MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Bomb Threat at DC GamerGate Meetup Shows There Are Bad Eggs on the Other Side

Militant anti-feminists and scorched-earth social justice warriors deserve equal speech rights

GamerGateGamerGateA Washington, DC-area bar hosting a meetup for supporters of GamerGate was briefly evacuated Friday night after someone called in a bomb threat. Reason contributor Cathy Young, who attended the event and has written positively about the online social protest movement, gave her take on the happenings here.

GamerGate is the name ascribed to a diffuse online community ostensibly targeting corruption in video game journalism, political correctness run amok, and certain progressive feminist critics of video games and internet culture. Several of the group’s most respectable leaders, including the American Enterprise Institute’s Christina Hoff Sommers and Milo Yiannopoulos, were in attendance on Friday.

I say leaders, but really, GamerGate has no such people. Like Anonymous or Occupy Wall Street, it lacks formal structure or a set of definite goals. This means, of course, that people can very easily claim the GamerGate mantle in pursuit of less noble ends—and that GamerGate as an entity gets the blame for vile, misogynistic personal attacks made against critics of the movement, like Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn. Indeed, bomb and death threats made by GamerGate activists have forced Sarkeesian to cancel speaking engagements and other events in the past.

But the events last Friday should make clear that GamerGate has no special monopoly on making threats or conducting smear campaigns. While it’s not clear who specifically made the bomb threat, Twitter personality Arthur Chu—a celebrated Jeopardy! winner, Salon columnist, and vitriolic critic of GamerGate—personally spearheaded efforts to convince the bar, Local16, to cancel the event. He sent emails to Local16 management asserting that GamerGate was a “right wing hate group and harassment campaign that’s caused tremendous damage to my life.” Letting the meetup take place was akin to “letting anti-feminists gather to celebrate the harassment and intimidation of women in tech,” he claimed.

I’m not sure how GamerGate has damaged Chu’s life—indeed, criticizing the movement has given Chu an impressive podium in his post-Jeopardy! career—but it seems hyperbolic (to say the very least) to brand the entire meetup as a right-wing, anti-women hate group. As Yiannopoulos pointed out in his write-up of the event, attendees included a lesbian video game designer—who currently relies on a cane and had some difficulty evacuating the after the bomb threat—and her fiancé. Presumably these are not the right-wing opponents of women in tech that Chu was talking about.

Some have suggested that Chu’s cryptic Tweet, “Whatever, it's ending tonight with them meeting up there,” amounted to a threat of violence. This seems like a stretch (and Young agrees). To make absolutely sure, I emailed Chu to ask if he had any knowledge of the bomb threat. He responded: “I know nothing about it. Please leave me alone.”

Chu seems unable to separate the real abusers from the honest critics of his perspective, and plenty of other people on both sides of GamerGate have done the same. The mentality of “you either agree with me or you’re a Nazi,” is often on display.

But threats of violence against another group are never okay, and that goes for militant GamerGate anti-feminists, scorched-earth social justice warriors, and everyone in between.

Photo Credit: Youtube

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • John Titor||

    Thought about using an image of bob-omb instead.

    That's it, Soave! Turn in your juvenile, psychopathic gamergater badge!

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    Took me a minute to find this.

    Shame on you, Robby.

  • SIV||

    Indeed, bomb and death threats made by GamerGate activists have forced Sarkeesian to cancel speaking engagements and other events in the past.

    *citation needed*

    I have no affiliation with GG, don't play and electronic games and don't follow the whole mess. I think one of the only things I know about it at all is Sarkeesian canceled some appearance over the fact that firearms could not be banned from the facility and she pointed to a "threat" the authorities had deemed not credible" as an excuse for not showing up. No "force" was involved.

  • ||

    The information I have seen showed that the bomb threat was made by a Brazilian Game Journalist. Also the Utah cops made a statement that the there was no reasonable threat to Sarkeesian or to attendants. She chose to cancel. There was no "forced".

  • Calbeck||

    Sarkeesian: "I'm in danger!"

    FBI: "No, you're not."

    Sarkeesian: "Yes I am, and everyone attending this event must be disarmed!"

    FBI: "You're not in danger, and that's illegal under Utah state law."

    Sarkeesian: "I'm canceling because I'm in danger and they wouldn't disarm the psycho #GamerGaters no doubt skulking around in the crowd!"

    ABC News: "Oh, you poor dear! Tell us all about it."

  • ||

    Actually I think they could disarm them...she wanted anyone who was issued a concealed permit (just the permit) to be bared from her speech.

    "The speaker, Anita Sarkeesian, canceled the presentation. She was concerned about the fact that state law prevented the university from keeping people with a legal concealed firearm permit from entering the event."

    My bold

    http://www.usu.edu/ust/index.cfm?article=54179

  • ||

    She wanted people who had permits excluded, or people actually carrying a gun with a permit excluded?

    I would not be the least bit surprised if she wanted permit holders excluded simply because they are permit holders.

  • Dweebston||

    Does a concealed-carry permitted attendee have a legal obligation to reveal to the owner of a venue whether or not he's carrying at any given time? In fact, how does a private venue get access to the list of concealed carriers? Is that public record? And if the concealed carrier doesn't report himself or vacate the premises, is he legally liable? And is that a worse crime than sneaking a gun into a conference and murdering someone without ever having gotten a permit to carry concealed in the first place?

  • ||

    Read the article. It says what I quoted and bolded:

    "people with a legal concealed firearm permit"

  • Dweebston||

    Well, christ, if I wanted to read I'd have started with Soave's piece.

