http://33.media.tumblr.com/61932329b3a6a1c628cd44d0f6132a32/tumblr_ndym38fc2N1tysqaxo1_1280.jpg
That's pretty much the most blatant evidence of this being largely "STOP COMING INTO MY TREE HOUSE DIDNT YOU SEE THE SIGN?? :sad:".
http://33.media.tumblr.com/61932329b3a6a1c628cd44d0f6132a32/tumblr_ndym38fc2N1tysqaxo1_1280.jpg
That's pretty much the most blatant evidence of this being largely "STOP COMING INTO MY TREE HOUSE DIDNT YOU SEE THE SIGN?? :sad:".
If playing Candy Crush on your phone doesn't make you a gamer then the world is a bitter unsweetened place indeed.
Moms playing Candycrush.
Cultural appropriation.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Comparing video game culture to the culture of race or skin color.
As if video game culture can be appropriated.
"Privileged women folk know nothing about my people's struggles"
i like how that guy actually thinks that the majority of people today don't look down upon video game culture
@Purple:
"Privileged women folk know nothing about my people's struggles"
I will sing you the song of my people
!
! note: this guy actually has a #SkeletonGate song too
I like how that guy thinks that all women up until this point just sat on the sides mocking video games. You know, it's not like any of us started playing video games from the early days …
Skeletons have always been there
Oh, another thread where people try desperately to reduce "Gamegate" to the story of some random girl being harassed by internet meanies for cheating on her boyfriend :getlost:
Yes, there are people who will harass others on the internet and it's a bad thing, but this is off topic.
That Zelda pic proves a conspiracy, and totally blows my skull.
Oh, another thread where people try desperately to reduce "Gamegate" to the story of some random girl being harassed by internet meanies for cheating on her boyfriend :getlost:
Yes, there are people who will harass others on the internet and it's a bad thing, but this is off topic.
It's all about ethics in gaming journalism, remember.
Can't we stop pretending it's either all A or all B ? Sure, everyone's free to try and derail debates but that stops being funny after a while. It's the mainstream media's job to spread disinfo, no need to do it for them.
Great, we have a culture of skeletons that we can all have fun with and someone had to go an appropriate that culture by making it about female skeletons
#skeletongate #itsaboutskeletonethics
Great, we have a culture of skeletons that we can all have fun with and someone had to go an appropriate that culture by making it about female skeletons
#skeletongate #itsaboutskeletonethics
When the single consistent advocate of GG here has essentially admitted that GGers won't touch you even if you haven't established any sort of ethical improvements as long as you don't say anything against them and would rather push against what they see as the opposition, I don't really see what else there is to say.
Basically I'm just gonna repost CCC's Clickhole link because it's a good summary of the whole mentality: http://www.clickhole.com/article/summary-gamergate-movement-we-will-immediately-cha-1241
[hide]
[/hide]
Can't we stop pretending it's either all A or all B ? Sure, everyone's free to try and derail debates but that stops being funny after a while. It's the mainstream media's job to spread disinfo, no need to do it for them.
There it is again lol.
It's the mainstream media's job to spread disinfo, no need to do it for them.
Hey guys, serious questions for a bit, could I get some sort of update on what's been happening? Apparently, since I've stopped following, it has been revealed that Zoe Quinn did NOT sleep with those gaming journalists? That it was made up?
Also, as I read through this thread, I saw a lot of comments about how the GG people were against equal representation for non-dudes in gaming. When did this enter into the equation?
I do know about all the doxxing and death threats and stuff, so no need for that.
Prec it guys.
