Anita Sarkeesian was on The Colbert Report tonight

I like that folks have asked him about it over the years, and he is always quite coy about it.

Back in 2012, someone recounted a question and answer segment before the show started:

“What did Laura Bush whisper to you after your speech?” Colbert said this isn’t the first time he’s been asked this, and turned it back to 20-something girl who asked the question. “What do you think she said?” Colbert asked, grinning politely. The girl responded, “Did she tell you to fuck off?” Without missing a beat, Colbert responded, “Are you asking if the former First Lady of the United States of America told me to fuck off after giving a speech about her husband?”

The audience erupted, Colbert never answered the question and instead yelled, “Let’s make a show everybody!” He tossed his microphone in the air (which someone else caught) and descended to his “C” shaped desk for final pampering and production notes.

It's funny when you think you know what something is about, but turn out to not really know anything at all. I thought I knew what GamerGate was, and then I see this thread and I have no fudging clue at all.

People are offended by simple and non-offensive comments, people are not offended by offensive comments. Left is right, and up is salt. I just don't know anymore.

I'm aware. I'm talking about the inevitable aftermath of somebody mentioning Anita. Trotting out the same tired arguments about her and GG for the eleventy-billionth time is accomplishing nothing.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be discussed, of course. I feel very strongly about this issue, and it pains me to yet again see the depths to people will sink. I just wish it could be discussed in a civilized manner. (I'm mostly talking about other websites. The mods here are usually very, very quick about weeding out the worst of things, which makes me able to follow the discussion here without wanting to become a hermit)

yea I certainly see what you mean. My point was just that there was no lull. people haven't stopped complaining about Anita; calling her con a artist despite her not conning anyone.

unless they think her talking about women's right is a con. then I don't know.

it just makes me sad that the evidence about what gamergate is keeps mounting and people continue to be stubborn.or are still using the hashtag because of its popularity

its hard to have a discussion when one side doesn't know what they want.

Obviously, it's about ethics in games journalism.

...

heh. I'm just joshing. I think one of my comments from the last page covered the general jist of the bigger conflict:

The simplest way to think about it is like a storm conjured up out of a discordant array of angry fans of gaming, and in the end, the only truly unifying element is anger at -something-. A cloud of unease, fear, and suspicion desperately desiring to be acknowledged. To make known that it exists and still has some control. Amidst it all, there has never been a unified banner or accepted leading voices, though, as any time anyone has spoken or acted too specifically, folks have shunned them as not really representing the wider effort.

Which has resulted in no one being able to talk about much but the resulting damage from the storm. Analyzing the pieces strewn about online and bickering about their meaning. With no one to truly talk to or reason with in the storm, the only practical things you reflect on are the many people hurt(particularly women) and the conversations left muddled and contentious. In many ways, this is just another example in a long line of little blow ups, and we're going to see more as gaming and the community around it continues to grow.

It's a mess, and you're understandably befuddled by the seemingly random wreckage in its wake. But don't feel bad. It's the normal response to all of this.

So basically it's like that scene in The Avengers where, unbeknownst to the Avengers, Loki was using his scepter to influence everyone into getting angry at each other to the point of violence but no one truly knew why or how they were being made to feel this way? Because that's fucked up.

The only question now is... who's the puppet master?

If you don't think her videos are inspiring discussion within the game industry then you are mistaken, here is Cliffy B talking about her videos and the reaction to them. I've been told that the Last of Us postmordem at the last GDC also talked about how an increased awareness of the portrayal of women in games helped shaped Elie's character and the story in general (I haven't watched it myself because I am still finishing The Last of Us and there are spoilers in the video). Heck Anita won an Ambassador Award from GDC. Her videos are creating a discussion within the development community and they are creating a discussion here. If you try to read beyond the few people screaming about her very existence you can usually find well reasoned criticism of her videos. I think the Hitman example from one of her videos gets trotted out as a fair criticism every time her videos are brought up. If you want to read someone intelligently critiquing Anita's videos look no furrther than @jadegl's posts on Anita's work; they are well worth reading. Anita's videos aren't creating a shameful depiction of games for the sake of being combative, they are pulling together a wide swath of potentially problematic tropes that already exist, explaining why those tropes are unfair to women, and asking that people think before they employ those tropes again.

I Think the term is the core of the issue. It's always been a thing to have people identify so deeply with games that they feel personally attacked.

One particularly interesting thing that got my attention from his take on it ( Colbert's ). "Sega Genesis". I remember reading about that era of video games from a marketing advertisement perspective. That time was when the main angle became about deeply self identifying with the medium and in that case one brand or the other.

No other media asked for the same since it was of a different nature. 20th Century Fox did not create a childish smearing campaign against Universal since their platform was always the same.

