access to solid information on your race/gender/sexuality, all that does is give a specific target to the insults so they don't have to take the shotgun approach.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by eepok · · Score: 1

      Insightful and well said.

    4. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "...your immutable characteristics and everything to do with your actions. "
      that's blatantly false.
      I've seen gay people and women being verbally attacked for being gay and/or a woman.
      a lot.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by eepok · · Score: 1

      Where do you go to see RL gay people and women being verbally attacked online because they are gay and/or women? That's sounds like a horrible place. Why do you go there?

      But are you certain it's *because* they have those characteristics or might it be, as suggested, that knowing those characteristics, the offender specifically uses certain terms and phrases to hurt that person?

      There's a big difference between a person who thinks everyone woman is a slut to be hated and person angry at another person who happens to be a woman and (using the knowledge of womanhood) chooses the word "slut" as a means of honing one's insult.

      Too hard to believe? Consider the angry rantings of a child.

      Almost everyone has heard a pissed off kid say, "I hate you! I wish you weren't my mom!!"? Maybe you said it yourself as a child.
      Which is the more likely interpretation?
      (A) "I genuinely wishes that s/he had different parents. I would not cry if I was taken away from you."
      (B) "I'm pissed that I didn't get my way. Knowing that you love me as a parent, I offer words contrary to my own knowledge and opinion with for the specific intent in doing you emotional or psychological harm in retribution."

    6. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      that's almost nothing compared to what's said between friends. I mean, smack talk is sometimes part of the game, mind game and all.

    7. Re:Actions Against People Who Happen to be Women by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i've seen straight people being attacked for being gay and or a woman too. you'd have a point if only homosexuals and females got attacked for being homosexual or female. but again, scattershot... and more a symptom of societal ills for being part of that scattershot approach. but that's another discussion.

  74. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  75. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  76. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  77. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  78. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  79. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  80. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  81. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  82. Re:I predict by Drippin'+Chronicles · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  83. Re:I predict by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2

    It sounds like that was said in the context of comparing to other fan-doms. Such as someone might be a Twilight fan and write some fan-fiction. She is saying, in response to something before the cut which is not shown, that her case is slightly different. She is not a fan.
    To me that could even mean "I'm not a fan. I am a gamer."
    In any case, I don't think it follows automatically that she does not like video games. That can only be said if the context in which she spoke is ignored, and her words taken to the letter. "Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre." applies here.
    That she had to learn a lot about video games also does not mean anything, because there are many genres and games out there. Nobody has an overview without some systematic digging.

    I think we can agree that she played games at some point (and thus at least was a gamer), so she can talk on the subject.

    Even if she had literally said "I do not like video games" she could have been a prolific gamer, become disappointed with the industry, and stop actively playing. In that case "I do not like video games" would be a true present statement, yet she still has all right to talk on the subject of video games.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  84. Re:I predict by tylikcat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thank you for fighting the good fight.

    I almost didn't even look at the comments here, especially since I'd burnt through the last of my mod points last night, and especially the first wave of really offensive shit that gets posted any time the treatment of women in geek culture comes up just depresses the hell out of me. (I'm trying to stick to the optimistic version opined by another friend, wherein there's a really grim whiny ass first wave, which mostly gets modded down over time. Over course, the friend wrote to me a couple of days back to tell me he'd decided that no, he took it back, anything involving women was getting a fair bit worse.)

    The creepiest bit is that half of my social circle, roughly, are male geeks* and they generally seem like a decent bunch, individually and in groups. My students are an amiable bunch, even in those final crunch days as they're trying to wrap up an experiment or get a paper in. Is the first wave of /. comments overwhelmingly from bitter seventeen year olds? Are these some other geeks who I have managed to distance myself from over the years.** Is it possible that some of the entertaining, amiable geeks that I spar with, party with, code with and blow things up with turn feral and run in packs when I'm not around? Eesh.

    * Well, okay, that assumes that the martial artists are predominantly geeks, which might get into some kind of definitional argument. *Many* clearly are.

  85. Re:I predict by Chronicles+of+Rape · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  86. Re:I predict by Chronicles+of+Rape · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  87. Re:I predict by Chronicles+of+Rape · · Score: 1

    -----------

    Well, to begin, I'm just your average guy. But unlike your average guy, I once had everything anyone could ever want: a gorgeous wife, a beautiful two-story house, an adorable seven year old daughter, a stable job, and a nice salary. Basically, I was living the American dream. None of my needs or wants were left unfulfilled. The family always got along, and everything was perfect.

    Until one day, that is. Following one of my routine doctor appointments, my doctor informed me that I had lung cancer and that I only had a few years to live at most. As you can imagine, I was shocked. Not just shocked; I could see all of my hopes and dreams being shattered right before my very eyes. Still, my doctor gave me hope by telling me that there was a chance, however slim, that Chemotherapy and various other things could help me. After speaking with my wife, I decided to receive the treatments.

    All was not lost. I still had a perfect family that I could rely on and get emotional support from. I still had hope for the future. I'm a firm believer that you should make the best of things rather than wallow in depression. I had to press on: not just for my sake, but for the sake of my loved ones. But my strong resolve was soon shattered.

    The family I thought I could count on betrayed me. My wife, whom I loved deeply, filed for a divorce. She said that she could not handle the emotional trauma of being with someone who had cancer. She apologized profusely, but no matter what I said, I could not change her mind. I screamed, I cried, and I begged her to rethink her decision, but it was all to no avail.

    In my madness, I made all kinds of accusations. I said that she was cheating on me, that she never loved me, that she just married me for my money, and various other things. I soon learned, however, that a few of those were more than just baseless accusations. I began stalking her, going through all of her personal possessions, and trying uncover any secrets she may have been keeping. What I discovered horrified me: she had been cheating on me with another man for the past year. She must have been waiting for an opportune time to abandon me for this other man.

    When confronted about her betrayal, she screamed at me, told me it was none of my business, told me that I was always a worthless husband, and told me that I was an abusive man. I soon discovered that there was absolutely nothing that I could do. My marriage was in shambles, and by this point, I was on the brink of suicide. The only thing keeping me going was my devotion to my precious daughter.

    It wasn't long before I received news from my insurance company that they were getting rid of my coverage. They gave me multitudes of vague and bogus reasons, but anyone could figure out their true reason: they did not want to waste money on a dying man. Naturally, I planned to fight this with every fiber of my being, but I knew it would be a long, drawn out process.

    In the span of a year, I went from a very happy man who had everything he wanted to a miserable shell of what I once was. I couldn't take it anymore. Despite the fact that I wanted to remain in this world for the sake of my daughter, I tried committing suicide four times. All four attempts failed. I needed something to take my misery, regret, and anger out on. First I began verbally abusing my daughter. It wasn't long before I began physically abusing her. Sometimes I did it with my bare hands, and other times I used various objects. Beating my daughter soon became my only pleasure. My life had spiraled out of control into a den of anguish, uncertainty, and madness.

    That's when it happened: I found MyCleanPC. I downloaded it, scanned my computer, and had it fix all of my problems. MyCleanPC is outstanding! My computer is running faster than ever!

    My wife's response? "MyCleanPC came through with flying colours where no one else could!"

    My daughter was

  88. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Oh no how ever will I handle this utterly brainless tu quoque by a shitty person?

    I might have no choice but to live my life without being a terrible human being and just pity you.

  89. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't really have explanation. One thing is clear from reading this is that they're stupid conspiratorial morons.

    Like, super credulous about anything that casts prominent individuals as malicious manipulative actors. Part of that is just sexism, you know the old "women lie" stereotype. But part of it is that they're pathetic. None of them has ever done anything of note. So they see people who do get recognition as manipulating events to put themselves on top.

    I suspect what we're seeing is the psychology of losers amplified through the lens of misogyny. Hard to say for sure though. We'll never get honest self-analysis from this crowd.

  90. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

    Then call the police. Subpoena the IP logs from twitter and find the "rapist."

    But no, she didn't call the police. She called the SJW media so they could all write breathless articles about how terrible the "gaming community" is how we need to read this article and the hundreds that will follow it to "raise awareness." Oh, and ad revenue.

    It's a fucking scam. Nobody harassed Zoe Quinn. She made it up. She profited. Her game that couldn't get a green light before got one. She shut down a gaming event targeted at women so it wouldn't compete with her own. The media profited. At no point did anybody even try to find the "real stalker" and punish him. Because there was no real stalker.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  91. Slashdot enjoying the clickbait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Posting anon because I enjoy my job.

    For some reason, slashdot has mostly ignored this topic for the past couple weeks, and now we get an article that revels in moralistic naysaying while ignoring what keeps this going.

    The recent "ugliness" is not just a product of sexism and misogyny. To be fair, women have been harassed. To be even more fair, not all women who have been harassed have been harassed by "gamers".

    The fiasco that has now grown into "Gamergate" (not my term) is not easy to relate in few words, but I will summarize that it is a reaction by enthusiast gamers against a clique of prominent video games journalists, writers, and indie developers who have been using their personal connections to promote each other's works and political ideology, as well as exclude those who do not toe the line.

    It began when the ex-boyfriend of indie developer Zoe Quinn made a blog post detailing with evidence how Ms Quinn cheated on him with at least five other people, as well as perceived attempts by her to emotionally manipulate him. (http://thezoepost.wordpress.com/) Among individuals named in the post were Nathan Grayson (a writer for Gawker Media's Kotaku and former writer at Rock, Paper, Shotgun) and Robin Arnott (a judge at the Indiecade independent games competition that later went on to give Ms Quinn's game an award). Initially, this post was ignored by games journalists, and was circulated in online gaming forums. However, many forums deleted any and all topics concerning the matter, including the largest reddit thread deletion in history (with over 20K comments deleted; http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dz0gs/totalbiscuit_discusses_the_state_of_games/) concerning youtube commentator TotalBiscuit's response to Ms Quinn allegedly using a false DMCA request to take down one of the first videos discussing the subject (http://themundanematt.tumblr.com/post/95428752119/dmca-notice-and-removal).

    Investigation by redditors and members of various boards on 4chan soon uncovered that Ms Quinn allegedly pointed her twitter followers to critique a new game charity designed to help female game designers have their ideas actualized because she felt the charity's profit-motivated goals and its policy towards transwomen (biological males who identify as women) were oppressive (http://static.fjcdn.com/large/pictures/60/24/6024fb_5271447.jpg). When the creator of the charity attempted to seek promotion from major gaming journalist sites, he was told that since Ms Quinn had issues with the charity, no promotion would be possible (knowyourmeme.com/photos/814183-quinnspiracy).

    While specific written pieces promoting Ms Quinn's work were actually short in supply, further investigations showed that the relationships of other journalists to their subjects were less tenuous. Patricia Hernandez of Kotaku was shown through previous twitter conversations to have lived with and possibly had a romantic relationship with Anne Anthropy, an indie developer she directly promoted in several articles. Ben Kuchera of Polygon, among others, was shown to be a supporter of Ms Quinn on Patreon, a site designed to crowd-fund stipends to content-creators. In response to these issues, the two above mentioned games journalism sites posted clarifications and/or updates to their positions on conflicts of interest, noting that they would attempt more honest journalism in the future, as well as in the case of Kotaku disallowing writers to contribute to subjects' Patreon accounts.