  • Dweebston||

    I set down my drink and read what you'd written. I'm not certain how I feel about that. On the one hand I don't mind private venues barring concealed carriers, and I assume the law applies only to public venues (like the university). On the other hand, I'm certain the law carves out exceptions for courtrooms, police precinct, city halls, capitol buildings, etc. Which is a little bit arbitrary to prevent the venue holder from setting their rules for the venue.

    But my original point stands: even if Sarkeesian had coopted the university into illegally barring concealed carriers, it's not as though she's magically shielded from people intent on murder. But it's all about gestures for some people.

  • ||

    "I set down my drink and read what you'd written."

    My rely was for Suthenboy.

    =)

  • Dweebston||

    I realize you can't have infinite threading and I'm glad for a number of reasons that Reason doesn't look like Reddit, but a tag in the byline like

    Corning | 5.4.15 @ 11:12PM | # to Dweebston

    wouldn't go amiss.

  • Calbeck||

    Except, of course, the only point of doing so would be to protect against a non-threat.

    And it would still be illegal to deny people access on that basis in ABSENCE of a credible threat.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Of course, her bullshit worked, didn't it? She's even got an otherwise thoughtful and reasonable guy like Robby accepting the premise that the Gamergaters are bad guys when, as far as I can tell, the violence is pretty one-sided.

  • cfskyrim||

    I have to say that I understand and am more sympathetic to the gamers here (full disclosure, I quite enjoy games myself.) Here we have a bunch of people enjoying their games and here comes this dumbass Sarkeesian trying to destroy their favorite past time because of some perceived injustice that she made up in here demented, warped little mind.

    When you fuck with people that have never caused any harm to you and are just going about their lives then then tend to get quite pissed and irrational. I would say their irrational behavior is only boosted by the fact that we have all witnessed the progs and SJW's destroy everything they touch.

    If it was anyone else fucking with video games (think of ill informed mothers, they didn't get treated like this) I don't think the gamers would react like this.

  • ||

    I think a significant factor isn't even about feminism, but people trying to politicize something that many people would rather remain purely apolitical. Lots of people just want to play some fun games without constantly being lectured at and "educated". Video games are one of the few media forms in which haven't been totally politicized.

    Of course, they won't stop anyone from making action games, but they might inject some political message into the narrative to tell everyone how they ought to be thinking and voting.

  • Dweebston||

    This entirely, full stop, blockquoted and preserved on a placard for future generations. Politics is corrosive and people like Sarkeesian will always reach for the political solution ahead of any voluntary effort to remediate gaming or games. Rather than carve out an isolated niche where her aspirants can feel safe playing a curated selection of titles by similarly-minded developers, they go immediately for the jugular by, say, sleeping with reviewers or engaging in journolist story framing. They're not so much underhanded as seedy. And tiresome.

  • ||

    The thing is that Sarkeesian is a living example of what happens to people who live in an overly politicized culture. People don't want to be like her. And yet, people like her, they have a missionary zeal to politcize anything and everything as part of a larger social mission. One must always be aware of the political content of everything one does, in order to search for and root out traces of latent racism, sexism, or any kind of politically incorrect implication. Since everyone is subconsciously racist, for people to not examine their own activities in this way is a true moral failing. And thus, for some group of people to reject this way of life is a blasphemous sign of rejection of the ultimate project of eliminating racism and sexism. Ergo, if one wishes to live in an environment where one doesn't have to constantly examine oneself for traces of sexism, one must be a sexist. If you aren't constantly thinking about the political implications of every activity you perform, you are part of the problem, perpetuating an unjust system. It makes perfect sense from their point of view, a view in which people have moral obligation to "make the world a better place". But it's also an incredibly fanatical and stifling way of living. The kind of living that turns people into Anita Sarkeesian, shrill, fanatical, devoid of joy and fun, and ruthlessly regimented.

  • GILMORE||

    "Video games are one of the few media forms in which haven't been totally politicized."

    Which is why they suddenly turned their attention to it.

  • ||

    NNNNEEEERRRRRRDDDDDDSSSSSS!

    -Ogre

  • Banjos||

    Mini skirt Troi or camel toe Troi?

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

  • Banjos||

    The theory I heard for why this happened was that they ran out of men's uniforms for extras. I have fully accepted this theory without question.

  • GILMORE||

    Of course a CIS-SCUM like you *would* assume that.

  • ||

    You guys seen Other Space?

    Not bad really.

  • GILMORE||

    No.

    ". a young, inexperienced and highly flawed crew embarks on a routine exploratory space mission. Suddenly, their ship, the UMP Cruiser, is drawn through a portal into a different, mysterious universe. With no maps, no contact, and no way back home, Captain Stewart Lipinski, First Officer/Stewart's-Older-Sister Karen Lipinski and their crew have to learn to work together"

    Sounds like an American ripoff of "Hyperdrive"? Because i expected that to happen sooner or later.

  • cfskyrim||

    I tend to play a lot of strategy games and rpg's. Females have always been represented in these genres and with rpg's they have always either been the lead character or one of the several main characters.

    Nowadays one has the option to choose the sex of the character. I think this is more to do with games becoming more advanced and more options becoming available. Also more girls/women are becoming interested in gaming and so they have a wider audience to cater to.

    Traditionally gamers have been dudes and the industry catered to them. Now they are changing as their audience widens. These SJW's are doing nothing more than showing up with no knowledge of what they're talking about and saying, "Why aren't there more female characters?" Gamers have tried to point out that there have been several high profile lead female characters and that the audience has been traditionally men.

