From #1reasonwhy to #1reasontobe, and 1,600 Comments In-Between

@ahopelesstroglodyte said:

@Brodehouse: You misunderstand. Saying someone is "privileged" isn't supposed to imply that they're inherently bad or ignorant (though a lot of tumblr kids who don't understand social theory do use it that way!). It's simply saying "you haven't had to experience certain hardships that the people in question have, so listen to them and realize that their opinions probably matter more than yours on these specific issues." After all, when asking about evolution, you wouldn't trust the proverbial man on the street over someone who's spent their life working in evolutionary biology, right?

Regarding the "with us or against us" thing...issues of gender, race, et al. are almost always structural in nature, based on widely-accepted underlying ideas more than individual behavior. It's very easy to claim that you're all for gender equality while still defending some of the core concepts that uphold sexism; I and many others in this debate would argue that this is sexist behavior. Most activists I've seen consider "allies" who do this to be worse than no friends at all, so from their perspective framing them as "against us" does infinitely less harm to the movement than including them would.

And historically, liberal accommodationism of the sort being advocated for here has not won marginalized groups rights; these battles have almost always been won by being loud and angry and persistent and yes, uncompromising. Ask virtually anyone who was part of the civil rights movement, and they will tell you that it absolutely could not have done what it did without Malcolm X and the Black Panthers. Even MLK Jr. was not the middle-of-the-road accommodationist that whitewashed mainstream history makes him out to be; near the end of his life he had begun to speak much more harshly about the US and even capitalism in general.

The use of 'privileged' actually does mean they're ignorant; it's used to say that a) they are incapable of anything approaching empathy, which implies that anyone born male is a sociopath, and that b) they are incapable of making an ethically sound argument. I dislike both of these implications. The 'evolution' comparison doesn't fly; the ability to speak with authority on a scientific topic is completely unrelated to the ability to broach an ethical conflict and greater social justice. 'Privilege' assumes that because I was born male, I am incapable of forming any sort of relevant opinion about the core nature of fairness. Not on personal issues, but gender. That's unacceptable. We would never accept that applied to women.

I have two issues with your second paragraph. Whether you're speaking allegorically or not, 'It's easy to claim you're for gender equality while defending some core concepts that uphold sexism', effectively labels me a sexist for behaviors I haven't been party to. Very cunning. The second is representative; this isn't framing people based on behavior or even their opinion, this is framing them as immoral sexists due to their failure to fall in line with a supposed authority. It is the opposite of inclusive, it censors not based on ethical matters but authoritarian. I find any justification of this sort to be like justifying the Red Scare. The issue with Patrick is not about goal or intent, it's about prosecution. Equality does not mean the shame and servility from men that Patrick urges with 'we can do better', it doesn't mean complete mischaracterizations like 'Faith is one of the most memorable characters in games', it doesn't mean cherrypicking the worst behavior and stating that anyone who disagrees is no different. I can agree with Anita Sarkeesian's desires to create better depictions of women in games and media at large, I can't get behind her using shame, guilt, misinformation, censorship and sexual repression as her tools.

And I'm not going to get into 'accommodation'. I believe in ethical fairness and egalitarianism for all, not an endless string of victimization. On purely intellectual levels I find it a difficult comparison between modern third wave feminism and the civil rights movement. The first wave of feminism, absolutely. But that's really here nor there. If you want to argue someone is making a case of accommodation, I think you should look at someone like Patrick, who deliberately states that he's incapable of understanding the concept of fairness because of his gender, and is indirectly stating that men are guilty of sexism by nature of existing. I apologize, but I won't get on board that train.

@ZeForgotten said:

@BigDaddy81 said:

@AmericanNinja said:

I don't know why people think sexism is exclusive to the games industry. Why not bring awareness to sexism as a whole instead of singling out a certain industry? Using a hashtag on Twitter won't help the issue. Write your local paper, start a website or get a hold of your local radio/tv news station.

Because this is a gaming website so the focus is on sexism in the gaming industry? Just a thought.