    This is when hell started breaking loose. Prominent games journalists and indie developers cried out on twitter that Kotaku and Polygon

    1. Re:Slashdot enjoying the clickbait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      made some unsubstantiated allegations against her in a blog post.

      He screen-capped her conversations from across her numerous Facebook, Twitter, etc. accounts. He used her own words against her, she was caught red-handed. You'd know this if you actually bothered reading the post instead of blindly and ignorantly running to her defense.

    2. Re:Slashdot enjoying the clickbait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unsubstantiated?? He offered PLENTY of evidence. Do some fact-checking before you speak next time. This isn't really about her sleeping around, this is about journalistic ethics. Have you actually played her game? It is crap. It is seriously awful, and as someone that has actually suffered from depression, I can tell you now that it isn't accurate at all. It doesn't accomplish what she wanted it to do.

      So then she gives some games journalists that promoted her work (even if they didn't directly review it) and a person in charge of an indie game competition that gave her awful game an award.

      I'm happy that she exposed how awful many of these game journalists are, but I find a lot of her actions objectionable. Sleeping around? Who cares? Sleeping with people that are helping her to advance her career and destroying game journalism, indie game competitions, and a game jam charity so that she could promote her own game jam charity instead? One that she still has provided zero details about, and is taking donations for? YEAH I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

      The GP didn't even tell you about the shady shit that went down when she tried to get her game approved on steam greenlight.

      In conclusion: Learn to read and do your research next time, dumbass.

    3. Re:Slashdot enjoying the clickbait... by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      The reddit deletions were happening because they locked the thread, but people continued posting to it as a joke to see how high the number would go. In reddit, when you lock a thread, all it really does is sets an automoderator to immediately delete all new comments. The admins locked the thread because too many people were posting links containing Zoe's address, which is in violation of Reddit's #1 rule.

  92. Re:I predict by magsol · · Score: 1

    I get the distinct impression I'm only going to add fuel to the raging fire by responding...but I'm honestly perplexed by the "gay-bashing" comment. What in my history fits that moniker? I basically comment on science articles or I bash tech companies. That's pretty much it.

    --
    "I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
  93. Gamers are the Victims Here by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This isn't about Zoe Quinn. This is about Gamers being bullied and their hobby being culturally colonised by corrupt hypocrites.

    Gamers are the victims here. The people crying misogyny are the real bigots. Look up the harshtags #Gamergate and especially #notyourshield on twitter to get a real feel for what is going on here.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Gamers are the Victims Here by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Gamers are the victims here but not as you claim. a very very vocal group DO make online gaming hell for women,jew,black,asian,mom,GFs,gays many Battlefield 4 server renters have created programs that auto ban for the for mentioned. so ya Gamers are victims too from the legions of racists/women haters in online multiplayer games. People like you are just in denial or are one of the legions of offenders.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    2. Re:Gamers are the Victims Here by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      First Person Shooter players do not represent the entire gaming community. This stereotype is being used to label Pokemon and Super Mario players as misogynists and bigots. All gamers are being tarred with a toxic brush.

      This kind of labelling is wrong and morally bankrupt. The gaming community is being forced to defend itself against these kinds of disgraceful libels, by people who are genuinely ethical bankrupts. Simply browse the #Gamergate and #NotYourShield twitter hashtags to get a sense of where these accusations are coming from, and exactly who is in denial.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    3. Re:Gamers are the Victims Here by Verdatum · · Score: 1
      People getting death and rape threats are victims. People having their home address posted publicly with encouragement to harass them are victims. That's what Zoe has had to deal with, and no matter what she's done, short of genocide, no one deserves this kind of treatment.

      It is absolutely true that the game reviewing industry is a complete mess. But having to search a little harder for honest reviews for games does not compare.

  94. Re:I predict by fazig · · Score: 1

    Yet neither "side" is unanimous. And we can't even really tell to which side the trolls actually belong to.
    From what I've seen is that this whole discussion us full of straw man arguments, ad hominem, ad nauseam, circular logic, appeals to emotion and moralizing.
    If anything this showed me again that arguing on the internet is mostly pointless.

  95. Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 3, Informative

    I do not think that word means what you think it means.

    Feminism (n)
    : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    1. Re:Feminism by Iamthecheese · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When they're abusing statistics with the goal of spreading hate, when many mainstream feminists have rabidly man-hating quotes strung behind them, and when they don't collectively struggle for equal responsibility that definition sounds pretty damn hollow.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    2. Re:Feminism by Vintermann · · Score: 2

      That would be the motte in the motte-and-bailey doctrine. If you define feminism like that, it's extremely defensible.

      But as soon as you're going out to do any actual good work in the name of feminism, you're going to need a broader definition, one that opens it up for criticism.

      Retreating to the defensible but useless definition whenever your ideas are criticized, is dishonest.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    3. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      That would be the motte in the motte-and-bailey doctrine. If you define feminism like that, it's extremely defensible.

      But as soon as you're going out to do any actual good work in the name of feminism, you're going to need a broader definition, one that opens it up for criticism.

      Retreating to the defensible but useless definition whenever your ideas are criticized, is dishonest.

      My Ideas? WTF are you talking about? I am a feminist in exactly the sense of the definition posted. Nothing more, nothing less. Anything else is just you projecting.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    4. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      I do not think that word means what you think it means.

      Feminism (n)

      : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

      Actually, you can throw that word out. Ask 10 feminists what a feminist is and you'll get 10 different ideological answers. However, the end result is basically the same - not equality of the sexes but female superiority of the sexes.

      Says you. I'm a feminist and that's how I define feminism (along with Merriam-Webster, of course). Now get over yourself. I guess you're an insecure male, huh? Well, I'm a secure, middle-aged male and feel strongly that women have been treated unfairly for far too long. You're certainly entitled to your point of view, but don't try to tell me what I believe.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    5. Re:Feminism by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Which in the realm of gaming women have. So hooray! Feminism can leave gaming alone now?

    6. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Which in the realm of gaming women have. So hooray! Feminism can leave gaming alone now?

      I'm not a gamer, so I really don't care. I'm not into drama in general, so I won't start.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    7. Re:Feminism by diamondmagic · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, it's called individual rights when you think that everyone should have equal rights regardless of sex, race, physical traits, or anything besides the mere fact you're human.

      It's called feminism when you believe women should have the same rights as men, and not necessarily the other way around - an obsolete position at best, an appalling contradiction at worst.

    8. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      No, it's called individual rights when you think that everyone should have equal rights regardless of sex, race, physical traits, or anything besides the mere fact you're human.

      It's called feminism when you believe women should have the same rights as men, and not necessarily the other way around - an obsolete position at best, an appalling contradiction at worst.

      An interesting construction. Yes, I believe in equal rights for all. However, women have been (and in many places, still are) treated as second-class people and even property. That, IMNSHO, needs to change. Which is why I also believe that it's reasonable to give that particular area of human rights its own -ism. Feel free to disagree. I'm not so insecure that I need your (or anyone else's) validation.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    9. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Modern feminism doesn't mean that: http://womenagainstfeminism.tu...

      It's interesting that you use a biased (womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com) link to define feminism. I used a dictionary. Do you get the difference?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    10. Re:Feminism by mjm1231 · · Score: 2

      But you still live in a world where a woman is very much more likely to be denied the rights which a man has easy access to than the other way around. For the most part, the differentiation you are insisting on is only applicable in a fantasy world which does not, as yet, exist.

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    11. Re:Feminism by mjm1231 · · Score: 1

      But as soon as you're going out to do any actual good work in the name of feminism, you're going to need a broader definition, one that opens it up for criticism.

      Why, exactly, would that be?

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    12. Re:Feminism by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      But as soon as you're going out to do any actual good work in the name of feminism, you're going to need a broader definition, one that opens it up for criticism.

      I have yet to see any real, non-bullshit examples to support that claim.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Yes. You think a dictionary has insight. It doesn't.

      Insight isn't the point. The point is that I believe that we should all be treated equally and have equal opportunities. That's the definition of feminism. Words have meanings. They don't mean whatever you decide they mean to support your particular bias. I suggest you study a little epistemology, friend.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    14. Re: Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      I prefer the term egalitarianism, or, specifically, gender-egalitarianism w.r.t. gender. My rule of thumb is that any statement that can't be made without reference to a particular gender is discriminatory and/or sexist.

      A reasonable point. I agree. At the same time, I still feel its reasonable to focus on specific groups who are not treated in an egalitarian fashion. Call it what you like, but everyone should be treated equally and have and equal shake in life, IMHO.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    15. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      feel strongly that women have been treated unfairly for far too long.

      You point out that you believe that women are being treated unfairly as proof you're a feminist when being a feminist by the dictionary definition you quoted is "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities", not "the belief that women have been treated unfairly".

      Please explain how those two beliefs are mutually exclusive, or are in some way incompatible?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    16. Re: Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      It is not reasonable to focus on people who are being treated in an egalitarian fashion, because they belong to the same group as someone who isn't being treated in that fashion, unless, of course, everyone in that group suffers the same mistreatment. I don't believe this is the case with gender.

      Okay. I just want to make sure I understand your point. By your logic, because Christians are treated as at least equals to everyone else in the United States, no one should be concerned about the treatment of Christians in, say, Northern Iraq?

      Or am I missing something here?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    17. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      By the way, compare the definition of "Police" to what police are doing in Ferguson. Maybe using dictionary definitions is kind of a stupid argument and needs to be retired.

      Absolutely! Why should anyone agree on what words mean? I mean it's not like that allows us to have a common frame of reference or anything. Let's have at it! I say bagels are a form of ancestor worship practiced in Borneo. And hospital is the sensation you get when you bite into a York Peppermint Patty.

      Yeah. That'll work. Moron.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    18. Re:Feminism by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      I am a feminist

      Yikes. What a social faux pas.

    19. Re:Feminism by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      But you still live in a world where a woman is very much more likely to be denied the rights which a man has easy access to

      Please enunciate these rights.

    20. Re:Feminism by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 1

      You're certainly entitled to your point of view, but don't try to tell me what I believe.

      I think of the feminist concept as just a tool, in the toolbox of the modern miserable, sex-obsessed, bossy, and manipulative woman. The people who use that tool come off as power hungry and getting off on control. You could call that viewpoint insecure, or you could call it being annoyed by people who look at life through terms of how much power they have and what is holding them back from getting more, and don't have much else to talk about. To each their own.

    21. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      "Well, I'm a secure, middle-aged male and feel strongly that women have been treated unfairly for far too long" Does that line work well in bars?

      I don't know. I don't use lines and don't go to bars to meet women.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    22. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      They're just different independent beliefs. They're not incompatible nor did I ever claim or implied they were. You know that and are just dodging the implication. Your post heavily implies that you're a feminist because you believe that women have been treated unfairly when the definition of feminism you quote is about the other independent belief that men and women should be treated equally.

      Why I'm responding to a troll, I don't know. But I'll respond, and I'll use small words so you'll be sure to understand. My post implies nothing of the kind. I am a feminist because women and men should be treated equally. Full stop.

      The fact that women have been, and in many places still are, being treated as second-class citizens is a fact. That disgusts me. Does it disgust you? If so, why? If not, why not?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    23. Re:Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      You're certainly entitled to your point of view, but don't try to tell me what I believe.