[hide]https://38.media.tumblr.com/a99b4e72365ed8a026cb01ccf7d01945/tumblr_ndyu6yaAMo1qjyfteo1_500.png
https://38.media.tumblr.com/04bc50a695a727ac19e416591e5acb74/tumblr_ndyu6yaAMo1qjyfteo2_500.png
https://31.media.tumblr.com/f6ca831d83bb2128c3990c6ddacbe40c/tumblr_ndyu6yaAMo1qjyfteo3_500.png
https://31.media.tumblr.com/2afcdee86f58440b88a8a189c66b3ca6/tumblr_ndyu6yaAMo1qjyfteo4_500.png[/hide]
That was pretty hilarious. I was looking through Know Your Meme and found it's article about it, and I thought "Well, I guess it should be popular enough…" But the otherwise cheery comments are just damn depressing. An unanimous support of skeletongate. Not a single person seems to support it or at least find it slightly funny. It's practically hatred. Can't they take a joke?
Disappointing. I thought it was funny.
awkwardly and uncomfortably exits thread
!
@The:
Hey guys, serious questions for a bit, could I get some sort of update on what's been happening? Apparently, since I've stopped following, it has been revealed that Zoe Quinn did NOT sleep with those gaming journalists? That it was made up?
Basically this is the only substantive thing I can see coming out of any conflicts of interest concerning Quinn: http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-times-about-a-pos-1624707346
Nothing substantial otherwise has been unearthed, and other than that it's purely just allegations of her, it seems the big ethics question came into play for journalism only when there was an allegation that a woman has slept with a gaming journalist to get a good review, nevermind the common perception by gamers that publishers are commonly in bed with websites like IGN anyway. Anyway, afaik pro-ggers have since decided that Zoe Quinn is a scapegoat used by mainstream media and that she isn't actually the issue here and that mainstream media is just disseminating lies sooo whatever
Although, as Cyan said, at least Phil Fish has shut up
Also, as I read through this thread, I saw a lot of comments about how the GG people were against equal representation for non-dudes in gaming. When did this enter into the equation?
It's more of the moral analogue; if GG isn't against these issues or feminists, why do they have such a loathing of talking about these feminist issues? The big thing GG should create if it desires ethics in the industry is a general dialogue of the grievances that are legitimately ethical concerns in the gaming industry such as the ones Stephen mentioned. But oh! The problem isn't about those ethical issues. We're mainly talking about Ethics in gaming journalism! Which evidently isn't true in many circles of GGers: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/10/gamergate-should-stop-lying-to-itself.html
Even when Cruinthe addressed Rin, he pretty much dodged the question by saying "The movement isn't chauvinistic as a whole! Some of its best friends are feminists!" and saying that there isn't anything wrong with discussing equal rep when pretty much any dialogue concerning it is silenced. That anyone who talks about discussing the impact on the "Literally Whos" (not even addressing that these are actual victims and instead propping themselves up as the victims in this case) are "SJWs" or "feminists".
Yes I'm sure there are well intentioned folks in the movement. Yes there are those reporting doxxing. However, it is clear that the movement is poisoned. It is an incubator and a tool for which harm is being directed toward only one focused group, and when the rest of movement cannot uproot the sickness and when it is evident that the sickness will continue to plague it so long as it exists in its current form, it frankly isn't acceptable that people are placated in the movement by simple actions of donations or reports when it doesn't solve the underlying issues with the movement itself.
This is depressing as a further update, but also adds some more info…http://kotaku.com/felicia-day-and-gamergate-this-is-what-happens-now-1650544129
Yeah
It really says something when the majority of a movement clamors to remain anon while people voicing their concerns/criticism do so while putting their jobs and lives at risk (and a majority of GG is anon obv seeing as it thrives in a chan site and also http://t.co/e1cKc5htbw )
Gotta watch out for @TheBonespiracy #SkeletonGate
Excellent, excellent post Purps.
The director of the NYU Game Center wades in: http://gamecenter.nyu.edu/a-message-from-the-director-regarding-gamergate/
Quoted in full:
Up until now I haven’t commented on the GamerGate affair – not out of fear, nor out of some attempt at neutrality, but out of a conscious effort to avoid pouring more energy into an argument that seemed to be a pointless and harmful waste of time.
