Nitwit, in the future when posting any giant image that takes up literally 8 screens, please put it behind a tag.
Gamergate continues to be confused easily offended man-children with no social skills, news at 11.
Nitwit, in the future when posting any giant image that takes up literally 8 screens, please put it behind a tag.
Gamergate continues to be confused easily offended man-children with no social skills, news at 11.
Nitwit, in the future when posting any giant image that takes up literally 8 screens, please put it behind a tag.
Gamergate continues to be confused easily offended man-children with no social skills, news at 11.
I was very tried. Didn't get enough sleep. So I thought I just end it right there. Also piracy be damned! If they try stealing clips of One Piece online and bootleg them on some shitty torrents. If One Piece gets cancelled because of this madness.
Let's just say that anonymous isn't the only ones who can hack and terminate a group a bunch of hippies.
10 year timeskip. lol
Oh wow , is the whole forum anti-GG or just the 5-7 people in this thread?
I still didn't saw any reason to be pro-CG.
Oh wow , is the whole forum anti-GG or just the 5-7 people in this thread?
Not so much against it so much as we have seen little or no reason to actually support the movement.
Which seems to amount to slut shaming women in and out of the industry and doxxing and threatening people for no discernible reason.
Not so much against it so much as we have seen little or no reason to actually support the movement.
Which seems to amount to slut shaming women in and out of the industry and doxxing and threatening people for no discernible reason.
So you're saying "I'm not against slut shaming, threats, or random doxxing (is there even a time doxxing CAN be justified?), I just see little to no reason to do it myself?"
Like no. You're either against what's going on and all the bullshit it pretends to be, or you're a terrible human being. Don't shuffle your feet like a coward and say you're not really against it.
Not so much against it so much as we have seen little or no reason to actually support the movement.
Then why make a thread about it?
Then why make a thread about it?
I believe the original purpose of the thread was to post skeletons
I believe the original purpose of the thread was to post skeletons
So basicaly 50 pages of off-topic discussion
So you're saying "I'm not against slut shaming, threats, or random doxxing (is there even a time doxxing CAN be justified?), I just see little to no reason to do it myself?"
You seriously came to that conclusion based off what I posted?
Let me clear if my comments didn't come off as clear as it should've I don't support this "alleged" movement, it's mentality,it's actions, or anyone else who supports the more visible and negative parts of the movement and would actually welcome it dying in a cruel and miserable way.
Then why make a thread about it?
At the time of the creation of this thread, discussion of the topic was kind of absorbing the news thread, hence making one just to keep this trash away from there.
Also, if you look back several pages there's a number of people who did defend Gamergate and failed epically to convince anyone to see Gamergate as anything more than, as Robby puts it, "easily offended man-children with no social skills."
Personally I don't know how the whole thing can still exist when everyone, media included, saw Gamergate for the trash it became.
Also: skeleton is in the title of the thread and the topic has been there from the first page. We can hardly consider posting of skeletons to be off-topic.
So , are pro-GG voices ok here or is Foolio gonna ban me?
From what I've seen, opinions don't get people banned. But conduct will.
So , are pro-GG voices ok here or is Foolio gonna ban me?
That depends. If I say video games these days are woefully underrepresented in the LGBT character department, and that publishers (Not developers) need to get the sticks out of their asses about not giving developers the freedom to include these characters for fear of pissing off the white male demographic, what would your reaction be?
If it's to call me a filthy piece of shit SJW who needs to be raped a good two or three times to learn me my place*, or something like that, then yeah, you'll get banned.
*Paraphrasing of an actual thing a self professed GamerGater actually said to me.
Otherwise, you won't be banned but be prepared for people to disagree with and counter everything you say.
I'm more towards the GG side cause the sex-negativity of the opposition puts me off. Don't care too much about celebrity drama.
Plus of course , hating the click-bait nature of modern journalism.
I'm mainly here for One Piece so I don't see myself posting much here (especialy since I'm seeing I'm the only one pro here).
I'm more towards the GG side cause the sex-negativity of the opposition puts me off.
"Sex Negativity"?
Do you mean the notion that women characters in games should be actual characters first, sex symbols as a distant second? That "Sex Negativity"?