    Of course these perfectly understandable answers are not good enough for dumbasses like Sarkeesian.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Of course these perfectly understandable answers are not good enough for dumbasses like Sarkeesian.

    That's because that's not the real reason behind their outrage. What they can't stand is this. Did you laugh or at least crack a smile? Congratulations you are, or once were, a teenaged boy. You know doesn't find that funny? 20-something middle-class women. Indeed, the entire identity of your average 20-something middle-class woman is predicated on being in direct opposition to the aesthetic preferences of males 13-21. Now in the past, they might have just rolled their eyes and just can't even-ed, but now, everything that doesn't explicitly cater to their demographic must be pathologized. To them, even admitting that there are other demographics that have equally valid aesthetic norms and expectations is a sign of utter moral degeneracy. Had these women been born 40 years earlier and around 9,000 miles away, they would have happily marched to the Killing Fields so that they could hack people to death with farming implements for the crime of wearing glasses or speaking French.

  • Banjos||

    "What they can't stand is this. Did you laugh or at least crack a smile? Congratulations you are, or once were, a teenaged boy."

    Some of us vagina folk love the silly, stupid, and immature too HM. I laughed. I'm still laughing.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • esteve7||

    I can't stop laughing at this video. Definitely a pick me up on a bad day

    I'm not GG but generally if it's something the left lies and screams holy hell about....

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The floating "get rekt" text gets me every time.

  • GILMORE||

    Wow, just wow.

  • lap83||

    "your average 20-something middle-class woman is predicated on being in direct opposition to the aesthetic preferences of males 13-21. Now in the past, they might have just rolled their eyes and just can't even-ed, but now, everything that doesn't explicitly cater to their demographic must be pathologized. "

    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Radical feminists seem more abundant than they really are because they're so loud and shrill. Sure, women in that category won't get the references, but the average woman is not going to go on a tirade against something just because she doesn't understand it. Part of the feminist myth is actually convincing everyone that they are normal women, but they're not.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration.

    When I wrote, "they might have just rolled their eyes" I specifically had the SJWs in mind as "they". I should have made that clearer.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Or to be more specific, I believe much of the animus against gamer culture expressed by the anti-Gamergate crowd is just a manifestation of the larger "war on boys" identified by Christina Hoff Sommers. Much of gamer culture is an expression of how young men view the world: what they find interesting, what they are concerned about, and how they formulate their identity. As such, to radical feminists, such a culture is an anathema. Because of their ideology, they automatically assume that because they are not young men, the culture of young men is in direct opposition to theirs. Therefore, they seek to emasculate it, i.e., render it safe and ineffectual. And because, at heart, they are nothing more than amoral, violent sociopaths, they have no compunction about using the force of the state to systematically destroy young men's culture.

  • Dweebston||

    The Five Nights at Freddy's ensemble gets me. I never played the game, but I watched some playthroughs and theorizing videos, and... damn. Dark.

  • Brendan||

    I rewatched this LP and even though I knew where the scares were, I still jumped.

    I had to buy it on Steam, didn't make it through the first night, knew the end was coming and still got a scare.

    I may still buy all the sequels.

  • ||

    Well if you are going to use a video at least go with mega triggering original:

    Farming Simulator Mad Skill | No Plow | 360 Crop Rotation |

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEJHrmliVQw

  • GILMORE||

    " Indeed, bomb and death threats made by GamerGate activists have forced Sarkeesian to cancel speaking engagements and other events in the past."

    Were any of these so-called 'threats' ever actually tied to anything related to 'gamergate'? Or any particular person?

    Last i checked they never tied any threats to a single person actually associated with the Gamergate handle.

    Is this sort of like the UVA rape case, where you're supposed to assume the worst until otherwise given permission not to?

  • GILMORE||

    That statement (re = Gamergate "bomb threats") above reminds me of the Buzzfeed article where the girl got some Tweets from the ridiculous racist who merely said, "I hate niggers and i'm with Gamergate!", and so they *ran with that story*

    Is the idea we just have to believe the hysterical claims made by the professional victim mongers, because *not to* is just so 'dangerous'? (*because otherwise you get the Ana Merlan treatment?)

  • Dweebston||

    The UVA case turned out so radically different from the norm because people refused to assume the worst and started poking holes. And going forward, I think the Sarkeesians of the world will find it rather difficult to engender a ton of sympathy for their unsourced, uncredited accusations involving no police reports.

  • GILMORE||

    "I think the Sarkeesians of the world will find it rather difficult to engender a ton of sympathy for their unsourced, uncredited accusations involving no police reports.'

    Are you kidding? Here we have an example of a journalist asserting as a *point of fact* that there had been "gamergate bomb-threats"

    while they may 'lose a few' like the UVA rape case... they win far more than they lose when it comes to "Narrative Creation". and the media happily enables whatever bullshit becomes part of the 'discourse', facts be damned.

    see = "Rape Culture"

  • Dweebston||

    Do they, though? Which cases have they "won" that enjoyed anywhere near the publicity that the UVA or Duke Lacrosse fails were subjected to? Just look at the cases they've ignored because the racial alignment was wrong. I'm not saying the can't or haven't managed to get some market penetration with this shit, but it gets awfully repetitive when they're offering up a bland accusation with a ton of inconsistencies and following it up with paypal links.

  • Calbeck||

    1) We're not militant. The worst "threat" we're ever supposed to have sent was, according to the FBI, neither a threat nor sent by us. Ms. Sarkeesian saying it was doesn't make it so.