But now I worry that my silence may be misinterpreted. So now, reluctantly, I am wading into the tumult to clarify my perspective. I’m speaking personally here, but as the Director of the NYU Game Center I hope to reflect what I see as the shared values of the community we are building here at NYU.
Let’s start by stating what should be obvious. There are a number of women who have been the target of extensive and appalling harassment. The nature of this abuse is so repellent and shameful that it dwarfs any other issue involved in the discussion. There’s a reason that the GamerGate story on the front page of the New York Times is about the violent threats levelled at Anita Sarkeesian. The reason is not that the Times is part of a feminist conspiracy – the reason is that the violent threats are the story and any sensible person should be able to see that.
And no, it isn’t possible to point to harassment on both sides or to claim that the harassment is the work of a few isolated trolls. It doesn’t matter what percentage of the people who use the tag are decent folks who wouldn’t hurt a fly. The process by which words and phrases acquire meaning is complex and beyond our control, and the fact is that GamerGate has come to mean something abhorrent.
It has become clear that the Internet can be a hostile and unpleasant place for women. Technology can be a hostile and unpleasant place for women. And sadly, games can be an especially hostile and unpleasant place for women. These are serious problems that demand our attention. Regardless of intent, GamerGate has been inextricably linked to the worst aspects of this hostility and should be opposed.
As for the purported issues of ethics and corruption that are the ostensible motivation behind the ongoing use of the tag, I have not been able to find a single explanation of a coherent GamerGate position. It remains completely unclear what is being called for or denounced. As far as I can tell there are no useful ideas with which to engage here – only an inarticulate mess of confused feelings, uninformed opinions, and second- and third-order meta-arguments.
All of that said, there is one consistent thread in the GamerGate maelstrom which I do want to address. This is the notion that game reviews should be objective, that critics should clearly describe a game’s features and shouldn’t dwell on the political context or ideological values implied or expressed by the game.
I think this position reflects a frustration with a gradual change that has happened in the overall perception of games, of what they are and how we should think about them. There used to be a sense that games should primarily be thought of as a form of technology – as something like appliances – and that writing about games should take the form of the kind of technical product evaluation that you find in Consumer Reports. But there is an emerging consensus around a different way of thinking about games. In this newer view, games are not appliances but works of culture like songs, movies, or TV shows.
Seen as works of culture, games will always have complex relationships to history and society, to the identities of the people that make them and the communities that play them. These qualities exist alongside the game’s formal and technical features, they don’t replace them but are all intertwined – and thinking about one dimension can illuminate aspects of the other. These relationships are often subtle and complicated and can be surprising, multi-layered, contradictory and ambiguous. The reason to consider these qualities is not to demand obedience to one particular ideological view but to inform our understanding and deepen our appreciation of the games we love and enrich our conversations about how and why we love them.
This shift of perspective is not simple, and the process of understanding games as culture is liable to continue to be challenging and contentious. But this is the direction we are moving: away from thinking about games as merely gadgets for children and towards an understanding of games as existing within a complicated web of social values and cultural meanings. If you love games, then you should be happy we are moving in this direction. This is an expression of games’ increasing importance, influence, and significance. We are moving uphill, together, and it’s going to be good for all of us.
Frank Lantz
Director, NYU Game Center
I think he makes a critical point: video games have increasingly become a part of our culture. And culture is inextricable from history, and society. Nothing that is made materializes out of thin air: so why should we expect that to be true for video games? For the longest, this community has been asking to be taken more seriously. The "games as art" movement was about that kind of validation; of our extremely cool experiences with interactive media. A very vocal body of gamers asked for this responsibility - if some don't want to be apart of that, that's fine. But for the rest of us, legitimacy doesn't come free. Now that gaming is a part of culture, there are challenges that needs to be answered. Finally. And criticism is an invaluable part of that.
The violent threats ARE the story.
That Kotaku piece about the pervasive fear critics and even people nowhere near this feel for even mentioning GamerGate is well indicative of what the movement is doing to people.
People who aren't even involved in gaming have never had more reason to be wary of the word "gamer," for all its myriad meanings, and it will surely have consequences down the line.