IIRC nobody in the comments, in the history of ever has said "Sexism is exclusive to the game industry and it doesn't happen anywhere else" That could just be me though, I'm not very good at reading invisible text

But you see, it makes more sense for a GAMING website to address issues of sexism as it relates to the GAMING industry.

@AmericanNinja said:

@BigDaddy81: Yes I know that, but it's not going to help things by posting about on here though.

And it's statements like these that are part of the problem. Discussions like these are important no matter the venue.

@GreggD: Wow well thank god that I'm not signed up for this site because I want to make lots of great gaming bro friends. That was almost a really close call there, phew.

@Zetetic_Elench said:

@GreggD: Wow well thank god that I'm not signed up for this site because I want to make lots of great gaming bro friends. That was almost a really close call there, phew.

I'm sorry.

@Zetetic_Elench: Your use of the word bro is amusing, I'll give you that. Actually, no it's not.

I hate how people think that raising and discussing an issue doesn't accomplish anything. It makes a huge difference. It brings attention to important issues. It puts pressure on people with the power to make change.

@Zetetic_Elench said:

@Brodehouse: You are a white male. You are privileged. You might be fucking blind to that privilege, but that's because you've lived your entire life with it. Acknowledge that you have it.

You are right. I am guilty of being born white and male. Does this mean that my thoughts and feelings are now irrelevant, insubstantial, invalid? What tormented definition of equality of sexes and race is that? Would you accept the statement that your gender makes you incapable of understanding the difference between right and wrong?

@Brodehouse said:

@ahopelesstroglodyte said:

@Brodehouse: You misunderstand. Saying someone is "privileged" isn't supposed to imply that they're inherently bad or ignorant (though a lot of tumblr kids who don't understand social theory do use it that way!). It's simply saying "you haven't had to experience certain hardships that the people in question have, so listen to them and realize that their opinions probably matter more than yours on these specific issues." After all, when asking about evolution, you wouldn't trust the proverbial man on the street over someone who's spent their life working in evolutionary biology, right?

Regarding the "with us or against us" thing...issues of gender, race, et al. are almost always structural in nature, based on widely-accepted underlying ideas more than individual behavior. It's very easy to claim that you're all for gender equality while still defending some of the core concepts that uphold sexism; I and many others in this debate would argue that this is sexist behavior. Most activists I've seen consider "allies" who do this to be worse than no friends at all, so from their perspective framing them as "against us" does infinitely less harm to the movement than including them would.

And historically, liberal accommodationism of the sort being advocated for here has not won marginalized groups rights; these battles have almost always been won by being loud and angry and persistent and yes, uncompromising. Ask virtually anyone who was part of the civil rights movement, and they will tell you that it absolutely could not have done what it did without Malcolm X and the Black Panthers. Even MLK Jr. was not the middle-of-the-road accommodationist that whitewashed mainstream history makes him out to be; near the end of his life he had begun to speak much more harshly about the US and even capitalism in general.

The use of 'privileged' actually does mean they're ignorant; it's used to say that a) they are incapable of anything approaching empathy, which implies that anyone born male is a sociopath, and that b) they are incapable of making an ethically sound argument. I dislike both of these implications. The 'evolution' comparison doesn't fly; the ability to speak with authority on a scientific topic is completely unrelated to the ability to broach an ethical conflict and greater social justice. 'Privilege' assumes that because I was born male, I am incapable of forming any sort of relevant opinion about the core nature of fairness. Not on personal issues, but gender. That's unacceptable. We would never accept that applied to women.