"Sex Negativity"?
Do you mean the notion that women characters in games should be actual characters first, sex symbols as a distant second? That "Sex Negativity"?
Yes. One can be all of these , it's not a "this or that" situation.
Yes. One can be all of these , it's not a "this or that" situation.
Uh-oh? As an Ex-GGor on this forum. You better be careful of who you trust in the group. Cause I was being used by certain individuals that caused me to get my Facebook account hacked by anonymous trolls and hackers. The latter of which didn't succeed on posting inappropriate stuff on my account. At worse they would doxx me as well. Still haven't gotten my account back for a whole year. :(
Uh-oh? As an Ex-GGor on this forum. You better be careful of who you trust in the group. Cause I was being used by certain individuals that caused me to get my Facebook account hacked by anonymous trolls and hackers. The latter of which didn't succeed on posting inappropriate stuff on my account. At worse they would doxx me as well. Still haven't gotten my account back for a whole year. :(
I'm in the IT industry for a decade now , no worries.
Yes. One can be all of these , it's not a "this or that" situation.
It should: A: fit in with their character. Character should be written first, then "Making them sexually appealing" should be an easy second.
B: should also not be EVERY Female. We need examples of normal females too.
Like, for example, and I'll actually use a rare MALE Example to hammer my point home about how this is a universal thing that women just happen to have done to them way more.
Bridget in Guilty Gear is a crossdressing cutie boy who a lot of "Trap Lovers" really like. It's clear he was designed to be cute first and his character was written second because the two things are incompatible and make no sense with one another. He's a prettyboy whose parents raised him as a girl, so we have the crossdressing part down and explained….. BUT, they made a huge character trait of his that he realizes he's not one, doesn't feel like a girl (so he's not trans, he's a cis boy) and demands that everyone acknowledge him as a man...... who still crossdresses...... and gets mad when people think he's a girl.....
I mean, if they wanted to make a comment about gender nonconformity, they could have had him make statements like "Why can't I be an awesome manly guy while STILL being in a skirt!" this would have worked, but.... they didn't.... they just played the comedy of a boy who crossdresses but somehow still wants to be taken as manly.... this makes no sense.
To say that ALL sexuality needs to be stripped from media is dumb, but it needs to be a better ratio. Like, if I was talking about Comics and de-sexualizing a lot of those characters, if someone popped up and said "and that Emma Frost character, her outfits needs to change too!" I'd be like "Whoa Whoa whoa..... She's like the ONE character who is written in such a way that her outfits make perfect sense.... no, let's focus on the other characters first.... like Amanda fucking Waller! She was fine before the New 52 guys! Seriously!"
I'm in the IT industry for a decade now , no worries.
Cool. Your lucky. I need a working computer so that someday, I'll become apart of anonymous movement and do some good things in life. Just like my friends online before me? I'll take a picture of what my laptop looks like?
[hide] [/hide]
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Also off-topic. lol
It should: A: fit in with their character. Character should be written first, then "Making them sexually appealing" should be an easy second.
B: should also not be EVERY Female. We need examples of normal females too.Like, for example, and I'll actually use a rare MALE Example to hammer my point home about how this is a universal thing that women just happen to have done to them way more.
Bridget in Guilty Gear is a crossdressing cutie boy who a lot of "Trap Lovers" really like. It's clear he was designed to be cute first and his character was written second because the two things are incompatible and make no sense with one another. He's a prettyboy whose parents raised him as a girl, so we have the crossdressing part down and explained….. BUT, they made a huge character trait of his that he realizes he's not one, doesn't feel like a girl (so he's not trans, he's a cis boy) and demands that everyone acknowledge him as a man...... who still crossdresses...... and gets mad when people think he's a girl.....
I mean, if they wanted to make a comment about gender nonconformity, they could have had him make statements like "Why can't I be an awesome manly guy while STILL being in a skirt!" this would have worked, but.... they didn't.... they just played the comedy of a boy who crossdresses but somehow still wants to be taken as manly.... this makes no sense.