That's the second worst thing about seeing this happen, to a community I love.
Thank you for the reply, purple man. I appreciate it.
Yeah
It really says something when the majority of a movement clamors to remain anon while people voicing their concerns/criticism do so while putting their jobs and lives at risk (and a majority of GG is anon obv seeing as it thrives in a chan site and also http://t.co/e1cKc5htbw )
Reading the retweets, the common excuse seems to be "Oh yeah well guess what I wouldn't have needed a twitter account if it wasn't for corruption in gaming journalism!!"
Which would be fine if it was maybe a reasonable increase in size I suppose. But when the 80/20 rule comes into play and a majority of tweets result from the vital few of accounts, in this case, a very select range of months of creation, yeah that doesn't really fly
Agree 100% silence
@Purple:
Reading the retweets, the common excuse seems to be "Oh yeah well guess what I wouldn't have needed a twitter account if it wasn't for corruption in gaming journalism!!"
Which would be fine if it was maybe a reasonable increase in size I suppose. But when the 80/20 rule comes into play and a majority of tweets result from the vital few of accounts, in this case, a very select range of months of creation, yeah that doesn't really fly
I've seen a lot of people confess that they got a twitter account for the sole reason of talking about GG, and that's fine (I'm sure the spike isn't just trolls or bots)
However, it still means that the people don't have anything to lose and might as well be anon anyway. They don't have a history of tweets or a network of friends at risk.
Agree 100% silence
I've seen a lot of people confess that they got a twitter account for the sole reason of talking about GG, and that's fine (I'm sure the spike isn't just trolls or bots)
However, it still means that the people don't have anything to lose and might as well be anon anyway. They don't have a history of tweets or a network of friends at risk.
That's why I pointed more towards a "reasonable spike" being fine. So some percentage of those new accounts are geared as "I only have it now because of gg" but the huge spike can probably be more attributed to secondary accounts where there's no danger of your opinions endangering yourself or your own personal circle.
Basically, I highly doubt that there's that many people making accounts and tweeting in october (right now) because they feel so inflamed about the issue just now and decided to pitch their voice in unless they make it for the point of anonymity, which many of those retweets seemed to indicate. There's just too much of a majority of those tweets from such a minority that it's highly indicative of the issue you brought up that it brings a sense of anonymity.
@The:
Also, as I read through this thread, I saw a lot of comments about how the GG people were against equal representation for non-dudes in gaming. When did this enter into the equation?
Basically, the best answer I can give is to repost this:
Read that. It's the perfect representation of what a lot of GamerGaters think of anyone that seeks any kind of progressive inclusion of other groups in gaming.
If you're, in any way, for the inclusion of more characters in gaming who are A: Strong Female protagonists, B: Racial Minorities, or C: Fall under the LGBT umbrella, then you're NOT a "Gamer". You're an outsider who is trying to "Appropriate" their "Culture".
So, as I type this, I am sitting at my work in a Twilight Princess T-Shirt, with Triforce Earrings and am gearing up to play some Smash Bros on my 3DS on my break.
But because under that Twilight Princess T-shirt happens to rest a pair of breasts, I'm NOT a gamer. I'm an outsider appropriating gamer culture.
You can be IN the above mentioned groups and not be a subject of GG's ire if you basically don't speak out in any way about inclusiveness. If you're a woman, or a black person, or a Gay person, who thinks games are just fine exactly the way they are, and that there's absolutely NO Reason to change or add anything to the mix, then you're fine with the GGs. I guess because in their eyes, you would "know your place" and be happy in it. This is where their entire argument about not being Misogynists comes from. Apparently, to them, you have to be equally against all women to be a Misogynist, but if you can find women who happen to agree with you and are nice to THEM, then you're suddenly not in any way Misogynistic because that's apparently how bigotry works. See the classic "Some of my best friends are ___" argument for further information.