It's interesting seeing this whole debacle while analyzing the nature of it from a different perspective. Of course people would find no inherent correlation with bad things by the simple act of playing a video game. The problematic issue has always been it's specific nature as a product. ( which is probably not bound to change...Rational people still say stuff like PC master race like it's not a thing. To someone looking from the outside, that sounds not only kinda offensive, but also demonstrative of the same kind of obsessive allegiance from the nintendont era. Not to mention console wars, that should go without saying)

@sethphotopoulos:

@baillie: they should distance themselves from the only movement that managed to uncover weird connections, actual evidence, a popular Twitter hashtag, and the most change "gaming press" has committed so far because terrible people on the internet made threats that didnt mention it? All the "game bloggers" dismiss all this and mock ethics when they will not even be open to discussion and if you do move away from Gamergate you would just be chastised for coming from that movement and ignored even more. I guess it must just be the misogyny in my blood and the social construct of testosterone to be annoyed that consumer questions are being shut down and dismissed as hate

No surprise. Its another shot at painting #GamerGate as a harassment movement rather than admit the faults of the press and take actions to improve it.

Colbert was great as usual. It's the first time I've had the hint of a smile on my face while this issue has been discussed. I’m torn on Sarkeesian, she brings up some relevant points of discussion and valid criticisms but I think she relies too heavily on presenting things out of their proper context. The binarity of her criticisms can also stifle discussion as anyone who dares challenges her views risks being labelled a sexist.

Total Biscuit put out an interview today with Stephen Totilo discussing ethics in games media which was a really great listen and a good first step in hopefully resolving this issue at least as it’s viewed by the moderates in this debate.

i dont like her, nothing against the "movement", but i just dont like her.

but even still, i found that segment totally harmless and fine and fun.

I'll have to watch it later. :D

Sort of, but it's more like a bunch of people were riled up by festering discordant anger and suspicion to attack a number of women and rail against just about anyone you can be mad at in gaming. There has never been two sides to all this or even much of a side at all. A storm is a storm, and a lot of regular people trying to defend themselves and others from it and then repair the wreckage after it has moved through an area isn't a "side". I'm "anti-GG" in the same way I'm "anti-mudslides". It has been more of an odd, chaotic cyclone than a tangible group or side to truly align with; yet, people have still tied their names to what they personally picture it to be.

Saying you're pro-GG is effectively like saying you're "angry about something". It has ended up being relatively meaningless outside of some prevailing themes, none of which everyone agrees on. I could say it was about feminism and the threat of liberalism based on all the people that have told me that's what it's actually about, or I could say it was about fighting a battle to purify gaming as a place focused on "real gamers" based on those who have insisted time and time again that's the obvious real point of it all.

The only puppet master has seemingly been a kind of general discomfort and suspicion. Unresolved conflict within a quickly-growing entertainment medium and the Internet that has grown along with it. People themselves setting in motion an almost stand alone complex-esque effort, believing in a unified vision that isn't ever there. Most convinced that they understand the true origin and purpose of the unrest.

You can't reason with a storm. You can batten down the hatches and try to weather it, and you prepare for the next one, taking measures to reduce the damage more and more over time. Fortunately, as I mentioned, I think it's a storm that will ease over time. We've been slowly trading a harmful status quo with blow ups like this, and eventually, even these will fade. Disagreement will prevail over bluster and fighting. There are no quick fixes, but continuing as we are in gaming and growing discussion of our conflicts will help. Too much is often left festering, and we can do better.

I would just like to point out that if you're against ridicule and harassment (which I hope to assume that everyone here is) than the first response you have to people that support gamergate shouldn't be more ridicule and harassment. Put some more thought behind what you say and act how you expect the people from this controversial movement to act.

There's some blanket harassment going on in this thread but it is being overlooked because it's for what people find to be a good reason. Of course it isn't as horrifying and violent as what Zoey Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian have faced but there are no free passes. Don't be dicks.

Let's start the real conversations and not continue the name calling and reinforcements of stereotypes.

well- that was about what i expected. nothing revalatory, but anita did pretty well- i'm glad her experience and work is being exposed to a larger audience.

but colbert was absolutely spot on with his remarks on the ethics of video games journalism, and the seeming contradiction in terms- this whole debacle has done nothing but exposed the ghastly regressive cultural undercurrents (organised abuse) still thriving on the internet. any hope of any message has been lost- and if anything, the whole experience underscores our collective need to take a hard look at how we treat and represent one another.

granted these things have been blowing up a lot lately, but the more I see of how things are playing out I remain convinced that the right people are winning.

Or you can actually realise GamerGate as a whole will never get past the misogyny and bullshit no matter what happens.

Its the anti-GG side that is unwilling to talk. Covering your ears and shouting labels prevents GG from achieving its goal promoted over two months.