I have two issues with your second paragraph. Whether you're speaking allegorically or not, 'It's easy to claim you're for gender equality while defending some core concepts that uphold sexism', effectively labels me a sexist for behaviors I haven't been party to. Very cunning. The second is representative; this isn't framing people based on behavior or even their opinion, this is framing them as immoral sexists due to their failure to fall in line with a supposed authority. It is the opposite of inclusive, it censors not based on ethical matters but authoritarian. I find any justification of this sort to be like justifying the Red Scare. The issue with Patrick is not about goal or intent, it's about prosecution. Equality does not mean the shame and servility from men that Patrick urges with 'we can do better', it doesn't mean complete mischaracterizations like 'Faith is one of the most memorable characters in games', it doesn't mean cherrypicking the worst behavior and stating that anyone who disagrees is no different. I can agree with Anita Sarkeesian's desires to create better depictions of women in games and media at large, I can't get behind her using shame, guilt, misinformation, censorship and sexual repression as her tools.

And I'm not going to get into 'accommodation'. I believe in ethical fairness and egalitarianism for all, not an endless string of victimization. On purely intellectual levels I find it a difficult comparison between modern third wave feminism and the civil rights movement. The first wave of feminism, absolutely. But that's really here nor there. If you want to argue someone is making a case of accommodation, I think you should look at someone like Patrick, who deliberately states that he's incapable of understanding the concept of fairness because of his gender, and is indirectly stating that men are guilty of sexism by nature of existing. I apologize, but I won't get on board that train.

Quoted for truth.

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

@Brodehouse: Your privilege from your gender and race mean that you haven't experienced a life that a person without those privileges has lived, so you should defer to them for what its like to be like them, instead of barging in with your perspective about how they should really see things. If that means shutting your mouth and listening, sometimes you just have to do that.

@Milkman said:

It's nothing to be ashamed of but you have to accept it as a reality.

As I said far earlier on in this thread, when you describe something in this way, it sounds like a cult.

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

lol. misandry doesn't actually exist, fyi.

@AmericanNinja I'm glad somebody got called out on their bullshit somewhat publicly. This is why the Blizzard "put your fucking real name" agenda had my vote.

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

@Zetetic_Elench said:

lol. misandry doesn't actually exist, fyi.

Yeah, in your opinion. Just as you think every white male born has privilege, from birth to death. Have you ever considered that you may be wrong?

@Brodehouse: You are a white male. You are privileged. You might be fucking blind to that privilege, but that's because you've lived your entire life with it. Acknowledge that you have it.

@EnduranceFun said:

@Zetetic_Elench said:

lol. misandry doesn't actually exist, fyi.

Yeah, in your opinion. Just as you think every white male born has privilege, from birth to death. Have you ever considered that you may be wrong?

I know one who has had no privilege his entire life.

@SexVicar said:

There's a couple of smug feel good charity streams and campaigns, for sure.

If you would, please highlight examples of 'smug feel good charity campaigns.'

@AmericanNinja

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

Reach a wider audience? Like...I don't know...Twitter maybe? Which is exactly what they did. And this story has been picked up by a bunch of major news companies. So, whether people like it or not, this was already successful.

@Zetetic_Elench said:

@Brodehouse: Your privilege from your gender and race mean that you haven't experienced a life that a person without those privileges has lived, so you should defer to them for what its like to be like them, instead of barging in with your perspective about how they should really see things. If that means shutting your mouth and listening, sometimes you just have to do that.

Deference, now? You are advocating submission on the grounds of gender, regarding an entire ethical topic. Tell me, at what point did the nature of right and wrong become dependent on what sex you were? Are we ready to declare that women's opinions on the lives of men to be invalid and irrelevant? I'm not. I think anyone, regardless of their gender, is capable of empathy, fairness, and understanding.

The idea that anyone can 'barge' anywhere on an open discussion forum, or that perspective is only valid when it comes from the 'proper' gender also mystifies me.

At what point are people (well, men) allowed to finish listening and express their opinion, on a discussion forum? When one side of a discussion is 'shut up', it's no longer a discussion, it's a broadcast.

@AmericanNinja said:

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

AmericanNinja, you share a similar concern to that of lots of other people posting comments in these two threads.

Basically, you're saying that more needs to be done, that this isn't good enough, that tweeting or whatever is not a solution.

You're kind of right! More does need to get done. We can all agree on that.