      I think of the feminist concept as just a tool, in the toolbox of the modern miserable, sex-obsessed, bossy, and manipulative woman. The people who use that tool come off as power hungry and getting off on control. You could call that viewpoint insecure, or you could call it being annoyed by people who look at life through terms of how much power they have and what is holding them back from getting more, and don't have much else to talk about. To each their own.

      So, for you the concept that all humans should be treated equally and have equality of opportunity is a "tool...of the modern miserable, sex-obsessed, bossy, and manipulative woman?" Gosh, that speaks volumes about you. Did your mommy not love you enough? Poor baby.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    24. Re: Feminism by KevReedUK · · Score: 1

      I, for one, share your beliefs on the subject. I do not, however, refer to myself as a feminist, but rather as an egalitarian. The reason for this distinction is that, rightly or wrongly, feminism has become associated by many (especially those too lazy to consult a dictionary) with female supremacy. The extremist views, statements and acts over the years by some who have claimed to be acting in the name of feminism certainly hasn't helped, neither has most of the press, which will report on such matters without clarifying the inappropriate use of the term feminism /feminist. It is also fair to say that it's not just the sexes that I think should be equal, either. Hence my use of the term egalitarian.

      --
      Just my $0.03 (At current exchange rates, my £0.02 is worth more than your $0.02)
    25. Re: Feminism by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      I, for one, share your beliefs on the subject. I do not, however, refer to myself as a feminist, but rather as an egalitarian. The reason for this distinction is that, rightly or wrongly, feminism has become associated by many (especially those too lazy to consult a dictionary) with female supremacy. The extremist views, statements and acts over the years by some who have claimed to be acting in the name of feminism certainly hasn't helped, neither has most of the press, which will report on such matters without clarifying the inappropriate use of the term feminism /feminist. It is also fair to say that it's not just the sexes that I think should be equal, either. Hence my use of the term egalitarian.

      Well said. Thank you. I understand your concern with the (mis)use of the term. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but where I come from, there are men and there are women. Between them, they make up the species Homo Sapiens.

      I have transgender relatives (fairly close ones) who I love dearly, and have no issue with them or anyone else. What is more, those who choose to consider themselves genderless or a combination of two genders will get no argument from me. They can define themselves as they choose.

      However, from a practical standpoint, there are those who have a Y chromosome (males) and those who do not (females). So, when I say that I believe that men and women should be treated equally, and have equal opportunities, who exactly am I leaving out?

      Yes, I know that some folks will say that restricting humans to just two genders is bigoted and closed-minded. From a genetic standpoint, that's a load of malarkey, IMHO.

      Since the definition (and yes, despite those who try to hijack words, words have meaning and their definitions, while somewhat malleable, must be used consistently or we can't have any common frame of reference) of feminism is exactly that, I don't mind calling myself a feminist at all.

      Feminism is, at its heart, an egalitarian construct. I refuse to allow a bunch of crazies (on both sides) to co-opt (at least in my usage) a perfectly valid and useful word.

      Let's be clear, even if some label themselves as one thing or another, it's their actions that define them. I allow my actions to define me, not the biases associated with those who would co-opt language for their own purposes.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    26. Re:Feminism by diamondmagic · · Score: 1

      1787 wasn't the start of slavery nor could it have been the end.

    27. Re: Feminism by tarius8105 · · Score: 1

      Thats a myth perpetuated by the thinking that two people in the same position should have the same salary regardless of time and qualifications in the position. Women also make less not because they are paid less but because they tend to leave the workforce to raise children and come back at a later time. All things being equal, typically women are paid more than men.

    28. Re:Feminism by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      One person's insight is another's bias.

  96. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Asmodae · · Score: 2

    This is not limited to gaming. Here's a breakdown of the statistics as they are known right now. Based on this: Wiki-link rape statistics 1/6 women have been raped in the US. Out of 150 million women in the US, that is around 25 million women estimated which have been raped. I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number. So YES, millions of people (mostly men) ARE in fact out there raping people. No media bias needed, just knowing some real numbers.

  97. One Angry Gamer by Guy+From+V · · Score: 2

    These search results on the One Angry Gamer website about The Fine Young Capitalists game dev team (who also happen to be women, some might remember them as the team who wrote the game Depression Quest), who got blackballed by unscrupulous writers for a handful of well-known gaming and tech review outfits because of the second-rate "escapades" of one Zoe Quinn and her "relations" with several of them. Ironically, it was 4chan who stepped up to raise $5,000 to fund them when the rest of the community dropped them like a sack of shit because of Ms. Quinn and her "conspirators' " favoritism. PS quotes=sexual escapades and pillow talk railroading.

    1. Re:One Angry Gamer by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Not really possible not to play. Even if all 'nerds' would ignore those misandristic ankle biters, they would fake their own 'responses'. To much money involved in a good 'shitstorm' and no morale whatsoever.

  98. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    Because the sexists defend the hell out of each other. And love to allege "you're the real bigot" to protect their ego from facing the reality of how their beliefs are wrong.

    Like, I have a hard time with the general concept of "patriarchy" but this whole thread is sexists defending sexists in a kinda self sustaining system almost exactly as described. It'd be intellectually fascinating if they didn't represent an absolutely terrible thing for the world.

  99. Re:I predict by Squiddie · · Score: 3, Informative

    Oh, please. If she liked video games she wouldn't actively lie and misrepresent video games and bitch and moan about every little thing, some of which are of her own invention. Take the Hitman video she did. She went on about how the game rewards you by killing the dancers at some club, when anyone who has played the game knows that you actually get punished for it, due to their deaths being unnecessary. She's a dishonest cunt, and you should stop trying to invent situations that we know don't exist. Her actions reflect that she does not like video games and she never has.

  100. Re:Put game cops in games by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    Monitor all males in real time and if they break the rules, either they get 10 years in prison or they lose an eye. Either one.

    The delicious irony of the modern feminism.

  101. Too much by kelemvor4 · · Score: 2

    What is going on with slashdot lately? "Politically Correct" is a different type of PC.

  102. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

    I was given the explanation that Anita must have a friend who looks out for this, and saw it, and told her; and that Anita probably uses an application, rather than logging into Twitter, or uses two accounts and is often logged out while switching; and so Anita would have found out about this through her friend, immediately, and gone, not logged in because she's never logged in, and screen capped.

    That still relies on said friend discovering this immediately, and then relaying quickly. It also puts in a whole lot of wild conjecture about how the screen capturing person became logged out.

    It's driving me nuts, because everyone has taken the word of a sham as gospel, and now we're seeing a big flurry of activity around this shit. I believe the appropriate punishment for con artists who knowingly lie and manipulate others to benefit themselves is crucifixion.

    Currently, there's an ionized water seller trying to sell people a $3000 machine at the market here, talking about how their ionized water has an alkaline balance and changes the pH of your body to boost your immune system and remove toxins--all of which has been debunked by science decades ago. There was also a person explaining how the hydrogen ions in a $30 wrist band he was selling create magnetic vibrations that boost the energy levels and power of your body.

    Nail these people to a tree.

  103. Re:I predict by tylikcat · · Score: 1

    The standards of evidence are particularly bad. I mean, if you're going to manufacture it, you should at least manufacture a variety of sources so people aren't all pointing to the same infographic. (I mean, really, this stuff is laughable when Fox does it. I expect geeks to at least be more competent.) And yeah, I think that whole perceived loss of privilege - why isn't someone showing up to make them into the next software billionaire, and where are all the babes the universe owes them?

    I guess the one up side is that they're doing a pretty good job of making this line of thinking look really, really gross.

  104. Re:I predict by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    How do you expect to screencap your Twitter feed, Mr. Anderson, when you're not logged in?

    The screencap shows she captured the whole event immediately upon its completion, while not logged in. Also, it shows the account was created for the purpose of this event. How did Anita get logged out? Why did she capture this account page in a screenshot, and not a capture of her feed with the slew of threatening messages?

  105. Re:Again?! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    The Zoe Quinn who shut down a gamejam specifically targetted at helping women coders, because she perceived it as in competition with her own fundraising efforts?

    [citation needed]/pics or it didn't happen/insert meme about how any random person can make shit up on the internet.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  106. Re:I predict by eepok · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm a male gamer and I agree with the assertion that video games with women typically find methods of objectifying the female form... but it's not as though video games or gamer culture is unique in this way. The gaming industry objectifies women. As does Hollywood. And print media.

    One of the best selling products in history is the female form and it sells well. Sex sells well. What do you do in a capitalist society when there is a seemingly unlimited demand for a product of which you have a nearly unlimited supply? Well, you sell it.

    We can even take it a step further an confidently assert that there will always be a sufficient supply of the female form to meet or exceed demand due to psychological imperative with which most Western girls grow up that suggests that if they cannot receive validation of self through other actions or deeds, then there's always the option to resort to sexuality. One could even assert that this persistent and potentially indoctrinated psychological rationale may be one of the roots of reproduction for humanity.

    And it's even easier to supply the female form in games because you don't even need a female. You just need artistic skills and an imagination!

    So we've defined the multifaceted problem (biologically-enforced demand and an unlimited supply). We've also based the discussion on the issues that such objectification is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the comfort of more and more people (social evolution).

    So what is to be done?

    Stop all games that singularly sexualize the female form? What if both the male and female forms are equally sexualized? All good?
    Do the same for video and print media?
    Do we affect demand?
    Are we to shame males and lesbians for appreciating the female form in game, video, and print media?

    And this is where I always get stuck. If we want to change the frequency or the visibility of the objectification of the female form, we have to affect supply, demand, or both-- but doing so by shaming or legislation seems to infringe not only upon the social contract but upon biological imperatives thus making such an effort pointless.

    So what is to be done?

  107. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    You're still trying the "you're angry" nonsense.

    You get that it's completely reasonable to be angry with a person doing or saying evil things, right?

  108. Re:I predict by Creepy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Misogyny isn't the right word, but objectification probably is. The entertainment industry is really shallow that way, and I'm saying that as someone that has worked professionally in both music and game programming/game music (I've also done game art and 2d and 3d modeling, but I probably couldn't cut it there in modern games - it didn't take as much talent in the 1990s). I lobbied to have female characters in one of the games I worked on and was mocked and told by the owner that there was no market for that (and all I really asked for was ONE female character NAME in that game, which was a driving game - incidentally, someone modded them in later). I also have a friend in TV and that industry isn't much better, and he is probably the best example of that (for years behind his back my friends joked of him as our male slut friend, but he finally settled down with a long term girlfriend and even moved in with her and sold his bachelor pad, which he refused to do with the other two fairly long relationships he had).

  109. We were already on the path to inclusion by sstamps · · Score: 2

    Games and gamer culture were already well on their way to inclusion of females in various contexts long before the Anitas and Zoes were out of diapers, and will likely continue unabated despite them and their detractors. From players to developers, to games specifically gender-neutral or targeted towards women, it's already happening. That a small percentage of games cater to a certain male-dominated demographic (which has been around since the dawn of gaming), or contain certain representations which some females find offensive for whatever reason, shouldn't paint the rest of the industry as non-inclusive. Personally, even as a male, I don't care for those games; I find them base and puerile, but I deal with it simply by not buying or playing them. I certainly don't care if they are made or if anyone else plays them or not.