I just read an article about Felicia Day at Kotaku, and here's one of the first posts on that site:
@ninjarapper @ Kotaku:
sorry bro progression doesnt make for good games… I dont need to play a video game character that is a transgender wheelchair bound black woman because that demographic isn't fairly represented in videogames.
If you dont like the backlash from attempting to subvert really the hobby I enjoy the most to fit your dumb #$%^ ideals then please go social warrior justice elsewhere you @#$% $%^#.
See? To this guy, the idea of inclusiveness in gaming isn't in the spirit of togetherness and making others feel welcome in gaming. Nope. It's "Subverting" the "Hobby [he] enjoy ~~most" for no other reason than to fit into "dumb ideals".
That really is it. That's the ENTIRE Reason Anita Sarkeesian is getting piled on by GamerGate. She dared to produce videos exploring females in gaming, and is being attacked relentlessly for it. You can try to say it's a special case because she posits some level of misinformation in her videos (Some have claimed outright lies, while some just think she's wrong) but really, she's getting rape threats, death threats, someone threatened a school shooting to cancel one of her events etc.
I mean, Michael Moore gets almost the exact same kind of criticism, and while he gets PLENTY of heated criticism, even actual death threats, but googling it and watching videos about him discussing said death threats, I've found not once instance of him claiming he's gotten rape threats nor does it seem anyone has ever threatened a venue he was going to speak to get one of his engagements cancelled. The only time I can find any of his events getting cancelled was a comedy festival he was doing had only ONE of it's planned dates cancelled due to a scheduling conflict with a local Beer Festival.
My advice to people who legitimately don't agree with Anita is to actually REBUT her in a professional way. Make a video pointing out what you feel are the things she got wrong, write an article. It is possible to be critical of someone without resorting to destroying her or attacking her character.~~
If you're, in any way, for the inclusion of more characters in gaming who are A: Strong Female protagonists, B: Racial Minorities, or C: Fall under the LGBT umbrella, then you're NOT a "Gamer". You're an outsider who is trying to "Appropriate" their "Culture".
Aah…okay, so this is the meat of it all? I'll admit this thread was starting to confuse me.
But, to be fair so we satiate the demands of GGers saying that we're pretending that it's all A or all B, I don't believe that SkeletonGate the movement as a whole stands for chauvinism in the same way that I don't believe that SkeletonGate the movement as a whole stands for anything.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Aah…okay, so this is the meat of it all? I'll admit this thread was starting to confuse me.
Basically this is the core, yes. Now, others will say that "GG is all inclusive! We even have female and minority gamers here!" The fact that a significant portion are incensed not for the sake of gaming journalism ethics but precisely what Rin et al. have described and, key point, have created a significant amount of harm, and that people continue to accept it as "well we're a movement and you'll always have bad eggs" doesn't really fly here.
This also hearkens back to when Tabs posted those people comparing GG to significant civil rights movements as well which is laughable.
@Purple:
Basically this is the core, yes. Now, others will say that "GG is all inclusive! We even have female and minority gamers here!" The fact that a significant portion are incensed not for the sake of gaming journalism ethics but precisely what Rin et al. have described and, key point, have created a significant amount of harm, and that people continue to accept it as "well we're a movement and you'll always have bad eggs" doesn't really fly here.
I blame the internet for making me keep reading GG as "good game"
So the bold, are you saying there are female/minority members in this movement, er for lack of a better word….that are against female and minority representation in games? Huh?
I blame the internet for making me keep reading GG as "good game"
So the bold, are you saying there are female/minority members in this movement, er for lack of a better word….that are against female and minority representation in games? Huh?
As I previously said, "But, to be fair so we satiate the demands of GGers saying that we're pretending that it's all A or all B, I don't believe that SkeletonGate the movement as a whole stands for chauvinism in the same way that I don't believe that SkeletonGate the movement as a whole stands for anything."