The thing is, when a group that is discriminated against voices their complaints, the last thing anyone should tell them is, "hey you're doing it wrong! You're wasting your time! This is not the way!" You may not be doing it intentionally, but in a way you're helping to shout down and discredit their complaints. Again, that's probably not your intention at all, but maybe think about how what you're saying might be construed that way.

Twitter is a widely accepted means of communication for people in the games industry. There's a lot of discussion back and forth on twitter. A lot of gamers use twitter too, and as one of them I had no idea exactly how many women felt that they were discriminated against or treated differently because of their gender in that industry. We're precisely the audience that needs to see this stuff.

@Gordo789 said:

@AmericanNinja said:

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

AmericanNinja, you share a similar concern to that of lots of other people posting comments in these two threads.

Basically, you're saying that more needs to be done, that this isn't good enough, that tweeting or whatever is not a solution.

You're kind of right! More does need to get done. We can all agree on that.

The thing is, when a group that is discriminated against voices their complaints, the last thing anyone should tell them is, "hey you're doing it wrong! You're wasting your time! This is not the way!" You may not be doing it intentionally, but in a way you're helping to shout down and discredit their complaints. Again, that's probably not your intention at all, but maybe think about how what you're saying might be construed that way.

Twitter is a widely accepted means of communication for people in the games industry. There's a lot of discussion back and forth on twitter. A lot of gamers use twitter too, and as one of them I had no idea exactly how many women felt that they were discriminated against or treated differently because of their gender in that industry. We're precisely the audience that needs to see this stuff.

Exactly. All that matters is that the message gets out and reaches an audience.

@Rasmoss said:

@Milkman

@AmericanNinja

@Milkman: That's just how I feel. Plus look at all the comments of people arguing back and forth, calling each other names. That's not helping things. Also this is a video game website, if you want to bring awareness on an issue you need something that can reach a more wider broader audience. Getting an interview with a local newspaper, radio or tv news channel would help more I think, or maybe try getting on a national newspaper or tv news channel. I'm sure some of the people in games media know someone from a news show be it on radio or tv.

Reach a wider audience? Like...I don't know...Twitter maybe? Which is exactly what they did. And this story has been picked up by a bunch of major news companies. So, whether people like it or not, this was already successful.

In fact Roger Ebert just tweeted the story that was picked up from Mother Jones. Dude's got 750000 followers.

When the first article got on, I was pessimistic about this thing, mostly for the same reason Ninja is. But I was hoping that it might work, I wanted it to work. So I'm glad that this issue get the attention that it deserves.

@Brodehouse: You're not going to get through to that user. He/She is spouting radfem talking points. The entire rhetoric is devised in such a way as to make anything but perfect agreement impossible on any number of made-up reasons that paint the would-be dissenter as villain and them as victim.

@RagingDaemon said:

@Brodehouse: You're not going to get through to that user. He/She is spouting radfem talking points. The entire rhetoric is devised in such a way as to make anything but perfect agreement impossible on any number of made-up reasons that paint the would-be dissenter as villain and them as victim.

This. It's really depressing that the staff don't acknowledge that as inflammatory behaviour.

We can't possibly have an intelligent discourse when users posting like this get a free pass.

At least the 'go back to Kotaku' people Jeff mentioned don't continue posting for long using logic that states, if you disagree, that you are in fact a Kotaku member and should proceed to go back to Kotaku.

@ZeForgotten said:

@shoddyrobot said:

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

Maybe we have to watch from 6:41 to 15:45 and see if we can spot it? Like a dumb game of "I can't find anything but if someone else can then I can take credit for it"

They joke that because the protagonists are "rich white kids" they deserve all the bad things they suffer including death. It was a joke but it looks weird compared to this article and Jeff and Patrick damning naysayers. Rule of thumb, jokes about rich people and white men are ok. Sexism jokes? No no no! We'll crucify your ass!