    The vast majority of gamers either don't know about this crap or don't care -- they just want to be left alone to enjoy their hobby without a bunch of culture warrior idiots and douchebags telling them "you're over" and screwing with the games they are harmlessly enjoying. That is what I think tends to infuriate gamers which would otherwise have no issues whatsoever with the smooth transition of games and gamer culture from being nearly completely male-dominated for decades to one of gender balance which represents everyone fairly, if not equally.

    In short, everyone needs to step back and take a god damned breather, put all this bullshit into perspective, and move on into the future. Trust me, it's going to be just fine for everyone involved with respect to games.

    --
    -SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
  110. Re:I predict by qbast · · Score: 1

    Ok, sorry - obviously suggesting that your are angry is utter nonsense just like you say. I mean starting your comment with "Holy shit, you're fucking garbage." is sure sign of calm and collected person. So what do you do when you are angry? Scream incoherently and throw chairs?

  111. Re:I predict by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    Let's face it, gaming journalists have been in bed with devs and publishers for a long time, it just has gotten so out of hand that now we have journalists and devs literally in bed with each other. This would never fly in any other industry, so why do we let it occur here?

    ROFL!! Stahp it...you're hilarious...oh wait? you actually believe that. How sadly naive yet adorable.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  112. Re:I predict by Locmar · · Score: 1

    You compared the "analysis" on this jpeg to Loose Change, and I think that's pretty apt. The fact that people are so quick to latch onto this incredibly specious reasoning is really telling. Like, who the fuck cares if the person screenshotting it isn't signed in? You know what happens if I google "Anita Sarkeesian twitter"? I get her damn twitter page, exactly as it looks in that jpeg. You know what happens if I have that page up and hit F5 right after someone tweets something? I get that new tweet on my screen. This is not rocket-science level reasoning, it's plain, simple, and obvious. MS painting "look! it says this post is from 12 seconds ago!!!" on a screenshotand calling it a smoking gun isn't rock solid evidence, it's pants-shittingly stupid.

  113. offensive != offended by khasim · · Score: 2

    a. Being offensive is not the same as being offended.

    b. Rights are not the sole consideration. There is also politeness.

    The first question would be whether the person being offensive would say the same things on a public street corner. People who are offensive tend to be a lot more insistent upon their claimed "Rights" when they have anonimity.

    The next question would be whether they'd say it alone on a public street corner. The people from Westboro Baptist Church seem to be focused on being offensive. Which is why they "protest" in groups.

    If you cannot pass both those tests then you are being "offensive" and your goal is to offend someone else. So do not try the "no freedom of speech" argument.

    The guy standing on the street corner telling the world about how the government is tracking him through his dental fillings is doing more for "freedom of speech" than the guy screaming "fucking jew whore" when his character is shot in a video game.

    1. Re:offensive != offended by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      I don't believe protection from our government is a strong enough free speech protection. I believe free speech should extend to the government protecting us from each other as well. I don't believe donald sterling should have been penalized financially for his speech. whether you want to go after him for decades of racial discrimination is a separate matter entirely. Brendan Eich was also done a huge disservice by american society. I'm frankly horrified by the direction of american culture and its implications. Social condemnation is in certain instances more punishing than government censorship, and frankly more arbitrary too.

      I'm of the firm belief that one should be punished for their actions, and never for their ideas. the westboro baptist church, their contemptible but again, we should defend their every right to both hold their views, and live in our world, at the same time.

      Is there anything that someone could say that should cost them a billion dollars? apparently so. because the american public is both fickle, reactionary and forgetful. social media makes it all faster, more brutal and less discriminatory than it's ever been before, the will of the common man.

    2. Re:offensive != offended by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      I wanted to add that respect probably covers most of what you guys pointed out. If the simple practice of respect is applied by everybody, everywhere there would be very little concern here.

  114. Re:I predict by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Show me a statement from any police agency saying they are investigating credible death threats against either of them, and that Sarkeesian was relocated and is under police protection due to the credibility of those threats.

    This is Hilary Clinton dodging sniper fire to the 12th degree.

  115. Re:I predict by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

    Right, and if she had literally said "I hate video games with a passion", she could still have loved video games. You know, a love-hate relationship. Yea, that's the ticket.

    You make other apologists look amateur in comparison.

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  116. Depends on what you mean by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    If you mean in Youtube comments, please. Those are a shit show of the worst of humanity. Most people do not care to wade in to that. If you do, ok good on you, but you shouldn't be surprised that most don't.

    If you mean in games, well most of us don't see it, probably because we don't hang out with people like that and would call them out if they did. Assholes tend to operate where they can be assholes, and if they don't think they can get away with it they won't. I've not encountered people harassing women in the games I've played. The reason is probably because the kind of groups/guilds that I'm interested in joining are not the kind that would tolerate such things.

  117. Re:I predict by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

    I guess the one up side is that they're doing a pretty good job of making this line of thinking look really, really gross.

    When incredulity and skepticism are made to look really, really gross, we're all worse off for it.

    Disclaimer: I'm equal parts misogynist and misandrist.

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  118. Re:I predict by narcc · · Score: 1

    Actively lied? You're confused. Let's see what you offer as evidence.

    Take the Hitman video she did. She went on about how the game rewards you by killing the dancers at some club, when anyone who has played the game knows that you actually get punished for it, due to their deaths being unnecessary.

    Can you provide a link and time stamp for us? I've seen all her videos, but don't recall this specific one. Or even one specifically about Hitman.

    Also, is this the only example you have? Have you considered that it could just be a simple error?

  119. Re:I predict by Moses48 · · Score: 1

    You are right about that. Objectification of women is rampant across the whole entertainment industry. There is not a "gamer culture" of objectification. It far transcends this. This reporting is the same thing that happened with violence. People see something repulsive, and instead of realizing it's a problem that occurs everywhere and needs to be addressed they blame it on a sub-culture. Violence in video games is .... etc etc... It's one thing to call out entertainment across the board for all the drug, sex, and violence. It's quite another to turn a blind eye to all the content one consumes and blame content that their peers consume as the culprit.

    There are problems, but lets not blame "gamers" for the problem. And if one only blames the objectification when it's in something that they don't already like then it becomes obviously hypocritical.

  120. Re:I predict by narcc · · Score: 1

    Do they really?

    You should try reality, instead of thunderf00t's imagination land. You'll find it much more rewarding.

  121. Re:I predict by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    She didn't say she doesn't like games, she said that she wasn't a "fan", i.e. just a casual player. I wouldn't say I'm a fan of modern games because I haven't played many, but that doesn't mean if someone invites me to try one I won't enjoy it.

    Instead of making ad-hominem attacks why not address the points she makes in her videos directly? Can you point to specific examples of where her research and conclusions were incorrect and undermine her wider argument?

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  122. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by narcc · · Score: 1

    What? You have a mystery email that ... proves, what, exactly?

    You've gone off the deep end.

  123. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Asmodae · · Score: 1

    Unless it happens to be a PERSON where the death threat included home address information. Regardless of gender, THAT's the line that makes a threat credible.

    Tangentially, the behavior you describe is the reason I don't play those games. It's also a behavior that doesn't need to be there. Why defend it as if its necessary for some reason?

  124. Re:I predict by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The reason people hate Anita Sarkeezian is not because she is a woman, but because she purposefully misrepresents facts in games

    Example?

    and posed as someone that enjoys games when there is video evidence of the contrary.

    Why does this matter? You don't have to be an artist to criticize art. Roger Ebert seems to have become pretty well-respected considering his only film credit was Beyond the Valley of the Dolls.

    She lied to the people that financed her videos and then did not even deliver,

    Example?

    not to mention that it's such poorly made crap that a high school student could have done better.

    Oh, well, that's certainly worth death threats. You've convinced me with this one!

  125. Re:here we go again by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

    Don't worry: I am a misogynists. It is a badge of honor. Much like saying 'I am an anti-fascist'.

  126. The formula is: internet+anonymity=asshole by Yakasha · · Score: 1
    There is no sex variable in that formula.

    I don't know about you, but every time I get online I see flaming everywhere. Message boards, gaming, politics... Doesn't matter. Per the internet, everybody is a noob, living in their mom's basement, unemployable, unfuckable, uneducated, jersey shore wannabe, loser. People latch on to whatever makes the target of their hatred different, and attack it. It is not some special case of misogyny because it affects every individual equally, regardless of sex. The fact that there are fewer women in gaming just makes sex 1 trait of many that makes some people different than others, and therefore a "legitimate" avenue of attack.

    Misogyny, or the perception of misogyny, is a problem throughout society and is in no way exclusive to gaming. Focusing on gaming specifically is counterproductive because it implies a lack of focus on the cause of the misogyny, which is almost definitely from outside of gaming.

  127. Re:I predict by Pablew+Nopl · · Score: 1

    Maybe we could get rid our desire to have sex. Another alternative is to stop caring and stop being so puritan.

  128. Re:extinction? No, bifurcation -- the military tra by Yakasha · · Score: 1

    I doubt it. According to feminists, any male-dominated groups are inherently misogynist and have to be destroyed or forcibly 'feminized'. Of course women-only communities are just fine and example of woman empowerment.

    The imbalance of positions allows for an imbalance in the effects seemingly equal exclusions have on other groups. The group that is "in power" naturally has an advantage over the minority groups. The majority group excluding a minority causes more harm to the minority than a minority group excluding a majority member causes to the majority.

    If exclusion is the proverbial "shot across the bow" with sexism in gaming, you're talking about an Iowa class Battleship vs. a Walther ppk.

  129. Re:I predict by narcc · · Score: 1

    mean starting your comment with "Holy shit, you're fucking garbage." is sure sign of calm and collected person.

    Sounds like astonishment to me. As in "Holy shit! I had no idea that you were such fucking garbage!" A reasonable reaction by someone who believed that you were not, in fact, fucking garbage.

    Posting insane conspiracies with evidence and analysis which rivals the worst Glenn Beck has ever dared coupled with the tacit defense of MRA lunacy certainly makes you look like fucking garbage. If you are not, in fact, fucking garbage, you would do well to clarify your position in cases such as this.

  130. Zoe Quinn's Abuse of the DMCA by Jahoda · · Score: 2

    Regardless of the he-said/she-said of this whole thing, the part that I think would be of most interest of slashdotter's is Zoe Quinn's use of the DMCA to quash discussion about this situation which she did not like. Regardless of the truth of the matter, the fact that she did this (to me) speaks volumes about her character. Total Biscuit can summarize this better than I can, and also has a very levelheaded take on the situation :

    Total Biscuit TwitLonger "What the Hell Just Happened"

    1. Re:Zoe Quinn's Abuse of the DMCA by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      ...that I think would be of most interest of slashdotter's is Zoe Quinn's use of the DMCA...

      Not really. Just another little detail. The misandrists won't shirk from any stupidity to excuse this, for all the others it does not come as a surprise.

  131. Re:Again?! by Aardpig · · Score: 2
    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  132. Re:Again?! by silfen · · Score: 1

    we can, but we should not.

    Yes, we should. The shortcomings and predilections of teenage heterosexual males neither matter, nor do they have anything to do with technology or Slashdot.