    2) We're not anti-feminist. We're pro-equality. Of course, to many modern feminists, that IS anti-feminist, so your mileage may vary. If you oppose equality in the name of feminism, please don't.

    3) Repeating that we are militant anti-feminists, ad-infinitum, doesn't make it happen any more than wishing the sky would turn green.

    Yours Sincerely,

    #GamerGate

  • John Titor||

    Dear #Gamergate,

    I admit that I am more sympathetic to you than your opponents, but I find your tactics and intellectual rigor lacking. I am satisfied with your constant bush war with the vapid emotional musings of feminist individuals with deeply rooted personal and psychological problems; however, I find the vapid emotional musings of many gamergaters equally unconvincing. Might I suggest you take a page from the New Atheist movement, which had its own issues with attempts to push social justice concepts? Sam Harris' excellent criticism of social justice arguments is a good start. There's nothing of that intellectual calibre coming from Gamergate and too many moronic Twitter arguments rife with fallacies.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Dr. Lieutenant John Titor, PhD, Time Traveler.

  • Calbeck||

    Dear Mr. Titor,

    In future, if you wish to reply to something, you might find it more effective to actually reply to it rather than meander off into unrelated territory.

    Also, your moonrocks are in, and they are quite delicious.

  • John Titor||

    Dear Goddamn Moonrock Thief,

    Just providing some friendly advice to all those who use the #Gamergate tag. You might be pushing or holding back ideological arguments, but Harris took those arguments and buried them.

    And above all, be polite but vicious. Drives the bastards nuts.

    Lord General John Titor Esq.

  • Mr. Anderson||

    After watching Sam Harris try to invent a moral code from his feelz and proclaim it the revealed truth I decided he's just the religious but he claims to fight with s different bend. One where he is the messiah.

  • John Titor||

    I'm pretty sure that in four hundred years Harris is going to be a prophet of some New Age cult. I'm not defending everything Harris has written, just that he did a really good job absolutely massacring social justice positions.

  • ||

    Seconded, and as far as I can tell Sarkeesian's fame/infamy is entirely the result of a Streisand effect type reaction to gamer's obsession with her. These people are best ignored. Similar thing at least for me with Quinn. Never would have heard of these people without the overreaction.

  • Calbeck||

    So, faking a death threat already debunked by the FBI for purposes of promoting oneself on national television registers not at all with you, eh?

    Okay.

  • ||

    I don't give two shits about what she has or hasn't done. If she wants to make retarded videos on the internet or make retarded speeches I don't care. I will buy and play the games I want to, who gives a shit what she think about them? Who cares who Zoe Quinn was sleeping with? Who cares if some gaming journalists are idiots? Don't read them then and move on with your life.

  • ||

    I don't care about many of the things you say you don't care about.

    Fact remains the leading game site before gamergate were (and pretty much still are) corrupt and they were giving out shitty info in regards to games I was looking at purchasing.

    Maybe I was an idiot for reading those sites to find games I wanted to play. Gamergate informed me not to trust those site. Even if that is all gamergate ever does (inform people about crap games news) it is a huge service to gamers.

  • John Titor||

    Maybe I was an idiot for reading those sites to find games I wanted to play.

    There was a lot of pretty blatant signs way before gamergate. Off the top of my head, when IGN published their extremely positive Mass Effect 3 review while their site was plastered with Mass Effect 3 advertisements. Or the massive amount of 'reviewer parties' varies triple-A titles hosted.

  • ||

    "There was a lot of pretty blatant signs way before gamergate."

    Sort of. I got banned on Polygon and shadowbanned on Kotaku only a few months before gamergate.

    I really think there was a ratcheting up just before gamergate broke. But to be honest aside from the bans I did not notice. I did not know where to go to even see the opposing view and the corruption.

    Again I admit I was probably an idiot. Congrats that you were not one. I did not see what you saw. I think there were (and are) a lot of people like me who just did not know.

    Note: I never read anything on 4chan in regards to games nor Reddit nor any sites aside from Polygon Escapist and Kotaku. My Youtube usage consisted of watching lets plays with no real discussion about game news.

  • ||

    Yeah, the game media has been corrupt as fuck since forever. And it is because they are bed with the developers and publishers not people like Quinn. There is is a wealth of information on the internet, there is no reason to rely on one or two reviews. Hell you don't even need to rely on review sites at all with everyone giving their opinions.

  • ||

    "there is no reason to rely on one or two reviews."

    Polygon Kotaku and Escapist are three different sites.....
    Maybe i should have read Destructoid and Rock paper scissors as well...

    Oh wait THEY ALL WERE MEMBERS OF GAMESJOURNOPROS!!!

    "not people like Quinn."

    How about people like Nathon Grayson?

  • ||

    You should start at Metacritic, look through both the professional reviews and the user reviews. Or find a reviewer you trust, or whatever. There are tons of them all over the place, plus plenty of places to find user opinions (including Steam user reviews).

    Hell, unless its a developer I already really trust, I just add an interesting game to the wishlist and come back to it later when its on sale or something to see how opinion has shaken out (plus if i'm "duped" its for the sale price). I don't even know who Grayson is, apparently writes for Kotaku who I've never considered a good site for reviews.

    And you didn't even address the historical corruption. Places like IGN and gamespot have been corrupt as shit corrupt for years and they used to be some of the few places putting out reviews. Now there are thousands.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Those weren't the only problems though. SJWs got influence in these communities. DIGRAA

  • SusanM||

    Of course, all threats against people you disagree with are fake because one was shown to be unproven but the threats against the people you agree with are, without a doubt, true and credible.

    Same old story.