@ZeForgotten said:

@shoddyrobot said:

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

Maybe we have to watch from 6:41 to 15:45 and see if we can spot it? Like a dumb game of "I can't find anything but if someone else can then I can take credit for it"

They joke that because the protagonists are "rich white kids" they deserve all the bad things they suffer including death. It was a joke but it looks weird compared to this article and Jeff and Patrick damning naysayers. Rule of thumb, jokes about rich people and white men are ok. Sexism jokes? No no no! We'll crucify your ass!

@ZeForgotten said:

@JasonR86 said:

@ZeForgotten said:

@shoddyrobot said:

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

Maybe we have to watch from 6:41 to 15:45 and see if we can spot it? Like a dumb game of "I can't find anything but if someone else can then I can take credit for it"

They joke that because the protagonists are "rich white kids" they deserve all the bad things they suffer including death. It was a joke but it looks weird compared to this article and Jeff and Patrick damning naysayers. Rule of thumb, jokes about rich people and white men are ok. Sexism jokes? No no no! We'll crucify your ass!

Aha, so nothing relevant to this conversation at all. Gotcha

Not really no. I mean I see where he's coming from. It's hypocritical. But it is a joke so...

BUT, picking on rich white people is as about as easy as it gets so maybe we should yell at Jeff for lack of creativity.

@ZeForgotten said:

@JasonR86 said:

@ZeForgotten said:

@shoddyrobot said:

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

Maybe we have to watch from 6:41 to 15:45 and see if we can spot it? Like a dumb game of "I can't find anything but if someone else can then I can take credit for it"

They joke that because the protagonists are "rich white kids" they deserve all the bad things they suffer including death. It was a joke but it looks weird compared to this article and Jeff and Patrick damning naysayers. Rule of thumb, jokes about rich people and white men are ok. Sexism jokes? No no no! We'll crucify your ass!

Aha, so nothing relevant to this conversation at all. Gotcha

Not really no. I mean I see where he's coming from. It's hypocritical. But it is a joke so...

BUT, picking on rich white people is as about as easy as it gets so maybe we should yell at Jeff for lack of creativity.

@Seven2600: Those kids are spoiled douchebags. Continue fighting the good fight, and tomorrow may be a better place, where spoiled douchebags finally achieve equality.

@ZeForgotten said:

@JasonR86 said:

@ZeForgotten said:

@JasonR86 said:

@ZeForgotten said:

@shoddyrobot said:

@Seven2600: wow. I looked @Seven2600 said:

@Rasmoss said:

@Jeff said:

Wow, Kotaku must be thrilled to see their name mentioned so much here. I mean, if genuine articles about actual, serious issues make people think of them then they must be doing something right, huh? It's certainly a step up from the typical complaint they get about... video game cakes and Japanese panty shots or whatever it is.

It's sad to see some of you people get so furious over the basic idea of equality, as if that's something that should be argued about instead of just being implicitly understood. I mean, did you grow up with mothers that were constantly putting cigarettes out on your arms or something?

Or are you just currently growing up as an outsider and feel the need to lash out whenever anyone claims that there are groups of people out there that somehow have it even worse than you do? I was like you once. I was angry all the time. As I grew up I cooled down and gained a little perspective on the world. I hope, for your sakes, that you have a similar experience and get out of your weird, little bubble, at least for a little while. It gets oppressively ignorant in there.

Thank you, Jeff. Well spoken.

@Jeff Gerstmann Sorry I'm not sure you can have a valid opinion on knowing anything about or understanding equality....http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-far-cry-3/17-6839/ @~6:41 and @~15:45...what are the basic ideas of equality that you understand? Maybe you should wonder if its always been you who's in the weird, little bubble, with no perspective, still angry all the time...

uh... i went and looked up those time codes on the video you linked. I have no idea what you're talking about, so how about making it more clear than just vague accusations?!

Maybe we have to watch from 6:41 to 15:45 and see if we can spot it? Like a dumb game of "I can't find anything but if someone else can then I can take credit for it"

They joke that because the protagonists are "rich white kids" they deserve all the bad things they suffer including death. It was a joke but it looks weird compared to this article and Jeff and Patrick damning naysayers. Rule of thumb, jokes about rich people and white men are ok. Sexism jokes? No no no! We'll crucify your ass!