    She is talking about the gaming culture; which is in a horrid state for women right now. perhaps you should stop whining and try to understand women get a lot of harrassment from the gaming community

    There is no "gaming community" in the sense feminists talk about; it's a construct intended to fabricate a fictional enemy that people can grandstand against to make themselves important, gain power, and gain impressions. It lets them engage in their Two Minutes Hate.

  133. Re:I predict by Locmar · · Score: 1

    Do a google search for her account without being logged in. You'll get to her twitter page, and it will look exactly like it did in that screenshot. If she (or someone else) saw an incoming stream of creepy/threatening tweets at her, logged out to avoid having their information on screen, hit f5 to refresh and display the most recent messages, then took a screenshot, they would end up with...exactly that screenshot. That is a much simpler explanation than that weird ranty jpeg presents as a smoking gun.

  134. Re:I predict by narcc · · Score: 1

    How about something really, really, simple? Include women in roles other than passive, helpless, sex objects.

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with sexualized, helpless, one-dimensional female characters. The problem is that this is overwhelmingly how women are portrayed in games.

    Assuming that art is ultimately a cultural product, what does that say about the gaming industry's attitudes toward women? How do they compare to other creative industries? (Movies, TV, etc.)

  135. Re:I predict by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

    And I don't really want them to be garbage. That's a horrible thing to be right about.

    I'd love to be wrong about that. I'd love for there to be an oversimplification I'm making, that causes me to miss the good intentions forest for the misogyny and conspiracy trees.

    But genuine concern for "the state of games journalism" just doesn't map onto the actual behavior at all.

  136. Re:boring and laughable feminist commentary by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

    One thing Sarkeesian should do is work on her misandrism, objectification, and stereotyping of men, starting with the images of fat, lazy male gamers she keeps flashing in the background. The way she stereotypes and puts down men is offensive. And she should work on actually making a point instead of just rambling on.

    http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a7/a7b7d0021e612cd4758a2b3806895c1f23da64eed498aac29a179b5f5adaadd0.jpg

  137. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by radtea · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number.

    And you would be wrong. At least, you would be wrong if you are implying anything other than the majority of rapes are committed by a small minority of predatory men.

    How small?

    75-80% of rapes are committed by 4-5% of men: http://www.tjradcliffe.com/?p=...

    That's still seven or eight million men in absolute terms, of course, but far fewer than what is erroneously claimed by the old, failed, misandrist "rape is nothing less than a conscious conspiracy by all men against all women" model.

    It is easy for us, as humans, to leap from "all rapists are men" to "all men are rapists". Even if the former proposition were true (it isn't) the latter is unrelated to it.

    There is a population of sociopathic predators in our midst. Most of them are men. All of them are dangerous. Their victims are both men and women (we don't even know what the rate of male victimization in sexual assault is... all we know is that the reported rate is much lower than for women, but it would be, wouldn't it?)

    Focusing on men vs women rather than citizens vs predators is exactly what the predators need to keep on preying on the innocent. It's time we stopped doing that.

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  138. No. by denzacar · · Score: 1

    A person who offers a bribe is just as culpable as the person who takes the bribe.

    If I ask for money or something else from YOU, as a payment for some favor, that's extortion and the burden of guilt is on ME.

    If YOU offer me money or something else, ASKING for a favor in return, that's a BRIBE and the burden of guilt is on YOU.
    Up to that point, I am free and clear.

    If I do decide to ACCEPT the bribe, then there is a burden of OFFERING a bribe on you, and a separate burden of ACCEPTING a bribe on me.
    If I give you favors in return for the bribe there is ADDITIONAL burden on me for abuse of position/authority.
    Neither of which exculpates you for your crime. You still carry the burden of offering the bribe.

    There is an another scenario where one person offers a favor or money or something else of value as a gift, but later demands favors in return on account of that gift.
    Maybe threatening to reveal the "gift" to a third party as something other than just a gift, or demanding to have it returned or paid for.
    That's blackmail, and the burden is entirely on the gift-giver/blackmailer.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:No. by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      If I ask for money or something else from YOU, as a payment for some favor, that's extortion and the burden of guilt is on ME.

      No, it's not extortion. "Pay me or else I will do <unpleasant thing>" is extortion. "If you pay me, I will do <pleasant but illegal/unetical thing>" is soliciting a bribe.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  139. Not you too slashdot by Windwraith · · Score: 2

    I mean come on, only one side of the story, as every other online publication. For shame.

    Who knows if Slashdot is one of their allies. I can't trust this site now.

    1. Re:Not you too slashdot by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Feel free to ban me. This is the last time I post or read Slashdot. gonna delete RSS feeds, everything. I don't want to be considered a reader of this site any longer.

      The funniest thing is that I got attacked by the social justice bullies for suggesting that the entire indie game culture should be open to everyone, no exceptions. Still managed to find a way to harass me on twitter.
      Slashdot pandering to that audience giving only their side of the story is shameful, a terrible lack of understanding of the situation at hand, and who knows if it's an attempt to follow an agenda, now.

      Byebye slashdot. It wasn't all that good, because you started to shift from technology articles to sensationalist tripe. This is the damn yellow press for geeks. And I want nothing to do with it.

    2. Re:Not you too slashdot by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Do you know an alternative?

    3. Re:Not you too slashdot by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      No. I don't know. But given the amount of clickbait and news that have nothing to do with tech or science, I don't think I'll miss it that much today.

      This is a matter of principle. I can't follow a site that sides with a number of indie devs that are poisonous and harmful to me as indie dev. People who insult and doxx you, and call you misogynist bastard at best, just for saying EXACTLY what they are preaching. What makes me think they are all liars and are just in for the money.

      Slashdot backing them up is proof that Slashdot has become a mere blog. It's not worth anyone's time.

    4. Re:Not you too slashdot by epyT-R · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, here's the other side..

      zoe's then-boyfriend's account
      http://thezoepost.wordpress.co...

      wizardchan's experience with zoe
      http://imgur.com/a/4VOcx

      the birth of 4chan's 'vivian james' and zoe's attack on the fine young capitalists
      http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/...

      david jaffe vs kotaku
      http://kotaku.com/5883107/does...
      https://soundcloud.com/ben-kuc...

      anita sarkeesian is not a gamer
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      anita sarkeesian misrepresents the subject material. 'thunderf00t's analysis
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      This is an issue of journalistic integrity and quite possibly attempts at reculturing a community to conform to specific political values. The charge of 'misogyny' is just an attempt to muddy the waters and/or poison the well of any would-be critics.

    5. Re:Not you too slashdot by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Too true. And tech or science articles are less and less fun, because for every interesting reply you have to wade through 100 responses of imbeciles who don't even understand a fraction of the topic, but try to be funny. Still why go? Hardly possible to drag down the level here any further, so I have fun. And maybe one of my short sarcastic remarks will blow a fuse of one of those misandristic fanatics. :-)

    6. Re:Not you too slashdot by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Best thing is that people fighting in favor of Social Justice doesn't care about misogyny. All the women involved only want to be rare, special snowflakes who "dared" to oppose an industry that really doesn't give a damn about the gender of a programmer. Look at the credits in multiple AAA games and you'll see plenty of women in there, who make absolutely no noise nor fight for a false cause. They are just professionals who do their job as anyone else.

      They don't have a cause. All they want is to remain exclusive and unique. If they have to prevent any other women from ever being able to code a game, they will, and there's proof of it. If you aren't one of the elite, you are nothing to them, regardless of your gender, your coding ability, or your ability to put together a fun game.

      Best thing is that they shit on my customers. OUR customers. We are nothing without them no matter what they say. And it's not only customers, it's also my friends, of all genders, races and sexual orientations you can think of.

    7. Re:Not you too slashdot by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Well, I've been splashed by this topic personally. I've been attacked, insulted, threatened with violence (I don't mind that, though, used to it. And besides all live at the other side of the Atlantic ocean, so they can't reach me anyway), and doxxed (fortunately there's not much dirt to uncover other than my real name, which got out after years of being careful about it).

      Note that this is exactly what that people is complaining about, yet they have no second thoughts on doing it themselves, even against KIDS.

      My sin was posting that there should be no "elite", that any developer should be able to publish a game and profit from it, be it man, woman, gay, lesbian, trans, black, I don't care. 90% of those games WILL be crap, but I always, always encouraged people to at least try. The maker of that shitty game might learn and make a better one next time. But that's being sexist to them. Somehow.

      Anyone supporting them without seeing the other side of the story is biased to a point where I'd think the person is blind, or has an agenda. Given a number of recent posts in here, I am starting to think that they simply don't care. It's all about clickbait, Slashdot doesn't care if they make things worse by publishing a biased article that only benefits a few, and already have the benefit of the press.

      Many readers of Slashdot are the target of those social justice bullies, as well. The ones that they want to, in their own words, "kill". No one should stand for that.

      Specially when women are being insulted by them. Making their point completely hypocritical.

  140. Re:extinction? No, bifurcation -- the military tra by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile most men aren't on a fucking battleship, so why is it perfectly acceptable to shoot them with a Walther ppk?

    Sorry but no.

  141. Get a life! by Przepla · · Score: 1

    Dear Gamers "threatened" by Ms Quinn and by Ms Sarkeesian,

    Get a life! You're mean, and those are just computer games.

    Best wishes,

    Confused human who is living a life (and treats computer games as mere entertainment)

    --
    When in doubt, go to the library. - Ron Weasley in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
    1. Re:Get a life! by Windwraith · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You don't get it, do you?
      Zoe and Anita do not harm us in any way. People like Ben Kuchera, K.Thor Jensen and such, do.
      You haven't paid attention in class. And as far as I know, Ben Kuchera is a guy, not a woman, so I am not misogynist for calling him on his insults and doxxing threats. Look them up.

      Not to mention Phil Fish producing a massive internet meltdown calling everyone a rapist (including YOU) and telling aspiring developers to quit. I think Phil Fish is also not a woman. Also, he didn't do almost any work on Fez, look at the credits. He was just an idiot hogging fame from a team you'll never hear about.

      I am a developer. I was attacked by the people claiming to be on my side for suggesting that bias shouldn't exist. For supporting equality. But you know what? They don't want equality. They want to be few and rare so they can maintain their "special" status.

    2. Re:Get a life! by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Oh, and for the record, I did support Anita Sarkeesian, financially and otherwise.

    3. Re:Get a life! by Tanuki64 · · Score: 2

      Zoe and Anita do not harm us in any way.

      You're sure? Not physically, sure. But I think they are firestarters, who deliberately pour oil into the fire for their own financial gains.

    4. Re:Get a life! by Windwraith · · Score: 2

      They were just a hint of something being wrong. The moment we saw what was really going on, they became irrelevant.

      I supported Anita because I thought it was a good idea. I didn't think she'd be insulting everyone after getting the money.
      It's true that some of the tropes she calls out are tired and very cliché and boring. Her methods of doing it by stealing uncredited footage from LPers are pretty bad, but the idea is good and I can still support that despite the things she's said.

      Zoe, herself, is a pretty nasty piece of work. Extremely rude individual even when this topic is not being discussed. Swears like a sailor. But what damage can she cause? It was the journalists who accepted sex or a romantic affair in return to favorable coverage (which, by the way, does exist. Despite people saying the contrary, even when the articles are still present at Kotaku and other sites, they didn't even bother deleting them). She just was laking in the moral department enough to exploit that loophole. She's got a terrible personality, but she's not the one causing damage. She's just another pawn.