To say that ALL sexuality needs to be stripped from media is dumb, but it needs to be a better ratio. Like, if I was talking about Comics and de-sexualizing a lot of those characters, if someone popped up and said "and that Emma Frost character, her outfits needs to change too!" I'd be like "Whoa Whoa whoa..... She's like the ONE character who is written in such a way that her outfits make perfect sense.... no, let's focus on the other characters first.... like Amanda fucking Waller! She was fine before the New 52 guys! Seriously!"
I don't agree much.
Guilty Gear is a fighting game. That means , concept first , fight stlye second , character background maybe not even third.
I don't follow the comic scene much but I've learned not to mind these things too much. All these decades the heroes have changed style/appearence a lot of times. I'm sure the will come a time that even Emma will be wearing full on non-revealing clothing and Amanda Waller is a sexy 80s android or something. As long as the stories are good then it's all good imo.
Oh boy, here we go . . . .
As long as the stories are good then it's all good imo.
Therein lies the problem. I'm going on a limb here and say you're a dude. In which case, to you there's no issue. As far as you know you just play games and there's fun stories and deep stories and good games and bad games. To you it's just another piece of media to consume. Because in the end, the root of the problem is that these stories and worlds are for the most part developed with a white-cis-male-hetero demographic in mind.
The commentary and fighting is not against sexuality, because when all is said and done, a healthy sexuality is a good thing. But this is not what this is. What we see more than anything is objectification, in which women are treated as objects for male arousal to ridiculous degrees. That has nothing to do with sexuality. In fact, it flies against a healthy discussion of sexuality because it compartmentalizes it as revolving around a sexual act of instant gratification where one half, the female, is merely an object to be used and whose sexuality or individuality doesn't matter, while the other half, the male, has to limit itself to what society is depicting as the normal male standard of being sexual animals who lack any degree of control or emotional depth.
That's the stuff that's dangerous, because even if most guys are just normal guys who will still have principles and have a functional brain, the message that's being sent is that it's ok for white-cis-hetero-male players to feel entitled to a woman's sexuality as a reward. Because that's what the media is telling them. You do a good thing, you get a woman, bonus!, and then you move on. And that's a dangerous mentality to feed to men because suddenly we have guys interpreting decent, nice behavior as being "led on" and an excuse for sexual aggression, harassment, or rape. Not to mention cases of men feeling entitled to comment on a woman's body exclusively, to cat call, etc. It's a message that preserves an ancient mentality that women exist for the use of men, something which is not true.
Additionally, as a gamer it's a practice that insults me in the senses that:
Oh wow , is the whole forum anti-GG or just the 5-7 people in this thread?
At this point if you're pro-Gamergate, you have to be able to explain why you hate women and are comfortable being in a hate group supported by the KKK that sends death threats and forces people to flee from their homes for fear of violence, all while setting gaming culture back decades in the public opinion.
You can actually be cool with the idea of "ethics in journalism", or some random facet of the idea, but there's other groups for that, and Gamergate has NEVER been about that, despite any claims to the contrary. It has from the very start been a petty slut-shaming revenge scheme against someone's ex girlfriend, and its ranks rapily filled with some of the most vile, misogynistic cowardly assholes around.
For you to claim to be specifically pro-GamerGate a year later? Means you've either paid zero attention to anything, or you're a terrible person, there's just really no middle ground at this juncture.
For cripes sake, they're sending death threats to an anime company over 1 line of dialogue in an anime no one has even heard of.
Then why make a thread about it?
Because it was eating the news thread alive and the bullshit had to go somewhere.
Come on people , I'm only one guy here. If you keep pilling up like this then the replies will come with a lot of delay.
Then maybe you shouldn't be saying "I agree with the group that openly hates and threatens women." while at the same time apparently not even understanding what the discussion is actually about.
I guess responding to two posts is hard?
(edit fail , let's try this again)
The commentary and fighting is not against sexuality, because when all is said and done, a healthy sexuality is a good thing. But this is not what this is. What we see more than anything is objectification, in which women are treated as objects for male arousal to ridiculous degrees. That has nothing to do with sexuality.