Aha, so nothing relevant to this conversation at all. Gotcha

Not really no. I mean I see where he's coming from. It's hypocritical. But it is a joke so...

BUT, picking on rich white people is as about as easy as it gets so maybe we should yell at Jeff for lack of creativity.

But they're the rich white kids version of the Jersey Shore kids. At least a knife in the kidneys should be ok, right?

Sure.

@TheEvilCory said:

@Seven2600: Those kids are spoiled douchebags. Continue fighting the good fight, and tomorrow may be a better place, where spoiled douchebags finally achieve equality.

It's a video game dude. It's a stereotype too. And apparently it's ok to hate people who have more and are a common skin color. Who knew?

@SexVicar said:

There's a couple of smug feel good charity streams and campaigns, for sure.

If you would, please highlight examples of 'smug feel good charity campaigns.'

@Brodehouse: You're calling yourself a feminist and you're not willing to defer to women on matters that are primarily relevant to women.

@Brodehouse: Again, you're projecting re: privilege. I am a man, making me highly privileged in these conversations, and I acknowledge this. However, I still make an effort to contribute what I can based on what I've read and my experiences with women, while understanding why people like Zetetic have a right to feel the way they do. Thus far I haven't received anything close to the kind of response you've gotten from them. Being privileged does not make you incapable of empathy; not listening to those who suffer under sexism when they point our your privilege, on the other hand, does suggest a lack of empathy to them. And the reality is that no matter how much you read about phenomena related to sexism, you cannot fully appreciate their power without direct experience; I can read the Schrodinger's Rapist article (http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/) and see the need for this kind of approach, but it will never trigger a visceral response from me like it does from many women because I don't have to worry about being raped by random strangers.

As someone who identifies as a skeptic, I would argue that the concept of privilege is so strongly supported by research (please don't tell me you're one of those people who just ignores all the social sciences!) and real-world evidence that your denial of it is a sexist act (in result if not necessarily in intention) and comparable in spirit to global warming denial. You calling yourself a feminist isn't helping either; "feminist" and "ally" aren't labels you can just apply to yourself and expect respect for, they're something you have to earn from others with your actions. And having read Patrick's article, I'm not seeing what you're talking about with "servility" and such. I also don't see a lot of these things from Sarkeesian that you do, although I will say that shame and guilt have also been necessary and helpful aspects of social movements throughout history; you need severe punishment to discourage bad behavior when it's as strongly ingrained in a culture as sexism and racism are!

Victimization is often a real thing, and you bringing that up gives the impression that you buy into right-wing "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" thinking. Again, historically this has been proven not to work for oppressed populations since their main problems are structural and not individual. People can acknowledge that they are victims of oppression while working to fight that oppression, you know. And even if you don't see modern feminism as "comparable" to civil rights, historically my point stands for almost all social movements regardless of however you may think they differ from each other.

The number of people saying that they're not here for articles like this is positively bizarre. Don't read them then? Though I completely support the article and think that Patrick's doing the right thing in addressing serious issues, regardless of how prevalent the issue is elsewhere because as people keep saying they want to hear about video games; so here it is: a look at sexism IN THE WORLD OF VIDEO GAMES. You aren't forced to read them, re-watch an endurance run or something. It's not like, instead of creating 40 more Quick Looks, Patrick forced the whole Giant Bomb crew to sit and watch as he typed out this article. Had he not written this article, I'm sure the uploading of content would be the exact same as it is right now, except minus this.

And to all the people who are ragging on Patrick for trying to steal the spotlight, or making this all about him by quoting his tweet at the end of the article; do you not understand that it's a part of writing style? Rather than saying "IN CONCLUSION I TOTALLY SUPPORT THIS ISSUE THE END.", he's cleverly using a statement made publicly in support of this movement or whatever you want to call it, as a wrap-up to summarize his support of this movement or whatever you want to call it?