  • ||

    Just to point out all threats against gamergate or Anita or anyone discussed in the story were fake. No one was ever in any danger.

    There were no bombs no guns no reasonable intent or capability of physical harm to anyone.

  • SusanM||

    I stand corrected.

    FWIW I think the best solution to this whole nonsense is this: Take all the Gamergaters and all the SJWs, send them off and dump them in the middle of some civil war over in Africa. Maybe then they'll all understand that an entertainment medium isn't worth fighting over.

  • ||

    "send them off and dump them in the middle of some civil war over in Africa."

    Well I am a gamergater....

    Anyway isn't nice that we have this huge conflict of ideas and no one is really getting hurt? I mean you do understand that it is a fight...you even say so...yet no one in the fight is getting hurt.

    This is a good thing no?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    God, Corning, why can't you have a real hobby, like whatever Susan does in her free time?

    *eye rolls* I just can't even!

  • SusanM||

    I finished a 3 hour Sniper Elite III XBONE live session, HM. Somehow I think Corning can dig that. ;)

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Well, I heard that Corning is a cheeky camping scrublord. Can you confirm?

  • SusanM||

    Not sure if I've played against him. I'll keep an eye out.

  • ||

    "Somehow I think Corning can dig that. ;)"

    I am old...I play 4x games and GTA5/online until some screaming kid kills the whole crew just as we are about to finish a hiest and then I rage quit.

    You would kick my ass in any online first person shooter except Enemy Territory.

  • John Titor||

    No, fuck you Corning, I want you and a feminist critic in the Thunderdome with machetes by next week!

  • SusanM||

    It's better than physical fighting. But I do wish both sides could get a little perspective here.

  • Rasilio||

    That is because you don't understand the fact that is is not and has never been about the games but rather has always been about SJW attempts to control social discourse and punish those who commit wrongthink and a group of hobbyists who got tired of it and started fighting back.

  • GILMORE||

    "is is not and has never been about the games but rather has always been about SJW attempts to control social discourse and punish those who commit wrongthink'

    Exactly.

    its basically "Culture Wars", transferred to social-media.

    And its mainly between groups mostly *on the left*, between the truly psychopathic SJWs, and the somewhat more-sane general population that is just sick to death of their fucking whining and insistence on cultural predominance.

    I still find it sort of amazing that we live in a time when people can talk about "rape culture" and be taken seriously. Its mass-hysteria, and it exists only because the SJW crowd will try and destroy anyone who dares to criticize them.

    HM once compared their whole shtick to "Struggle Sessions". and that's not even hyperbolic.

  • Dweebston||

    HM once compared their whole shtick to "Struggle Sessions". and that's not even hyperbolic.

    I see now where Margaret Atwood may have gotten inspiration for that scene involving women tearing apart a supposed political dissident...

  • Mr. Anderson||

    Someone tries to interfere with your private transactions, and you tell them to fuck off, then both are at fault? I don't follow that freedom of association is only confined to certain criteria, and entertainment isn't valuable enough to defend. If anything entertainment being subjective expression would be precisely where the battles for control will be fought, and should be fought.

  • SusanM||

    Again, what, apart from stoking latent paranoia, can Sarkeesian do to interfere with your transactions adding her thoughts to the marketplace of ideas? I'm just not seeing the connection between "Middling YouTube series" and Alaskan Gulags.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Again, what, apart from stoking latent paranoia, can Sarkeesian do to interfere with your transactions adding her thoughts to the marketplace of ideas?

    The chilling effect that calls for censorship and onerous regulations have upon what can be depicted in the narratives of games? Surely you're familiar the connection the Comics Code had to the hysteria that was fomented around comic books in the 1950's by a crank who published a book titled Seduction of the Innocent, aren't you?

  • SusanM||

    If you want free speech then you're going to have to accept the risk of that. I'm sorry but I don't see the alternative - or the ideological consistency of saying, in effect, "To protect speech we must suppress it".

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    If you want free speech then you're going to have to accept the risk of that. I'm sorry but I don't see the alternative - or the ideological consistency of saying, in effect, "To protect speech we must suppress it".

    Who's saying that but Anita and company? What I'm saying is that her speech doesn't trump mine. A heckler's veto is not free speech.

  • Brendan||

    Right back at ya.

  • ||

    I think you are confused about the history of gamergate.

    Zoe post then quinspiracy videos then massive deletion of reddit posts then gamergate hashtag then gamers are dead articles then journalists started conflating criticism of anita with gamergate then internet gamer nerds will be internet gamer nerds so they started talking about anita also.

    gamergate is not about Anita it is about ethics in journalism. She came into the picture after the fact and was/is used by the game journalists as a shield against criticism of them.

    Note: I became aware of gamergate after the gamers are dead articles but before anita was even discussed in regards to gamergate.

    Note2: yes there was/is a political movement to change the games and shame unapproved developers and promote SJW approved games which includes the gaming press, academia, Digra and the IGDA.

  • SusanM||

    Quite possibly. Many timelines abound and I can't even begin to figure where to start sorting it out. Mostly because Gaming journalism credibility ranks below litter laws in Jakarta and the history of cheese on the list of things I really care about. And I'm kind of at peace with entertainment journalism being shills for whatever they cover. In fact, I'd love to see Reason get Kurt Loder to do a piece on how Rollin Stone operated.

    I guess one of the things that gets me is that both sides could easily(!) agree to grow the industry so that there's room for both rather than have a pointless battle over control. But agendas abound as well, so that's unlikely to happen.

