I find Ms. Sommers (can't find out if married or not) assertion that since games are targetd at males that they aren't sexist because they're (theortically) reaching their target audience to be at best kind of inane but mostly dissmissive of the whole point of ciriticisim in general.
MrMazz's forum posts
@sinisterraven: why dose she have to look at all sides of this issue, its her opinon piece wherein she chose to focus on the fact that this person (Fish was apprently added to it so perhaps its better to say people) was being harrassed on a bunch for a bunch of bullshit reasons. This is a thing with a lot of sides.
Leeroy change isn't too bad in comparison the value from using it over say Reckless Rocketeer is lessenoned quite a bit which is a shame.
But making Buzzard cost 5 MANA is friggin insane deathknell stuff. Make it cost 3 mana as well and that'd be a lot more palatable. but at 5 mana hunters now lack good card draw.
@marokai: I'd recommend Pauline Kale's review of Stanley Kubrick's film Clockwork Orange on how because you can criticize something you see as problomatic dosen't mean you also want it to disapear (at least that's what criticisim should be).
particuaily the final paragraph
At the movies, we are gradually being conditioned to accept violence as a sensual pleasure. The directors used to say they were showing us its real face and how ugly it was in order to sensitize us to its horrors. You don't have to be very keen to see that they are now in fact de- sensitizing us. They are saying that everyone is brutal, and the heroes must be as brutal as the villains or they turn into fools. There seems to be an assumption that if you're offended by movie brutality, you are somehow playing into the hands of the people who want censorship. But this would deny those of us who don't believe in censorship the use of the only counterbalance: the freedom of the press to say that there's anything conceivably damaging in these films -- the freedom to analyze their implications. If we don't use this critical freedom, we are implicitly saying that no brutality is too much for us -- that only squares and people who believe in censorship are concerned with brutality. Actually, those who believe in censorship are primarily concerned with sex, and they generally worry about violence only when it's eroticized. This means that practically no one raises the issue of the possible cumulative effects of movie brutality. Yet surely, when night after night atrocities are served up to us as entertainment, it's worth some anxiety. We become clockwork oranges if we accept all this pop culture without asking what's in it. How can people go on talking about the dazzling brilliance of movies and not notice that the directors are sucking up to the thugs in the audience?
@spaceinsomniac: there's no such thing as an "objective" view. Everryone is biased. I'm sure there are people acting less than honerable on both "sides" but if one is born out of abuse from the other, not saying it's justified but it is certainly understandable. All I keep hearing is that all games journalisim is corrupt but have never seen proof beyond the very public Gertsmann situation. I think there are legitimate disscussions to be had but to me #GamerGate has been tainted to much for it to be any use, if it had any to begin with.
Maybe ask Todd Vanderwerff about his decsion not to go in more depth on certain areas, since he did write it.
Sorry if this comes off as harsh just done another round of reading on this and all I seem to find is twitter/comments shouting corruption and providing nothing but speculation as evidence.