The ideas are fairly grounded. I don't think anyone who follows the gaming industry denies that there's a huge amount of problems, one of which is corruption and journalists being paid for reviews. Stephen has previously posted a set of very real, very legitimate grievances one could floor. In that sense, I can see where gamers who believe the movement to be a good thing are coming from. So yes, you will have females rallying against the same idea. Same as any other minority. These are where the GGers are saying "We are not exclusive! Some of our best members are female/other minority!" etc etc
However, at the same time, the movement comprises several other appendages that are disgusting. One very clearly seen is the one in that post Rin reposted. Someone who feels the gamer identity is being appropriated by non-traditional gamers. Others congregate on 8chan or other private hangouts where they discuss the problems with progressive politics and feminists invading their once-pure pastime. Worst, certain chauvinistic entities have come and organized under the same banner. Many of the mods on r/kotakuinaction are affiliated with redpill/anti-fem stuff, as Stephen has pointed out.
Now, the next argument is "So there are a few bad eggs. There's just nothing we can do about it!" However, there have been previous attempts to reorganize under a different banner, but then the gamers say "OH WE'RE BEING INVADED BY PROGRESSIVES". They outline those who object to these intrinsic issues as "Social Justice Workers" or "Feminists". Although having centralized leadership would allow them to state their official position and condemn the misogyny, They outright refuse to have any central leader who can make executive decisions and outline the official stance of the movement. Worse, because they don't have any centralized leadership, it is incredibly vague as to what the demands of the movement are. They want ethics… of some sort. Without a firm grasp as to their direction or mission, it makes it even harder for people who would otherwise not bat an eye at the movement to relate to their position and otherwise see simply the destruction it causes. I don't believe female gamers want games without females as strong leads... but on the other hand I don't really know what they want. It is a headless movement that is currently being consumed by a parasite.
So next after reading all this is, "Well this is just one side of the picture! You're biasing poor MetaMario here!" Regardless about how you paint the picture, the bottom line is that women are being harassed, public venues threatened, and a significant portion of the movement is presenting itself as incredibly misogynistic and repugnant in terms of its campaign. No amount of "gaming ethics" or "we have female gamers!" justifies any of those results unless there is something that can be done to remove the intrinsic issues. If there is no way to be rid of that side, then the movement must reset.
@Purple:
detailed points
It's only fair I read the thread carefully and think about this issue myself. Because I certainly don't want to come off as someone who jumps to conclusions "whoa, is it really [X]? I had no idea!"
So thanks for explaining Purple, and sorry to everyone else if I seemed too ignorant.
Long story short, as has been echoed through the thread time and time again, if there is no central voice to denounce the actions, there is no way for them to say what is and what isn't gamergate.
Purple did a really good job of continuing to discuss the things I was as well, just want to add one more answer to MetaMario's questions.
- So the bold, are you saying there are female/minority members in this movement, er for lack of a better word….that are against female and minority representation in games? Huh?
There are those who, while not necessarily AGAINST increased representation of those characters in games, just people who aren't actively fighting for it.
You can make the argument that there are still major problems with the representation of these groups quite a bit, but one thing I do think needs to be said is, things have certainly gotten BETTER over time. Female representation, for example, HAS gotten better over time.
I'm not going to start a full-on conversation about about female representation in gaming, but for a small isolated example:
Here's Lara Croft's original character design in the PS1 Era of Tomb Raider games:
!
I mean, yeah. her chest size, Short Shorts et al… She was portrayed in the game as being a badass, which is good, but it was all in service of making her eye candy at the same time. I mean, they did Maxim "Photoshoots" of her. No kidding.
Now, look at her design in the modern Reboot:
!
She's clearly still attractive, but the emphasis was taken WAY off of the sexiness and is more balanced. She looks like simply a competent protagonist now. Looking at this character, I feel she could go toe to toe with Nathan Drake and be taken just as seriously, while PS1 Era Lara… not so much.
There are some women on the side of the GGers who basically see this trend, and are content with just letting progression of females in gaming happen naturally.