  • GILMORE||

    Saying "gamergate" was 'about' gaming journalism (or even 'gaming', at root) is like saying WWI was about Serbian Nationalism

    one affected the other, but its not why it turned into a shitstorm

  • Calbeck||

    I joined up because discussions of ethics in gaming journalism were being shut down, deleted, and people banned, across numerous gaming websites, on the argument that talking about various scandals was "harassment".

    It didn't matter if anyone in particular was being discussed, or even if any mean words were being said. The topics THEMSELVES were considered harassment. And on sites where such speech was tolerated, editors from the OTHER sites would show up and demand to know why the tolerant site was allowing "harassment" to take place on their forums.

  • Calbeck||

    When it was pointed out that this sort of mentality was nothing short of censorship, it was sneeringly claimed that "censorship" is a concept which applies only to government agencies, simply not existing at all in the private sector.

  • Brendan||

    Even better was the same people who scream "OPPRESSION!" anytime they don't get their way in a private ir public forum were falling over each other to explain how censorship is only something the government can do and that private parties can remove any posts they want.

    They would even unironically post this xkcd cartoon as an attempt to be glib about supposed "gamergate" supporters complaining about censorship.

  • Rasilio||

    What you are missing is the the battle for control is the entire point of the SJW crowd. That is what they do.

    The gamergaters would never have cared otherwise

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    yes there was/is a political movement to change the games and shame unapproved developers and promote SJW approved games which includes the gaming press, academia, Digra and the IGDA.

    Which I always found hilarious. How much of the gaming industry is in Asia? Do you think the design team assigned to, say, Bayonetta 3 gives a single, solitary fuck about what Sarkeesian has to say?

  • GILMORE||

    "Do you think the design team assigned to, say, Bayonetta 3 gives a single, solitary fuck about what Sarkeesian has to say?"

    When the united states/UK represents ~ 30% of total world wide game sales = Yes. in some way, if only to track consumer behavior and things affecting it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    When the united states/UK represents ~ 30% of total world wide game sales = Yes. in some way, if only to track consumer behavior and things affecting it.

    You'd think that, but from what I've seen, Japanese, and now Chinese, game companies seem quite happy to develop, market and publish their games to a primarily Asian audience. Hell, the US didn't see it's first Fire Emblem title until 2003, and the latest in the series to cross the pond still has plenty of stereotypical anime cleavage-bearing waifu.

  • GILMORE||

    "You'd think that, but from what I've seen, Japanese, and now Chinese, game companies seem quite happy to develop, market and publish their games to a primarily Asian audience.'

    yeah, you're generally right about them. I was just saying that, as ridiculous as the Sark types are, they have an effect.

    also, this has probably been deemed 'problematic' in 11 dimensions.

  • ||

    Do you think the design team assigned to, say, Bayonetta 3 gives a single, solitary fuck about what Sarkeesian has to say?

    Nah

    But for some fucked of reason EA does (did?) give a shit about what she had to say about their games. Also GTA5 was pulled from shelves at target in Australia. There are numerous examples of devs and games being shut down and changed. They did try to take Hatred off steam. There was one woman developer that got blacklisted becouse she supported gamergate and a campaign attempted to keep her game off of steam but gamergate supporters voted to greenlight it.

    Yes there was/is a campaign to change games, remove games from the market that are not approved and to promote games that are approved. It has small successes and it was growing. I think gamergate can be shown to have stopped future success.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Yes there was/is a campaign to change games, remove games from the market that are not approved and to promote games that are approved.

    Yes, I am aware of that. Hell, the SJW influence has been in games all the way back to A Mind Forever Voyaging. That having been said, their attempts would have only gotten them so far considering that so much of the industry is based in a country where something like lolicon is barely worth a raised eyebrow.

  • ||

    err...

    Didn't the Atheists lose their war?

    Richard Dawkins is seen with the same contempt as Ted Cruz nowadays.

  • John Titor||

    Depends on your circles I guess? Most of the atheists I know both online and offline in 'the movement' pretty much immediately rejected what the social justice folks were selling (many because they just saw it as basically a secularized religion). Dawkins still seems to have a pretty strong following, might simply be a case of a minority whining. Pretty much every 'intellectual elite' of new atheism flat-out rejected attempting to shoe-horn in social justice concepts. The 'intellectual elite' of 'social justice atheism' are pretty heavily mocked in new atheist circles.

  • ||

    Yes and gamers mock SJWs.

    But I am pretty sure the likes of Slate, Salon, MSNBC, VoX Media, the Guardian, Gawker etc all detest Richard Dawkins and express that contempt regularly.

    I think we probably need a better success/failure test then what we are using.

  • John Titor||

    Do you honestly expect Slate, Salon, MSNBC, or any of those other outlets to ever seriously give a fair shake to the likes of Dawkins or other heretics? They're hugboxes, designed to confirm the biases of people rife with a sense of moral superiority. It's like asking the Bible to give a fair take on the Devil.

    They erode their own credibility constantly by repeating this true believer stuff over and over, and people are starting to notice. Gamergate is an example of this, gamers are not primarily libertarians, conservatives or reactionaries. They're mostly progressives/liberals who are starting to see how these media outlets are distorting reality to push an agenda.

  • ||

    "They're mostly progressives/liberals who are starting to see how these media outlets are distorting reality to push an agenda."

    I totally agree. Would you say New Athiesm or Gamergate has been better at opening people's (progressives/liberals) eyes to this?