The 'gamers are getting bulled' narrative Colbert touched on is so transparent it makes GG even more repellent. It's a cynical appropriation of a hot and heavily weighted buzzword. Anyone with critical thinking skills will see through the ploy in two seconds.

The only thing GG has promoted is how vile the gaming community can be towards women in gaming. Oh there's also that faint whisper I heard about gaming press having friends in the gaming industry. You know like Giant Bomb and Harmonix, Double Fine, SuperGiant Games, Samantha Kalman...

Jesus Christ, Gamergate is going mainstream? Fuck.

@baillie: Which Giant bomb also discloses consistently upon any coverage they give of said companies and people.

@baillie: It seems as though you echo the same sentiments as the press that was first saying "Listen and Believe" while never asking the other side about their view and threw it in their face after a couple of weeks when random people on Twitter that had never mentioned GamerGate before publicly harass women. I understand that reading post from one side but please, all GamerGate supports must hate women and harass them endlessly

@deathbyyeti: When I look at who is being targeted by GG people and who they give a free pass to or justify as not "corrupt" it's hard not to come to the conclusion that they hate women.

@teaoverlord: yes, that type of thing really bugs me. How many people won't click the link, and just assume what they are told? (But I guess that's on them as much as the original poster).

@thatpinguino: I appreciate the shout out! I think that the best thing about the videos, even if you agree or disagree with the thesis, is that they are fostering discussion. I don't agree with anything and everything that is in the Tropes series, but I think that it's always good to take critical looks at the media that you choose to consume, whether it's books, movies, music, art or video games.

I tend to read a lot of articles covering all kinds of issues in games and in other forms of entertainment. I frequent /r/books and /r/literature just to see what is being talked about. I find interesting articles like this, which talks about the Nobel selection process for literature, the tagline being "The Nobel Prize’s wish to separate literature from politics isn’t just misguided. It’s impossible." Why am I mentioning this? Well, I see this type of discussion as being no different than what Anita does or what any number of people talking about politics, gender issues, race, sexuality etc does. This is part of being at the Adult table at Thanksgiving, instead of the Kiddy table, to use a common if not cliched bit of terminology. When games become more focused on as art, people start dissecting them as art. With that comes talk of sometimes difficult issues. But the discussion is, on the whole, worthwhile. Even if I disagree 100% with the commentator, the overall discussion is what matters, at least to me. I like getting into stuff like that. It's the English Major in me coming out.

As @thatpinguino stated, I have written somewhat extensively on the Tropes series and what I like and what I don't like in them. I think that's the best thing to do in these situations. I don't care whether I actually get any response from her personally, it's never been about that to me, it's about having that discussion with other people in places like this and coming to some sort of understanding as people who love games.

And I admit, I love some games that have stupid, sexist or quasi-sexist bologna in them. I have no problems with liking a game that may have problematic ideas or tropes, whether it concerns the treatment of women, minorities, sexuality, or something as pervasive as the handling of violent content. But I admit that to myself and I try to find out what I like, why I like it, and how I can articulate that while also being able to view possible flaws with an open mind. It's hard. When people rag on something like Mass Effect, Halo or Hotline Miami, that stings, whether it's due to violence, sex, even just general dislike, whatever. But, it's important to be empathic and try to view the contrary opinion, or at least give it a chance before outright condemnation.

I wish I could be successful with this all the time, but I admit I am human and therefore I know that I am not.

On the subject at hand, I have not yet had a chance to watch the video. I will later and hopefully it will be something fun and make me laugh. I think that it's really quite funny that the more some talk and complain about her getting more press focus, and the more she is threatened or harassed or tweeted about, the more mainstream press she actually gets and the more she gets her own message out there to people who don't even care about games or the people who play them.

Good for her, good for Colbert.

If people think they have a more nuanced and thoughtful perspective on the memes, ideas and portrayal of women in games - then go ahead and voice them.

It is ironic that the people who want to merely shut her up, not her critics, but just her detractors and abusers have given her a boost onto this worldwide platform. She was happy to talk about games and do her videos and have a open discussion on the small stage that would grow.

Real critics in this debate and this subject, the ones worthy of any attention, are the people who would sit down with her to discuss games and shake her hand afterward . They would be glad to be on a panel with her to discuss the intricacy of portrayals of character in games, because even they understand civil thoughtful discussion is when you shake hands warmly at the end and not shake fists.

I would like to see more people who would respect the subject enough to admit she has a right to have a voice no matter what. There is room for discussion or debate about interpretation of a specific games, meme or ideas; but just wanting her to stop talking or thinking is not being a critic of her work it is just a fancy way of disguising abuse.