I can honestly say that I like the trend we're on, but I still think we can make it happen faster. As well, I don't think we'd have gotten where we are today if Female Gamers had just stayed silent and let the myth of "Gamer" Culture being a boys club perpetuate either. I think we've gotten where we are by having actual CONVERSATIONS About these things and starting real dialog. Shooting down the other side and calling them "Misogynistic" or a "Social Justice Warrior" because you disagree isn't helping anyone.
It just so happens that SkeletonGate has been tainted by the death and rape threats to the point that, the movement is pretty synonymous with Misogyny now.
As Purple and I keep talking about, There's no doubt that there are people on the SkeletonGate side of the argument that honestly think there's a point and a good cause to fight here, but the "movement" is so aimless and so scattered that those people really don't have much of a leg to stand on.
If someone would stand up and come up with an actual list of the supposed "Ethics" game journalists were supposed to adhere to and would start focusing their campaign against the worst offenders of the actual issues they claim to be fighting (IGN, EA, the Shadow of Mordor Review Controversy, etc) then they might have something, but as long as they keep focussing on smaller Blog-based gaming sites who happen to also be the sites disagreeing with them... they'll never shake the image of the anti-woman trolls they have now.
And that's even assuming it's possible to shake that image at all without starting a whole new movement. It most likely isn't.
My advice to people who legitimately don't agree with Anita is to actually REBUT her in a professional way. Make a video pointing out what you feel are the things she got wrong, write an article. It is possible to be critical of someone without resorting to destroying her or attacking her character.
it's funny though, the women tropes thing is SO OLD. Arguing with Anita would literally just be scratching the surface of a long history of well researched criticism on women in media. The only problem is that this basically gamers are so unused to the concept of 'feminism' that they just get mad and lash out, when this is LITERALLY a conversation that's been going on for DECADES
Keeping to the Halloween theme, women in horror films, women in slasher films (staring with Halloween in the 1970s specifically) are often troped, and there are dozens of books and articles written about this subject. It's so obvious that women tropes are a real thing in film, that it's already been made into literal satire in MULTIPLE FILMS
!
!
!
All this stuff isn't just made up, it's real criticism of media and it applies to games just as much as film or anything else
It's just frustrating to see such a huge backlash to a discussion that's incredibly tame honestly. It says a lot about the maturity level and just how absorbed into their own little worlds that a lot of gamers are.
It's just frustrating to see such a huge backlash to a discussion that's incredibly tame honestly. It says a lot about the maturity level and just how absorbed into their own little worlds that a lot of gamers are.
Exactly. My whole point is, if you disagree with the concept of progressive issues in games, there are civilized ways of voicing your opinion. This concept of fighting against any kind of progressive change by burying your feet in the sand and throwing a fit at the opposition won't help.
Plus, while we're on the topic, I would REALLY like to see more LGBT representation in gaming. I really don't feel like I have too much in the way of game characters that represent me in that regard in video gaming because the few Trans characters we DO have are either A: Only referred to as Trans in supplemental materials, not in the games themselves at all (Poison in Street Fighter), or B: Had a respectful portrayal at first but it was censored. (Vivian in Paper Mario: TTYD)
I mean, seriously. It didn't take massive amounts of Trans Activism to get Nintendo to put Vivian in Paper Mario. There weren't Japanese trans activists busting down Nintendo's door or writing letters or doing really ANYTHING to get them to make that character, it was just something Nintendo decided to do as part of the natural creative process. But because of the attitudes of people in America still thinking Trans Identities are false or evil or sexually motivated, it got censored in some Countries outside Japan.
As a kid, I think I would have loved to have seen Vivian's portrayal match the Japanese version. It really would have helped make me feel more accepted or normal…. but nope.
Yet, if I were to fight for more of that. Even just fighting for those portrayals to stop getting censored in the west, I'd be branded a "Social Justice Warrior" and dismissed and/or attacked by SkeletonGate.
SkeletonGate is the movement for everyone because it accepts no single ideology. In fact, it doesn't accept any ideology.