  • John Titor||

    I think Gamergate probably has more influence simply due to having a larger population of gamers involved in online communities than atheists involved in the 'new atheist movement'. My general complaint is that you're never going to win with bitchy, vapid twitter fights. Both camps are just going to circle the wagons, and the Sarkessians/Quinns/whoever the fuck will keep making money claiming their eternal victimhood by cyberbullies.

  • ||

    "the Sarkessians/Quinns/whoever the fuck will keep making money claiming their eternal victimhood by cyberbullies."

    Honestly i don't care if they get paid. I mean you can't ever stamp out stupid SJWs...and I don;t really want to try and as a libertarian, free speech and all, i am actually kind of against.

    I just want a counter.

    If gamergate cleans up some corruption in games journalism so i can find games I want to play I am good.

    I do think gamergate has won on that count. Now as gamergate moves forward as a watchdog that uses "bitchy vapid" tweets to keep the corrupt forces from fucking up the news and games all the better.

    The success state of gamergate is smaller then is often perceived.

  • NebulousFocus||

    The SJWs are eating their own. Today Joss Whedon was chased of of twitter by his own team. Age of Ultron used the damsel trope or some shit...

  • Brendan||

    Like a vicious snake eating itself, it was fun to watch.

    It can only keep happening though, as they retreat to their "safe spaces" and insulated discussion groups and only hear from each other and begin infighting over minor disagreements on which 'oppression' is more serious.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Have to say, while I'm not much of a gamer (aside from a couple of old titles I futz around with on occasion), nothing you're saying strikes me as untrue. That is to say, it seems entirely consistent with all of the actual evidence I've come across.

    I will tell you, as someone who's probably a little older, you're making a mistake in assessing your opponents. All the telling them that you aren't anti-feminist or that you want equality in the world isn't going to make a dime's worth of difference to them. They don't give a shit. You're assuming they're motivated by principle or some worldview of right and wrong. They aren't.

    They're after power. Period. Full stop. They were after power with their antics in gaming journalism. They were after power when they decided to target you guys. Your unfortunate coverage in the media is the result of the fact that their allies in the media also want them to have power.

  • ||

    "I say leaders, but really, GamerGate has no such people. Like Anonymous or Occupy Wall Street, it lacks formal structure or a set of definite goals."

    Also like libertarianism and liberalism.

  • ||

    But how will they know who and what to prot at without leaders?

    -Occutard

  • SIV||

    Robbie does an excellent job carrying the cosmotarian torch to the SJW-friendly Millenial Generation. Much slicker than the tired old tsk, tsk...the right does it too...

  • Winston||

    Time for self-criticism SIV.

  • ||

    My internalized misogamy is that I wish the word "Cunt" was used in the US as often as it is used in Australia, New Zealand and the British Isles.

    Do Canadians use cunt? if not they should as well.

  • Akira||

    I'm American and I use "cunt" regularly if a certain female has done something particularly bad to deserve it. If someone complains (and they often do) I just point out that it's the equivalent of calling a man a "dick".

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Canadians use 'cunt'?! Let me see if I can explain through an analogy an American can understand...

    Canada is Massachusetts with shittier weather and Orange Irish.

  • ||

    Robby please correct this false claim:

    "Indeed, bomb and death threats made by GamerGate activists have forced Sarkeesian to cancel speaking engagements and other events in the past."

    It is provably factually incorrect:

    "USU police, in conjunction with several teams of state and federal law enforcement experts, determined that there was no threat to students, staff or the speaker, so no alert was issued."

    http://www.usu.edu/ust/index.cfm?article=54179

  • Calbeck||

    Not to mention that the sender cited, as his inspiration, anti-feminist mass-murderer Marc Lepine --- and nothing else.

    http://imgur.com/ymSfrUC

    The entirety of the threat was generically anti-feminist. Ms. Sarkeesian might just as easily claim it originated from the office of Ron Paul or Ted Cruz.

  • GILMORE||

    OMG RON PAUL IS #GAMERGATE?!?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Would have best good money that Bo would be in here concern trolling the living shit out of the thread.

    This is why I don't gamble.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Bet, damn Autocorrect

  • ||

    I thought he would've been in the earlier thread about the same topic. Even made a "Release the Botard!" statement. Maybe it's our lucky day.

  • ||

    As far as I can tell, the "other side" is composed almost entirely of would be fascists and professional grievance mongers. Fuck em with old rebar.

  • Calbeck||

    I should also note that the same people who call #GamerGate "misogynist" and out to "run women out of gaming" have just gotten done running Joss Whedon off Twitter by calling him a misogynist over "Age of Ultron".

    https://storify.com/Astojap/wehdon-twitter-hate

    These are the people you're putting your trust in.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    What is TERFiness?

  • ||

    I'm pretty sure it's code word for "bullshit".

  • ||

    Either it has something to do with shaving ones pubic region or it is a Jossism for astro turfing.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Those tweets actually make me like Whedon and I don't want to. Damn SJW tweeters.

  • GILMORE||

    "he same people who call #GamerGate "misogynist" and out to "run women out of gaming" have just gotten done running Joss Whedon off Twitter by calling him a misogynist over "Age of Ultron"

    lol

    This is what so many in the media, robby included, seem to fail to understand when they keep giving these people the 'benefit of the doubt', being 'evenhanded', taking their bullshit claims at face value, and pretending to being sympathetic to their ostensible 'issue'.

    ...their *only purpose is to attack and destroy things*. There is nothing else. They ARE WHAT THEY DO. They create nothing, they destroy everything.

    Anita Sarkeesian and her ilk don't really 'want' anything. There's no Happy Place, no Middle Ground where their complaints have been heard and their dis-satisfactions quenched. There are no, and never will be "feminist friendly games'" or anything resembling them, nor some utopian perfection when we have a Tranny Bathroom in every home....because whenever society has caught up to their faux-ideal? they'll have already set upon something else.