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
That's the stuff that's dangerous, because even if most guys are just normal guys who will still have principles and have a functional brain, the message that's being sent is that it's ok for white-cis-hetero-male players to feel entitled to a woman's sexuality as a reward. Because that's what the media is telling them. You do a good thing, you get a woman, bonus!, and then you move on. And that's a dangerous mentality to feed to men because suddenly we have guys interpreting decent, nice behavior as being "led on" and an excuse for sexual aggression, harassment, or rape. Not to mention cases of men feeling entitled to comment on a woman's body exclusively, to cat call, etc. It's a message that preserves an ancient mentality that women exist for the use of men, something which is not true.
That's silly. Plenty of violence in video games and TV. Kids grow up just fine.
Additionally, as a gamer it's a practice that insults me in the senses that:
- it leads to the systemic reduction and exclusion of women gamers due to the fact that it forces them to have to deal with a hoard of male gamers that feel entitled to ownership of the entire medium.
- it leads to average women not developing interest in gaming and technology due to it being such a male-centric field that continues to cater exclusively to men, even with several efforts not to do so.
You can't say that for all women. My wife complaints about not enough sexy choice in MMORGs for example.
- it leads to overall weaker and faultier games since they're developed to cater to an extremely small-minded world view where the opinion of the white male perseveres while female voices and opinions are silenced (not to mention the voices of people of different cultures and origins as well as LGTBQ groups!.) It makes stories stilted and boring when you constantly have just some gruff guy muttering one liners and women needing rescue and romantic sub-plots that are unnecessary, etc etc. And the sad thing is, this can happen to games we like and respect due to their gameplay. But due to the story arcs and character development being so exclusive and male-centric it's still excluding a majority of the world for no reason whatsoever other than sheer, stupid, reactionary habit. Like seriously, it's like watching a movie and realizing everybody is white and male except for a token black character and a token female character, which makes NO SENSE given how many women exist in the world, not to mention how ethnically diverse the real world is as well.
That's a VERY sex negative attitude. If you want to push for more options then please do. But the "less sex because it's problematic" rhetoric is baseless.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Then maybe you shouldn't be saying "I agree with the group that openly hates and threatens women." while at the same time apparently not even understanding what the discussion is actually about.
Gamergate doesn't hate women.
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
Excessive contextless random objectification paved over everything female to next to no exclusion is what then.
fucking lol at "U GUYS R SEX NEGATIVE".
The guys in the car blasting Brutal Death Metal at top volume with sub woofers in the dog park wondering why people are so sound negative.
(edit fail , let's try this again)
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
And there's how you're an asshole to women. Women aren't objects dude.
That's silly. Plenty of violence in video games and TV. Kids grow up just fine.
And that's how you're an idiot.
Kids grow up fine when they have other positive influences and role models in their life. When they don't, then you have assholes shooting schools and sending bomb threats to feminist speakers.
You can't say that for all women. My wife complaints about not enough sexy choice in MMORGs for example.
I can say that for most women, ie. the average. One individual does not cancel out a reality.
And yea, also, I feel sorry for her for having a husband who sees her as an object.
That's a VERY sex negative attitude. If you want to push for more options then please do. But the "less sex because it's problematic" rhetoric is baseless.
Has nothing to do with sex. Has to do with representation in media of realities of the world, instead of the media feeding a power ego to a group that's in reality a minority.
And again, you didn't even read. It's not pushing for less sex, it's pushing for more variety than just "women = sex."
You're beginning to sink yourself.
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
Hey pal, Tits Mcgee can be a character I guess. Sure whatever.
Why then of the five female characters is every single one Tits Mcgee.
The ninja lady? Tits McGee.
The lady with the gun who was a mercenary? Tits McGee.
The space marine? Tits McGee, now featuring space high heels.
The lawyer the company sends to advise you? Tits McGee. Her briefcase has a g-string on it also.
The death phantom monster lady? Tits McGee with get this, THREE tits.
Also they're all 20 years old somehow.
Or if it's Japanese they're all 14.
"I'm pro-gamegate but I'm cool with women. I'd totally buy more if I could."
That's a VERY sex negative attitude.
From the dude who aligns with a movement based on slut shaming.
So , are pro-GG voices ok here or is Foolio gonna ban me?
only if you talk about corrupt journalism
And there's how you're an asshole to women. Women aren't objects dude.
Objectification is not bad. People want to be onjectified in sex. That goes for both sexes.