      It's people like Ben or Nathan who are doing damage by accepting such deals and furthering agendas. If you think about it, our enemy is pretty much all "cis white males", writers and editors in chief, and PR people. What makes the playing of the misogyny card extremely hypocritical once you look into things.

      Don't give Zoe any attention she doesn't deserve. She's nothing in the whole scheme of things. Another cog in the system. Besides, she will play the victim card, so insulting her is an exercise in futility.

    5. Re:Get a life! by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      The moment we saw what was really going on, they became irrelevant.

      Really? They are so irrelevant that you want to leave /. because of the wave they caused. Several other blogs are riding the same train. I would not call this irrelevant.

      It's true that some of the tropes she calls out are tired and very clichÃf© and boring.

      I disagree. Here some Thunderf00t 'footage', which IMHO show how stupid this 'trope' meme is:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57tXyqPCOCM&feature=youtu.be
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9_MVPq1SJY&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A&index=14
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viDMai9b0UA&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A
      IMHO (again), she simply has no leg to stand on. Women are neither better nor worse treated than men in games or films.

      Don't give Zoe any attention she doesn't deserve.

      Actually I don't care for both. They have their agenda, they make money with it. There are certainly worse douchebags (male and females) than those two. But what really disgusts me are their brainwashed, spineless mangina followers.

    6. Re:Get a life! by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I didn't say "all" the tropes, I said some. It's true that some stuff like rape as a narrative device is terribly overused and ends up being a lazy course of action. I get what it tries to convey (a relatable problem that is dramatic in real life, and a way to make bad guys despicable), but it's used very often (even more in independent or derivative works) because it's an easy plot device. I think it's way lazier than sexist, though. In fact, I'd say most of those tropes are out of laziness instead of spite, to be perfectly honest with you.

      I try to avoid them myself, because I think there are other things that can be used instead to achieve pretty much the same effect without being cliché about it all. Then again I also have no second thoughts on making a dark-skinned protagonist, or featuring women that are overweight in the cast, or people wearing glasses without being nerds. I just think it's more realistic to be diverse, even if your story features cyborg liches and dimensions manifesting as planet-sized mechanoids. If the game is fun and appealing, no one will care about the main guy not being ciswhitehetmale.

      Anyway, I digress. And yeah, I agree. The whiteknighting has gone too far, specially when such white knights don't bother looking if they are saving a fair maiden or are being used as personal armies by some evil green witch in disguise. It's also fun how they project the sad virgin card on gamers, when they are the ones going to extremes to appeal to the girl.

      Again, bunch of hypocrites in every single way.

    7. Re:Get a life! by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Sounds sensible and I agree. But just one a bit provocative question, though you are not really the right person to ask. Just some thought for other readers.... and because I cannot resist. ;-)

      You write:

      rape as a narrative .... and a way to make bad guys despicable

      How does this work, when only 10% of what feminists try to tell us were true? How would rape in that case make anyone despicable? According to them most men, and probably all nerds would applaud and have pity... with one who was intended to be portrayed as the bad guy, when in the end he gets punished.

      You think I exaggerate? This would only be the logical consequence of what Sarkeesian said more or less about gamers and the game Hitman: They get 'hot' on the abuse of dead womens bodies.

  142. Re:Gaming has a problem by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    because criticism of criticism is automatically wrong, right?

  143. False accusations? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

    Watch Quinnspiracy Theory. It starts off like a crazy conspiracy theory but he supports it and I would actually like to hear all of the stuff addressed by those on the "Zoe Quin" side.

    Another second video presenting it in a bit different layout: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    All I've taken away from this is that this generation is starting to learn why Journalism is hard. If you want to be taken seriously and get the benefits of being 'media' you need to behave like media. Something tells me Barbra Walters didn't fuck her way to her position.

  144. Re:Again?! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Thanks!

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  145. Re:I predict by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    The issue is: This anonymous person did something "evil" and therefore you claim an entire demographic is evil and you are mad at them. Not a good example of rationality.

  146. Re:Surprised? by narcc · · Score: 1

    Of course geeks are misogynistic, they think so highly of their intelligence that when they get shot down by women due to their poor social skills, they think it's the womans' fault.

    Why is this modded -1? It's easily a +5 insightful!

  147. Re:I predict by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    Simple error? I mean I guess it would be understandable for someone that doesn't like or know anything about video games to not understand how game mechanics work. But completely misrepresenting how a game works is not a "simple error".

    She hasn't made a lot of them; not sure how you would forget such an absurd part. She went on at length about Hitman and something about punishing women for their sexuality.

  148. Re:I predict by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    You should try reality, instead of FeministFrequency's imagination land. You'll find it much more rewarding.

  149. Re:I predict by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    Manufacture what? The infographic? Would you find it more credible if there were simply more infographics with the same content? It was a review of the credibility of the threat. How come you don't have this same level of disbelief when the only evidence of threats that was manufactured was this one short term twitter account?

    I suppose it helps explain your method of thinking. There is a large group of people circularly referencing each other about how there is totally no corruption going on in their circle. But they provide lots of stories and references to those stories so by virtue of the bandwagon fallacy they must be correct.

  150. Only in case of... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    ...both parties being on equal footing, so that the solicited side can refuse the offer without suffering any consequence.
    "Pay me and I'll eat your vegetables and you can tell our mother you ate them."
    "Pay me, stranger, and I'll give you sexual favors."

    In the context of the discussion about BRIBES, there is an implied imbalance of power.
    You don't pay a bribe to a prostitute to HAVE SEX (same footing), you pay it LATER so said prostitute KEEPS QUIET (imbalance of power).

    Due to the same kind of imbalance of power, a politician coming to your workplace and offering his/her favors in exchange for money is not soliciting but extorting a bribe.
    The siblings metaphor gets an added "...and if you talk about it, just wait until mom and dad go to work and we're alone."
    Politician does not even have to imply a possible setback for your business or an unexpected windfall for your competition.

    Or simpler...
    A cop who pulls you over offers to waive the $200 fine for X if you make a $100 or higher donation to Retired Policemen Fund.
    Solicitation implies that you have a choice in the matter.
    Imbalance of power in the situation assures that you don't.

    Ergo, you are being extorted.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  151. Re:Again?! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    oh, well one post on the internet, that settles it.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  152. Re:I predict by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Here's the interaction I'm seeing:
    - story about woman getting death threats, someone most people not following modern game devs or fandom even know
    - instant reponse that there's no misogyny, typical slashdottery, and BESIDES SHE SLEPT WITH REVIEWERS!

    I'm sorry, but true or not, that's classic slut shaming.

  153. Re:I predict by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

    Is it possible that some of the entertaining, amiable geeks that I spar with, party with, code with and blow things up with turn feral and run in packs when I'm not around?

    It is unlikely. If you read further into this scandal and its surrounding issues, you will find that it is the gaming community which has been libelled by a clique of disingenuous bullies. These people will routinely label their opponents as bigots while displaying shocking levels of bigotry and hatred themselves. You can see ample evidence of this behaviour in these very comments.

    For a better understanding of where the real "Ugly incidents" in this scadal are coming from, simply look up the #GamerGate and especially #Notyourshield twitter hashtags. The vitriol, hatred, and misrepresentations in this debate are coming from Social Justice Warriors (I refuse to apply the terms feminist or progressive to these frauds.)

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  154. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Asmodae · · Score: 1

    You're clearly arguing with someone not me.

    The post I was responding to said:

    the media would have you believe there are millions of people out there raping women and whatnot...

    I said:

    I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number.

    You said:

    That's still seven or eight million men in absolute terms, of course

    Everything else you said was arguing with statements nobody made. The definition of a straw-man argument. There really are millions of people (eight or nine to use your number) committing these crimes. This is staggering to me. All I was trying to show was that the decimal place in the OPs thought may have been misplaced. Nobody said tens of millions or hundreds of millions, or anything resembling ALL. The name 'millions' is absolutely the correct term to use, which was my one point. As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure who you're talking to.

  155. Re:Again?! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    And? regardless if this person did that or not, my point still stands.

    Nothing proves my point more then the fact I got modded troll because I point out that women, as a group, get harassed regularly in the gaming community.
    I know a lot of female gamers (my daughter, my wife, all her friends, my table top friends who also play video games, etc...), and all of them had basically play a male character and use a male sounding handle just so they wouldn't get harassed.

    I do not give a damn about Zoe, and the issue surrounding he is so complex and heat filled it's pointless to discuss.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  156. Re:I predict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Woah there buddy that's some serious Faux-News quality evidence you have there.

    Actual evidence wouldn't include a lot of debatable conjecture on the part of the anonymous accuser, but would make some effort to demonstrate the source of the post in a meaningful way. For example: questioning that the poster was a fresh account isn't a suggestion that Anita did it; it's a suggestion that the poster knew they were about to write some serious stuff and prefer not to tie it to their own account. Writing a series of single sentence short tweets just tells you its a "tweet savvy" poster...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to fire off a series of tweets like that. And despite the fact that the internet is filled with grammar-mendicants, the simple fact is it also contains a healthy share of pedantic grammar nazis and I think one could just as easily argue that the proper puncutation of the sentences fits the profile of a very punctual individual...who in fact could be someone with mild Asperger's or a self-aggrandized perspective on their own worth and existence over others, all secondary traits of sociopathic behavior, actually.

    So let's see some real proof, not conspiracy theories, please.I'm not Sarkeesian apologist but crap like this is why people don't take her detractors seriously.

  157. Re:Again?! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    So what if gaming culture isn't black friendly. Does every. single. fucking. thing. in existence have to be!?
    So what if gaming culture isn't gay friendly. Does every. single. fucking. thing. in existence have to be!?

    Are you really that stupid?
    There is a difference between an entire culture and places within the culture. Run you're own private servers? So, make it a boys only, no one gives a damn.

    "This idea that everything should be either female-only (because these special snowflakes need special non-man spaces for their unicornness) or unisex is absofuckinglutely misandrous and absurd."

    Yes it is, which is probably why it isn't true.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  158. Re:Again?! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "There is no "gaming community" in the sense feminists talk about;"
    Yes, there is.
    You'r statement is , frankly, stupid.
    Like saying there is no 'football community.'

    ". The shortcomings and predilections of teenage heterosexual males neither matter,"

    A) even teenagers threating to beat and rape a women is BAD.
    B) Sadly, it turns out most of them are in their 20's and 30's.

    Gaming culture has very much been part of /. since it's inception.
    " It lets them engage in their Two Minutes Hate."
    Yes, being angry because you are constantly verbally assaulted is so unreasonable.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  159. Re:I predict by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    You are twisting what she said. Her point was that the player is rewarded with sexy corpses that they can pose and manipulate for their own enjoyment. To give some context the advertising for the game shows a number of scantily clad women in suggestive poses after being murdered. It's necrophilia, but they are hot so... it's okay?

    It's a common problem in games. In Bioshock there is a section where you enter a strip club and there are murdered men and women all over the place. The men are dressed normally, but the women tend to be half undressed and posed so you can admire their rotting boobs and thighs. It's supposed to make the game edgy but it's really just lazy.