    There is no "solution". There is only POWER to be gained, the only way they know to gain power is to create fear and submission, and so they constantly attack and attack, accusing everyone of being a ThoughtCriminal.

  • ||

    Sort of OT:

    Joss Whedon cancelled his twitter account today after SJW's massively complained about all the "sexism/racisim" in his new avengers movie.

    This is a fun video showing Joss's hypocrisy. Fun starts at about 5:30

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57tXyqPCOCM

    Note: Joss in a twitter compared #gamergate to the KKK back in October.

    Note2: The new avengers is OK. Though I just wanted to see The Vision and the Scarlet Witch kicking ass...only got a little of that.

  • ||

    Wow! They can't even win one battle before they start eating their own.

  • ||

    Well....one battle where there was another side that fought back. They pretty much already won every battle they had in academia, SciFi, Atheism and comics books.

    Honestly this eating of Whedon is just a victory lap for their conquest of comics.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Ha! Well deserved, what the fuck did he think would happen?

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    I still don't know the details of this dispute, except that feminists are Very Angry about something, and that generally means that the thing they're angry about is either harmless or even beneficial.

    I'm open to the possibility that feminists may be having a stopped-clock moment, but I'm not going to bet on it.

  • lap83||

    My understanding is that it's like a massive flame war (is that even a term anymore? am I dating myself?) but with more mainstream publicity.

  • Mx. F. Stupidity, Jr.||

    I emailed Chu to ask if he had any knowledge of the bomb threat. He responded: “I know nothing about it. Please leave me alone.”

    Fuck you Chu.

  • ||

    Fuck a Chu and fuck a you too, SJWs!

  • PapayaSF||

    "Leave me alone" is pretty rich coming from a SJW who wants to change the games that other people enjoy.

  • ||

    I would bet that Chu was actually behind the bomb threat. For one thing, because he's got to be one of the most fanatical anti-gamer-gaters out there. And he's obviously deeply commited to the cause or he wouldn't write about it so much.

    An anonymous follower would just post a long insane rant on a blog posting. But Chu already does that and so he has to go a step further when he gets REALLY upset.

    Also remember the thing about the Muslim students vandalizing some critic's dorm room? It turned out that person behind it was in fact one of the guy's most vocal critics and the leader of a student group who was well known on campus.

    Same thing here. It's usually the most vocal people who go the furthest off the deep end. Not least because having followers makes their egos explode.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Twitter personality ... a celebrated Jeopardy! winner, Salon columnist

    Even if he were a Kardashian, he would have had a less embarrassing reason for being "famous".

  • ||

    I think in some ways, gaming is like a "safe space" for nerdy men. It's a nice cozy space where nerdy guys and go hang out and be guys and not have to deal with people telling them what's wrong with men.

    And I think that a lot of the reason for the gamer-gaters reaction is the violation of the safe space by the "SJWs" trying to deliberately inject themselves into those internal conversations. The reaction isn't really any different from if a man walked into a rape survivors group therapy session and demanded that they make room for him to show up and explain why rape statistics are exagerrated. The reaction there would be equally furious.

    The GamerGaters just want to play their apolitical games in peace and have a pace where they don't have to be lectured at and told how they ought to think and feel. Why is that bad?

    It seems like the social justice crowd just doesn't want anyone to have any private space apart from politics. They genuinely believe that "the personal is political", and that all actions should be constantly monitored for political content and implications. That's actually what they do to themselves - constantly watch what they eat, wear, think and say, to make sure it conforms with an agenda of bettering the world. And they think everyone else should live like that. And they want to FORCE everyone else to live like that, by constantly injecting politics into every activity. Even something as stupid and irrelevant as video games.

  • GILMORE||

    "The reaction isn't really any different from if a man walked into a rape survivors group therapy session and demanded that they make room for him"'

    AND WHERE'S THE BEER?

  • PapayaSF||

    Exactly, Hazel. And something similar is happening in science fiction fandom, with the Sad Puppies brouhaha. The SJWs didn't just want to write their own SJW version of SF, they want to win all the awards, declare everyone else to be backwards, racist bigots, and force everyone to conform to their views.

  • GILMORE||

    "The SJWs didn't just want to write their own SJW version of SF, they want to win all the awards, declare everyone else to be backwards, racist bigots, and force everyone to conform to their views.'

    Exactly. they're not about simply adding "voices" to the "marketplace of ideas".

    They're about *destroying the fucking marketplace* and making themselves political gatekeepers. Even were they successful in this attempt...even then, they wouldn't 'add' anything, contribute their own SJW-friendly content to the marketplace; they'd just rent seek from the existing producers and insist on 'input' from the 'community'.

    they're generally the same people who produce 'criticism' by the buttload, but couldn't write so much as a single comic-book worth of A-grade content. Or when they do occasionally manage to squirt out said 'trifling contribution', its hailed as a freaking "game changer". because = Power. which is all their game is about.

  • All-Seeing Monocle||

    Right on the money. As usual for Hazel.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I'm really glad to see this comments section has more brains than the other GG comment section. This is the exact kind of culture war that is vital to our fight. This is a big deal.

  • dinkster||

    “I know nothing about it. Please leave me alone.”

    So you get to try to shutdown an event that had nothing to do with you, but you get to be left alone yourself?

  • Brendan||

    Not a surprise; like all of his thin skinned compadres, he can't take what he dishes out.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online