And that's how you're an idiot.
Kids grow up fine when they have other positive influences and role models in their life. When they don't, then you have assholes shooting schools and sending bomb threats to feminist speakers.
So are parents to blame or video games? Are you one of those people that say videogame cause violence? Welcome back to the 90s I guess.
I can say that for most women, ie. the average. One individual does not cancel out a reality.
And yea, also, I feel sorry for her for having a husband who sees her as an object.
If you want to talk about the average then pull up statistics and back it up.
My wife just flashed me , thanks.
Has nothing to do with sex. Has to do with representation in media of realities of the world, instead of the media feeding a power ego to a group that's in reality a minority.
And again, you didn't even read. It's not pushing for less sex, it's pushing for more variety than just "women = sex."You're beginning to sink yourself.
If you want to "dress up" existing characters and yes it's less sex. If you want to less sex jokes and acts then yes it's less sex.
I'm ok with more options with any kind , what gamer wouldn't?
Also , what's with all the name calling? Please be more civil.
Sexuality is a normal part of stuff, if even just a little sometimes.
Kind of like cheese is often part of a good meal.
unscrews top of parmesan container and dumps entire contents on pasta dish
Why do you hate cheese?
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
From the dude who aligns with a movement based on slut shaming.
Also how hilariously squeamish they are when anything female gaze is included in anything.
The outroar over that swimmer boy anime some years ago was clearly from the exact same demographic.
Gamergate doesn't hate women.
Uhm. Yes. Yes they do.
What with the violence and death threats and all.
Documented fact, not opinion on this one.
Unless you mean the "view them only as sex objects" aspect.
Uhm. Yes. Yes they do.
What with the violence and death threats and all.
Documented fact, not opinion on this one.
The same for anti-GG. Are you guys woman-haters? No no , let me guess , you are terrorists (2 bomb threats). Or are you pedophiles?
Dammit , so many options…
Objectification is not bad. People want to be onjectified in sex. That goes for both sexes.
We're talking about video games. Not sex. Not video games about sex.
Also I'm giving you waaaaay more benefit of the doubt then you deserve, so define what YOU mean by objectification. That you seem unaware of the loadedness of the word is telling though.
If you want to "dress up" existing characters and yes it's less sex. If you want to less sex jokes and acts then yes it's less sex.
I'm ok with more options with any kind , what gamer wouldn't?
Ok so I'm like maybe going over your head here a bit. But I think maybe I'm putting the message across that too much of something can be bad sometimes. It's a pretty basic nursery school level of wisdom, but I dunno if maybe you grasp that.
Objectification is not bad. People want to be onjectified in sex. That goes for both sexes.
You seriously came to that conclusion based off what I posted?
Let me clear if my comments didn't come off as clear as it should've I don't support this "alleged" movement, it's mentality,it's actions, or anyone else who supports the more visible and negative parts of the movement and would actually welcome it dying in a cruel and miserable way.
First of all, backpedaling is not clarification. But you are still leaving it open-ended, as if to say you think there is actually a part of the movement somewhere that has merit. There isn't.
So , are pro-GG voices ok here or is Foolio gonna ban me?
No, you're being pretty civil regardless of which view is "right". Though complaining that everyone is disagreeing with you and that you're getting "ganged up on" won't get you anywhere… you have an unpopular opinion.
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
Oh boy. Before this post, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt somewhat, in that you saw a bunch of angry anti-GG reactions presented in a biased way, and then concluded that you disagreed with that stuff so you sided with the GGers. Might still be true, as I get the strong impression that you're just making stuff up without a modicum of research into the topics, but yeah. In this case, you don't even know what objectification means. There's no progress to be made if you can't tell the difference between sexually admiring women or their looks, and treating them like pure objects of desire.
That's silly. Plenty of violence in video games and TV. Kids grow up just fine.
No, they don't. Even you think objectifying women is apparently normal. There are huge problems with society and treatment of women. Tons of abuse, disrespect, etc. Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And conversely, just because bad messages are sent and perpetuated by media doesn't mean it CAUSES them. But they're still bad.
You can't say that for all women. My wife complaints about not enough sexy choice in MMORGs for example.