    She repeatedly mentions in her videos that the games she talks about are not necessarily bad, and can be quite enjoyable. It's just a shame they have those aspects to them as well. In later videos she mentions a few examples of non-sexist games that she enjoys.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  160. Re:I predict by tylikcat · · Score: 1

    I have been following this as the story has unfolded - not obsessively (I have work to do) but not that distantly, either. So, no, I don't think so.

    At some meta-level, I do wonder if there are some basic subcultural differences in communication going on here. I mean, I see, for instance, the infamous screen cap, and think, gosh, I always have at least two different browsers open (sometimes more, though I realize this is somewhat idiosyncratic) I often browse privately, and if I were doing a similar screen grab, I'd almost certainly not pull it from instance in which I was logged in. (I mean, like I need more shit, this shouldn't be about my login, it should just be about what's being posted.) So I look at the so ofte cited screen cap and think "Why do you think I'll care?" I see a lot of quotes being taken pretty blatantly out of context. And, of course, I see a lot of really misogynist crap being posted. It certainly is comforting that a number of my male friends are at least as creeped out by these discussions as I am.

    Then again, I'm not at all sure I'm not a social justice warrior. I mean, I'm a mild mannered* neurobiologist and martial artist, with a pretty heterogeneous (if rather inclined towards the geeky) social circle, but I'm certainly willing to speak up when I see people being treated poorly.

    * Well, okay, when I asked a couple of my students if I were mild mannered, they didn't really answer, but mostly because they were laughing too hard to speak. So maybe not.

  161. Re:extinction? No, bifurcation -- the military tra by Yakasha · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile most men aren't on a fucking battleship, so why is it perfectly acceptable to shoot them with a Walther ppk?

    Sorry but no.

    Because men control most things on this planet (including the gaming industry), and because the dominant group tends to favor the dominant group's traits, yes, men are on a battleship. They're born there, live there, and die there. Just like whites have distinct societal advantages over blacks in the US, men have advantages over women.

    As in any other situation, banding together allows the members to pool their strength. Women's only groups assist inherently disadvantaged women to compete with men in the industry. They level the playing field. A men's only group helps the already dominant group, thus perpetuating the imbalance.

  162. It's unacceptable, but may not be representative by phorm · · Score: 1

    It's NOT acceptable. Most of what trolls do isn't. It's terrible crap designed to garner as much attention as possible. Nobody likes trolls.
    The problem is that now they're equivilating intelligent opposition to the trolls.

    Let's say there's a legitimate (political or otherwise) debate going on. During the debate, some troll heckler - who has no interest or stake in the debate - comes in and starts raising bothering debater B. Maybe this is just some random drunk/druggie who wandered in from the street. He threatens to kill debator B. Then, debater B uses this to accuse his/her opponents of all being offensive trolls. He/she says "see, it's proof that my opponents are all hateful and evil." But it's not, it's proof that one person is, possibly even a person unrelated to the debate at hand.

    Is the activity of that person unacceptable: YES!
    Is it related to the debate at hand: Possibly, but even if it is it does not represent all those involved in the debate.

  163. Because SJWs are not Feminists/Progressives by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Question, why do you (generally speaking) feel the need to lump all the people who disagree with you together into one group, give that group a sarcastic name,

    I call the people involved in this scandal "Social Justice Warriors (SJWs)" principally because I refuse to insult the feminist or progressive movements by calling these people with feminists or progressives. Genuine second-wave feminists have publicly criticised their behaviour.

    If you want to understand the difference, look up the #Gamergate and #NotYourShield hashtags on twitter. The Social Justice Warriors are hateful, disingenuous, at times sociopathic bigots. They are adult, internet-empowered versions of the bullies and tormentors which many gamers remember from secondary school.

    Gamers are the victims here. The modus-operandi of the SJWs is to cast themselves in the cloth of underprivileged groups -- most SJWs are in fact white, upper middle class, college aged -- then proceed to level accusations of privilege, bigotry, and misogyny against just about anyone involved in gaming for even the slightest perceived infractions. A climate of fear has developed, first in the indie and later wider gaming industry as a result of the "social justice" witchhunts which these people regularly engage in. Worse, this has resulted in SJW-aligned developers and journalists rising to positions of power and being first in line for awards and increasingly development funding, with cronyism trumping competence.

    For Gaming, so often a hobby of last resort for the excluded and isolated in society, this is an awful and tragic outcome. For gamers, male, female, straight, gay or trans, it is a frightening development. Their hobby, their refuge, is being taken over by bullies.

    Because their rhetoric and especially actions come across as so farcically disingenuous, I don't believe for a second that SJWs actually believe in or support the causes of homosexuals or transgender people in video games. Their support for women is also largely forced, and disturbingly biased towards the conservative view of women as a weaker sex who must be protected/defended (A view consistently challenged by the games industry over the years).

    My honest opinion of SJWs is that they are privileged Neo-liberals, who adopt a forced social justice persona both to project their own (increasingly obvious) bigotry onto others, and ultimately to benefit themselves socially and financially. They are disingenuous, extremist bullies, and the gaming community is under co-ordinated PR attack, and has been almost completely censored on gaming websites.

    The Social Justice Warriors are right about one thing though; this is a historical moment. Whether they win or lose, the GamerGate scandal will be seen as a watershed moment in the history of online-communities, and who controls them. Two weeks ago, I would never have believed that a clique so small could all but take-over a community so large, but it is becoming clear that this is precisely what (almost?) happened to gaming. There are lessons to be learned here, unrelated to the immediate issues, and I only hope the right people will take note and heed them.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  164. Re:I predict by narcc · · Score: 1

    So... no link and time stamp?

  165. Re:boring and laughable feminist commentary by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Why should she? It seems to be working well and she makes good money doing it. That this makes her a hate-monger and generally despicable person does not seem to bother her, so I expect she will continue in this path as long as the useful idiots cheer her on.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  166. Re:I predict by eepok · · Score: 1

    This is easy and it's happening more and more frequently. Today's games are much more likely to have female non-victim playable characters. But if that's going to be a gauge for any kind of improvement over time, then you have to establish a reference date. For example:

    2003 -- Year Zero -- X number of games and Y% of games on the market have the option to play female lead characters.
    2004 -- Year One -- X number...

    But then you can't go back and say, ".01% of all video games made between 1982 and 2014 have had the option of playing a female lead character." That would be disingenuous. That would be holding today's developers and writers accountable for actions taken by other developers while today's developers were in primary school. At some point, you have to have the integrity to say, "The old generational thought is dying out. The new generational thought is taking hold. It just takes time from here."

    And still, you can't force game designers to choose to make a character female any more than you can force a novelist. Part of game creation is following a creative vision. Yes, studios can make such changes. Yes, we can HOPE that newer game designers have the same gender-based sentiments as we, but since it is still an artistic endeavor, they should have the freedom to create the games they wish to create... with the audience deciding if it's a game they want to buy.

    "Assuming that art is ultimately a cultural product, what does that say about the gaming industry's attitudes toward women? How do they compare to other creative industries? (Movies, TV, etc.)"

    It says a couple things-- neither are too surprising. Young girls are taught to want to be rescued. Young men are taught to want to rescue. After the rescue transaction, adult-oriented fiction asserts that there's an expectation of physical intimacy. That's the fantasy story that told day-in and day-out. Sometimes the story is reversed. Sometimes it includes the same gender. It says nothing about women but quite a bit about our **historical** fantasies.

    Today's stories are different. Resident Evil, Salt, Twilight, Harry Potter-- Female competence and heroism is a celebrated expectation and is becoming more and more mainstream-- not because peoples' tastes are being forcibly changed, but because kids grew up with the expectation that boys and girls can both be whomever they wish.

    It's generational. The old and their ideas will die off. The new and their ideas will replace them. So just make sure not to hold the new accountable for the actions of the old. Hell... don't even lump them into the same categories.

  167. Re:I predict by tylikcat · · Score: 1

    Though in fact a lot of my male friends are all "What the flying fuck is with all the misogyny?"

  168. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Oh, no, I'm not spouting nonsense. Can you read plain English? Do you know what honeypot email accounts are? If not, what are you even doing here?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  169. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by narcc · · Score: 1

    So... what does your mystery email contain? How does it prove this collusion between Slashdot and Reddit to do ... what, exactly?

    How are any Slashdot editors "busted"?

  170. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    the media would have you believe there are millions of people out there raping women and whatnot

    Wait, aren't there? Because otherwise, there are a lot more successful serial rapists than we've been led to believe.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  171. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    the media would have you believe there are millions of people out there raping women and whatnot,

    I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number.

    And you would be wrong. At least, you would be wrong if you are implying anything other than the majority of rapes are committed by a small minority of predatory men. [...] That's still seven or eight million men in absolute terms, of course

    Okay, so just put the goalposts back where you found them, and move on. You're done here.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  172. Re:Again?! by silfen · · Score: 1

    Like saying there is no 'football community.'

    I didn't say "there is no gaming community", I said "there is no gaming community in the sense feminists talk about".

    Yes, being angry because you are constantly verbally assaulted is so unreasonable.

    Modern feminists are little more than trolls: they make outrageous statements and then feign anger when people get upset in response. Yes, it's unreasonable to complain that people use harsh language when you deliberately provoke them.

    A) even teenagers threating to beat and rape a women is BAD.

    That presumes that it's an actual threat, instead of merely language intended to shock; it just serves her agenda to blur the distinction.

    Of course, it's better not to feed trolls like Sarkeesian; it's better to respond to her with ridicule than harsh language. Come on, you can't really be taking her seriously, can you?

  173. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by julesh · · Score: 1

    It's a fucking scam. Nobody harassed Zoe Quinn. She made it up. She profited. Her game that couldn't get a green light before got one.

    The timeline I saw suggested her game got the green light 3 days before the story broke, i.e. the publication of the details of her relationships most likely happened in response to the fact that she was suddenly becoming better known.

  174. Re:Again?! by silfen · · Score: 1

    A) even teenagers threating to beat and rape a women is BAD.
    B) Sadly, it turns out most of them are in their 20's and 30's.

    By the way, how do we know that Sarkeesian didn't just fabricate these threats herself? I mean, she's making a lot of money off all of this.

  175. I'ma Gamer.. by PPNSteve · · Score: 1

    (..said as Russel Casse in Independence Day)
    Apparently I must have played right through all this mess.. I never even noticed it until afterwards... and I know a few guys who run gaming websites and they have said nothing.

    --
    PPN
  176. Re:/ignore Combating Recent, Ugly Incidents of Mis by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    you will care when they tone things down to make your 'boss fight' more 'inclusive' to some generalized feminine stereotype.

  177. Re:A week? You're going to give me a weeks respite by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    centrism and compromise don't define truth.

  178. Re:Shameful display on this site by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    So when someone challenges your politics, you run away?

  179. Yes they do act by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Why do you think that The State should infringe on those rights when miscreants engage in the same behavior,

    The state would indeed infringe on the "right" to be an asshole if someone was in my own house being one.

    Which is pretty much the case when you are on any PRIVATELY OWNED forum.

    Anyone has the right to put up their own website saying anything. But that's not the issue now is it?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  180. Re: by Khyber · · Score: 1

    /r/thefappening has plenty of resources for you.

    That took two seconds of a google search.