If this is what you believe then you have been listening to only one side. Giant Bomb has done a professional job of disclosing their relationships in the industry. The problem is that pretty much every one else doesn't. There isn't independence in the media for criticism. There is a culture of fear of speaking out. Major gaming sites and now mainstream sites toe the party line. Looking and listening to only one side of the argument. Anitas videos are obviously full of flaws. Nobody talks about that and only promotes them. When the "gamers are dead" articles came out, nobody dared to oppose them in the media.

https://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/gamergates-misconceptions-thus-far/

• GamerGate DID NOT start after the “‘gamers’ are over” article wave. It began with Adam Baldwin’s tweet, which when looked at on central time is the 27th August – the articles are all the 28th. In addition, the articles came after harassment of Anita and Zoe (more here). Whilst people may have joined over those articles, they were NOT the cause.

• The GameJournoPros list didn’t co-ordinate the ‘gamers are over’ articles on list since many of the authors are NOT on it. In addition, not all the journalists being claimed to be part of this collusion can be found on it either.

• The ‘Gamers are Dead’ article wave isn’t as clear-cut as it seems – analysis here.

Don't ignore her if you don't want her to. I'm referring to this people that dislike her mostly ridiculous views on gaming and gaming culture. The more negative attention you bring to her, the more publicity she gets. The less you pay attention to her, the less attention she will get.

@horseman6: In what way are her views on gaming and gaming culture ridiculous? Give me three concrete examples.

@horseman6:

I hope you realize that this is a fallacy. I don't pay attention to Miley Cyrus but I'm pretty sure she is controversial and still gets plenty of attention no matter how much I ignore her.

This

After some of her early videos contained incorrect facts and even some misinformation i chose to ignore her, say whatever you want Anita apparently people are listening.

I tend to not agree with Sarkeesian's approach, since as a general rule I don't like arguments that spend more time on negativity than building up their own foundation. It's very clear what she hates, but it's less clear what she likes, or what she even wants the answer to the problem to be, and those unclarities do her a great disservice. Also, she has a habit of casting too wide of a net, and her examples start becoming less about feminism and female empowerment, and more about a kind of old-fashioned prudishness. But broadly, I support what she's after: more diversity in gaming.

There's enough room in our gaming world here for every kind of experience, and for there to be something for everyone. It's not a message she gets across well in the slightest, but neither she nor anyone else in this movement want to actually take away anyone's games. She wants more types of games for more types of people, and there's absolutely zero reason to be upset or threatened by that notion.

Anyway, I think she did fine on Colbert. There's not a lot of time to explain or really get into the nuances of the issue in a format like that, but she got her points across well enough without getting too heavy-handed. I certainly wouldn't have been able to do better.

Should I go to 8chan or /r/kotakuinaction or ralphretort to find these perfectly reasonable people asking for ethics? All I find in these places are extremely toxic communities preoccupied by their phantom LWs.

@zolroyce: I don't actually mean she's evil or anything. I just mean that the reaction to Anita was so strong that it kinda fed her message more and more. So all the haters kinda have themselves to blame to an extent.

Saying stuff like this doesn't help anyone. Great that there was a long discussion! What points were brought up that you feel are worth further exploration? You're still talking about the meta-debate about what GG is. If you're going to talk about ethics in journalism, talk about ethics in journalism. Stop being defensive about what label you do it under.

i would agree with this. some people get way to hostile over a diference of opinion. The perception that a lot of this conversation is a personal attack is how a lot of this got so bad in the first place

@bradbrains: People need to learn to take a step back and look at things as they are. This is an entertainment medium. A lot of people rely on it as a form of income and death threats are not the way to go. Feeding hate with more hate is foolish.

Well. This thread is a clusterfuck. I like videogames guys what about y'all?

For the record, I listened to TB and Totilo's discussion yesterday and it was pretty good. It was a nice, reasonable discussion about some ethical concerns in games writing, which, despite me thinking GamerGate is idiotic, hateful garbage, I do think exist. To me, the discussion was even more proof that GamerGate needs to end. We can have discussions about ethics in games without hiding it behind a ridiculous harassment campaign.

@slyspider

http://shitgiantbombsays.tumblr.com/post/78336031347/oh-no-fuck-video-games-forever

And I think there may be a few quotes of Jeff saying 'MAN FUCK VIDEO GAMES' on podcasts and livestreams that are worth quoting. Always funny to hear.

First everyone gives her shit for "cherry picking" examples.

Then during the interview she doesn't give specific examples and now jokers are like "She can't even name 3 games!"

@milkman: well said. its a garbage hashtag that was made from garbage. but there are things about gaming and how it works that can be talked about

how much control metacritic has

embargos and how they work

how big companies can use there powers against the smaller reviewers who cant just go out and buy every title to review.