Yes, that's why the word "average" was used and not "all". I'll also point out, by the way, that an MMORPG is a bit different. You're selecting an avatar to play as; it is kind of representing you. It's not a character as much as your roleplay. I'm oversimplifying the issue but it's a very poor example that doesn't represent the point being made even remotely.
That's a VERY sex negative attitude. If you want to push for more options then please do. But the "less sex because it's problematic" rhetoric is baseless.
Gamergate doesn't hate women. I understand the rhetoric and the discussion very well , thank you.
No, see you don't understand. You're super lazy. You probably read a couple of biased summaries on these issues and think you know what's going on. Because you have no idea what you're talking about; you have no idea what people are actually asking for (hint: it's not "let's abolish sexy stuff in games"); you have no idea how girl gamers feel and the social influences involved. You will never be taken seriously if you don't actually have a serious approach to the issue, which involves actually considering the opposition's points and researching them.
The same for anti-GG. Are you guys woman-haters? No no , let me guess , you are terrorists (2 bomb threats). Or are you pedophiles?
Dammit , so many options…
Anti-GG is a stance.
Gamergate is explicitely a movement. Meaning yes actually you are tying yourself to other people and their extremes by association.
Unlike anyone who says "Hey this thing is fucking stupid".
So we're under zero obligation to identify with every mouthbreather on Tumblr. You on the other hand? Well shucks.
@Monkey:
We're talking about video games. Not sex. Not video games about sex.
Also I'm giving you waaaaay more benefit of the doubt then you deserve, so define what YOU mean by objectification. That you seem unaware of the loadedness of the word is telling though.
Sex is part of normal life just as much as death and killing. Should we stop producing games with gore and death?
@Monkey:
Ok so I'm like maybe going over your head here a bit. But I think maybe I'm putting the message across that too much of something can be bad sometimes. It's a pretty basic nursery school level of wisdom, but I dunno if maybe you grasp that.
So , too much of sex is… bad? While killing left and right is peachy?
(edit fail , let's try this again)
I disagree , objectification is part of sexuality.
Um, no it isn't. How would you feel if someone was cat-calling you on the street, and treating you like a piece of meat? I don't think you would not like that, not at all.
You can't say that for all women. My wife complaints about not enough sexy choice in MMORGs for example.
Um…. there are different options for everyone, things cannot be focused just on one type of stereotype. It's not fair at all. How would you feel if all games were centered around women, but very little about men? You would want things to be equal because you don't want to be oppressed. Try to put yourself in other people's shoes.
Gamergate doesn't hate women.
That is incorrect. They do hate women. If they did not, they would have not caused harm to those women that got attacked and feared for their life.
The same for anti-GG. Are you guys woman-haters? No no , let me guess , you are terrorists (2 bomb threats). Or are you pedophiles?
Dammit , so many options…
Gamer gate is an actual documented community with actual horrific crap being done. It is a collection of misogynistic pieces of shit, and anyone that at this point, actively goes by that label? Agrees to be lumped in with that.
"Anti-gamer gate" is not a group with dedicated websites and membership or a mission statement. It is simply, everyone else in the world with the sense to NOT be part of a blatant hate group that thinks its dumb. If you automatically think every single person who think Gamergate is awful is specifically part of some mysterious other club based purely around hating gamergate, that's half your problem right there chief.
It's not "us vs them". Its not democrats vs republicans. Its not Dallas Cowboys versus Minnesota Vikings. It's NOT two organized groups.
If you still do not understand, it is like "Nazis" and "People that are not nazis". "KKK" and "people that are not KKK." It's "douchebags that hate women" and "normal people that treats other people like human beings."
@Monkey:
Anti-GG is a stance.
Gamergate is explicitely a movement. Meaning yes actually you are tying yourself to other people and their extremes by association.
Unlike anyone who says "Hey this thing is fucking stupid".
So we're under zero obligation to identify with every mouthbreather on Tumblr. You on the other hand? Well shucks.
Ok then , as a movement Gamergate has denounced all these activities. Sourced and everything.
That is incorrect. They do hate women. If they did not, they would have not caused harm to those women that got attacked and feared for their life.
And, if I may add, in disproportion to the amount of harassment thrown at men who hold similar opinions.