    If I could do it, so could the AC. You obviously could not.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  181. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

    "Because, really, death threats? Threats to rape her? The crap I've seen in the coverage about this pretty much means this isn't hand-wringing and moralizing ... this is a sign of some pretty terrible (if not criminal) behavior." But that only matters when it happens to a woman. It's only credible when it happens to a woman. It only gets coverage when it happens to a woman.

    Do you even multiplayer, dude? I've had prepubescent boys threaten death in the most gruesome of ways from stomping them at CoD. And what about Blizzard's WoW dev team? Ever seen the shit slung at them when they make a big change that someone doesn't like? Gruesome, empty, threats are part and parcel with game dev, and everyone either deals with it as such, or cracks and quits. That is, unless it happens to a woman, then the massive MSM spin machine fires up, starts doxxing people on twitter, deletes posts and bans users on reddit, and a whole host of other bullshit to UTTERLY BURY the truth. Misandry and leftoid politicism will destroy video games. And you'll be there cheerleading it, apparently.

    I suspect that if the majority didn't tolerate such behavior, it would greatly diminish. Just sayin'.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  182. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

    Hahahaha! This would be Mary Koss "rape", where respondents to surveys don't get to decide whether or not they've been raped, and things like being called a bitch get marked down as rape. The mindset of a person who can honestly look around them in a developed western country and believe that one in six women have been raped defies analysis.

  183. Re: by narcc · · Score: 1

    I see that you're deeply confused by this concept of 'evidence'.

    You can repeat "the truth is out there" all you want, just don't expect anyone to dive in to your paranoid fantasies just to see if there's anything to them. If you can't support your outlandish claims, I have absolutely no reason to believe them.

  184. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    Maybe she is just clever enough to make screenshots in a private browsing tab to avoid accidentally leaking information. When I made a screenshot I copy the URL into a new incognito tab in Chrome first. If she was doing that as the messages were being posted it explains everything - the timing, being logged out and not having searched etc.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  185. This is not recent... by DenaliPrime · · Score: 1

    It is, however, starting to boil over. History has a way of repeating itself. From my generation, it was the HellKitten incident and the Quake Green Ribbon Campaign. For people who have no clue as to what I'm talking about:


    Quake Green Ribbon Campaign

    --
    I! Tego Arcana Dei.
  186. Aww! How cute. Baby wanna ad hominem. Awww... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Well... it's either that or you are retarded as shit.
    Not even realizing when you contradict yourself and all that.

    Matriarchal cultures and "cultures ruled by women" ( which are the same thing, women ruling the state != women ruling the culture

    In fact, the culture of the British Empire was heavily misogynistic.

    So what are you trying to prove there?
    That it WAS a "misogynistic culture" BECAUSE it was ruled by women, i.e. because it was MATRIARCHAL?

    Or that you are a retard who does not understand a CONCEPT of difference between a single attribute of a culture AND its primary descriptive attributes.
    I'm guessing it's the later... or you would realize that your generalizations lead into cognitive dissonance.

    I.e. Not only can your hasty generalizations of "history and cultures" be brought down with a single example of a matriarch ruler or culture (thus "proving" matriarchy across the board regardless of the presence or EVEN roles of males or females in a culture - which you promptly proceed to do yourself in the comment above) - but that your "presence or absence of X makes everything X because X does not correlate with Y" is a HILARIOUSLY, MINDBOGGLINGLY, JAWDROPPINGLY STUPID CLAIM.

    Or simpler...
    There IS cake everywhere BECAUSE, presence of cake or absence of cake is unrelated to presence of diabetics.
    Z is omnipresent because Z or NOT Z are NOT something else.

    Which works.
    You just have to be really dumb or really insane for that to work for you.

    As for the "education" ad hominem... It's hilariously pathetic and snobbish.
    And as usual, tells more about you and your values of "education" over logic or sanity than about me.
    Sorta like when 15-year-old trolls try to insult by using racial, ethnic or sexual slurs - showing their own set of values.
    What's next? Putting value on the "brand" of your education? Wearing shirts with little coat of arms patches? Singing school anthems? Waving little flags? My school was more expensive than your school?

    But it's nice, cause it allows me to call you a retard without feeling any guilt or remorse about it.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  187. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    I know. My Twitter feed shows my bank account number on the sidebar, so I have to go incognito.

  188. I didn't know truth was trollish. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Moderation -1 100% Troll

    Some people just need to take this person's advice before modding down truthful information.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  189. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by Triklyn · · Score: 1

    the link you provided, says in the next line that that statistic includes in its definition of rape, consensual sex under the influence of alcohol that is regretted the next morning. if you're going to broaden it to that, then you've defined away the utility of the word.

  190. world hardest game by SatyamDua · · Score: 1

    Www.hardest-game-ever.net84.net/login.html World hardest game do play yhis game$!

  191. Re:What is the most misogynist game? by dskzero · · Score: 1

    Anita once said Shadow of the Collosus was one of the most mysoginist game she had played (not hard, we know), and given it's pretty awesome, it's a safe bet.

    --
    Oblivion Awaits
  192. Re:I predict by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

    "Maybe we could get rid our desire to have sex"
    The hard core feminists already have kind of done that....

  193. Re:I predict by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

    In the end, correct representations of women in gaming will probably require women writing/authoring/controlling the game production.
    I'm curious what a rah rah super macho action game would be like made entirely by women with no male input. I'm sure it would be equally stupid. Or, alternately, very funny.

  194. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

    No, it would simply change. You'd go from "You're such a cunt" to "you're such a woman hating intolerant". Because these things are often primarily insults.

    Is there something wrong with being more civil?

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  195. Re:I predict by LienRag · · Score: 1

    "Roger Ebert loved movies" is actually his epitaph - so, bad analogy (it's Slashdot, stick with cars)...

  196. Re: by Khyber · · Score: 1

    I just gave you a source for every claim. You're the one that can't be bothered to look at it.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  197. Re: by narcc · · Score: 1

    No, you did not.

    /r/thefappening

    Is not a source. What's the domain?

    Further: Why the hell would I go to any URL with a reference to masturbation? It looks like a sad joke.

  198. Re: by Khyber · · Score: 1

    How sad you must be to not know that anything with /r/insertwhateverhere is Reddit. You're beyond help and beyond pathetic as a supposed geek/nerd.

    And apparently, you're too stupid to get the joke and reference in the first place.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  199. Re:I predict by cryptizard · · Score: 1

    Jesus christ, this is like the 10th comment that says the exact same thing. Maybe wait two seconds before you hit that post button?

  200. Re: by narcc · · Score: 1

    How sad you must be to not know that anything with /r/insertwhateverhere is Reddit.

    Sad? I'd say the exact opposite of that. Moving on...

    "The Fappening" refers to a series of nude photographs featuring various high profile celebrities leaked on 4chan in late August of 2014.

    You have absolutely no evidence, so you direct me to a porn site? Are you 12? Why not just link to goatse?

    Pathetic.

  201. Specific examples? by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Can you point to specific examples of where her research and conclusions were incorrect and undermine her wider argument?

    Others did that already...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Reply to rebuttal...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
    Both videos are extensively sourced.

    Additional unrelated article about errors in her "research and conclusions" based on prejudices and foregone conclusions which boil down to "let's blame everything on you know who".
    And going further into what is basically either willful ignorance or borderline insanity.
    http://armedgamer.com/2014/07/...

    Actually, after getting this crash course in her... opus, I'd be hard pressed to describe her not as a gamer but as a feminist.
    Opportunist? Yes. Hypocrite? That too.
    Feminist... don't see how. Because she's female?

    But what she most reminds me of is an economic opportunist turned chauvinist by said opportunity and the "role of the dice".
    E.g. People who root for the local team because the jerseys with local team's insignia sell better in their store.
    Or people who take up video games and feminism as a cause because video games are "about US$9.5 billion in the US in 2007, 11.7 billion in 2008, and 25.1 billion in 2010" industry, and because the "role of dice" (more like flip of a coin) determined their gender as female.

    Someone with a nose for a lucrative opportunity, but without actual understanding of the subject he/she preaches to the masses.
    Be it games or feminism. She obviously lacks basic understanding of both.
    Both of which she often tries to cover up with weasel words (such as "my version of feminism", "stereotypical female values") and by spiraling her "arguments" around in circles until she contradicts herself - and then she contradicts herself contradicting herself.

    All of which, considering her somewhat privileged background (google for images of 'gamer girl'... then google 'black gamer girl'), also makes her an exploiter.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  202. Re: by Khyber · · Score: 1

    While you have your head tucked in the sand, this whole debacle brought out more fun goodness. Too bad you're too stupid to go looking for this shit yourself.

    http://i.imgur.com/D2YsOFO.png

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  203. Re: by narcc · · Score: 1

    STILL no evidence for your claims!

    Instead, I get a bunch of porn and a conspiracy theory. Oh, you have no evidence because Reddit is hiding the truth! Does the NSA come in to play here? How about Area 51?

    Well, I'm not surprised at all. People like you delve in to fantasy when reality doesn't suit your crazy beliefs.

  204. Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton by skine · · Score: 1

    During their lifetime, 19.3% of women and 1.7% of men have been raped*.
    During the year preceding the study, 1.6% of women and a negligible number of men have been raped*.

    During their lifetime, 43.9% of women and 23.4% of men experienced other forms of sexual violence, including being made to penetrate, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences.
    During the year preceding the study, 5.5% of women and 5.1% of men experienced these other forms of sexual violence.

    Female victims reported predominantly male perpetrators in all categories.
    Male victims reported predominantly male perpetrators for rape, female perpetrators for being made to penetrate and sexual coercion, and a nearly even split for unwanted sexual contact and noncontact unwanted sexual experience.

    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/previe...

    *The US DOJ definition of rape: “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

    http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/...

  205. Re: by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Yea, which is why Reddit is currently fighting a swarm of people reposting the accusation. All Reddit has to do is step forward and go "This is bullshit, here's why" and instead, they're doing EXACTLY what the 'conspiracy' is claiming they do.

    Your naivety is rather refreshing. You refuse to open your eyes and look for yourself. You expect everything hand-fed to you on a silver spoon.

    No wonder half of your posting history is so poor.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  206. Re: by narcc · · Score: 1

    Okay ... Let me guess -- the earth is hollow and home to the lizard people who secretly control the world. All the government need do is stop fighting the swarm of "conspiracy" books and websites and step forward and go "This is bullshit, here's why". Instead, they're doing EXACTLY what the "conspiracy" is claiming they do. You refuse to open your eyes and look for yourself. You expect everything hand-fed to you on a silver spoon. THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE.

    Seriously, listen to yourself. You're a nutter.

  207. Re:I predict by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    The creepiest bit is that half of my social circle, roughly, are male geeks* and they generally seem like a decent bunch, individually and in groups. My students are an amiable bunch, even in those final crunch days as they're trying to wrap up an experiment or get a paper in. Is the first wave of /. comments overwhelmingly from bitter seventeen year olds? Are these some other geeks who I have managed to distance myself from over the years.** Is it possible that some of the entertaining, amiable geeks that I spar with, party with, code with and blow things up with turn feral and run in packs when I'm not around? Eesh.

    Hey, even violentacrez, the king troll of reddit, seemed like a decent guy in real life. The problem is as Penny Arcade pointed out years ago: Internet + Anonymity = Total fuckwad.