I don't think for even a second Patrick is trying to make this about himself, he's just using a statement that he made outside the article that he felt summarized his feelings on this as a summary for the article that expanded the issue and how he felt.

@Zetetic_Elench said:

@Brodehouse: You're calling yourself a feminist and you're not willing to defer to women on matters that are primarily relevant to women.

Name a good woman who would be the right fit to defer to on these forums. Do not include yourself.

@SexVicar said:

@EnduranceFun said:

@SexVicar said:

There's a couple of smug feel good charity streams and campaigns, for sure.

If you would, please highlight examples of 'smug feel good charity campaigns.'

So you don't think the likes of "Hey guys were gonna run through all the Zelda games on stream for Charidee!" are smug, selfish and self-congratulatory? The essence of working for charity is to do something selfless, sacrificial and sometimes even painful to raise awareness. Sitting on a couch and playing videogames isn't unless its Desert Bus For Hope (And even then they do things like forefits depending on how much gets donated to keep on message as well as playing Desert Bus). Even raising money for charity is treated as selfish in the culture with few exceptions. But then, this is the sort of thing you don't want to hear in the hobby. That you are selfish and that you are ignorant and leads to spasms of rage like this. So I look forward to the gnashing of teeth telling me I'm wrong and histories greatest monster because I think even the way the culture treats charity is selfish and in general, how the culture is incredibly selfish and ignorant when it comes to dealing with sensitive topics.

Not for nothing, but you just seem unnecessarily angry over something that you really, really shouldn't be getting angry over.

@JasonR86: Again, It's not that they're white or have a lot of money. There are rich white people that don't act like that. It's the fact that they act like spoiled douchebags.

@Christoffer said:

Yes, when we fight for that group we mostly benefit them. Remember, they have less benefits than other groups so that's the whole point. You can preach the "everyone be nice to each other" -gospel. It's not morally wrong, just a bit too unfocused to be effective.

Hell, I'm not even saying it's morally wrong to not be a feminist. But don't call out feminism to be gender biased. Wasn't the African-American Civil Rights movement race biased? Was that wrong too?

I never said feminism is wrong. I'm simply trying to reason that as a movement as large as it is, comprised of so many differing views that can sometimes clash with each other, it becomes murky when trying to acknowledge, represent or discuss. There can be an automatic twitch- as we see here- to what it can mean because it does mean so many things. I am wondering if there is a way the topic can be discussed that doesn't automatically elicit an aggressive response on either side.

But you're right. Feminism isn't gender biased because feminine isn't a gender. It's a set of physical and personality traits. I imagine some people might roll their eyes and insist 'you know what we mean', but again, with so many views and sides, no one can be 100% sure. This potential communication breakdown is what I was trying to reference to in my original comment, but didn't elaborate further. For that, I apologize.

Constantly disappointed in so many users on this site. Most of you people are really that horrible, aren't you? It really makes me sad.

If you're railing against women being legitimately discriminated against via hiring practices, pay discrepancies, promotion denials, etc, you have a legitimate issue.

If you're fighting for women to feel perfectly comfortable at all times, you don't have a legitimate issue. Real life is rough and messy. Conflicts happen. Social faux pas' are made. Feelings are hurt. Misunderstandings happen. Sexual Harassment laws exist if it goes beyond that. Being mistaken for a secretary, being hit on, being told you don't look like you're a programmer or whatever, are bullshit victim hysterical complaints. The world is not obligated to be sensitive and perfectly attuned to your personal set of hangups, no matter who you are. You are only deserving of human rights and a fair shake under the law.

Are you going to advocate for litigating "niceness"? Will you be happy once all language is fully neutral, the only allowed words denoting negative things are strictly regulated, and offenders fined and punished? How would you regulate interactions to prevent anyone from being offended ever? How far would you take it, if you were fully in charge?

Next, as has already been stated many times, the 47% figure is clearly BS.

The publishers would have gone out of business if the cash cow AAA titles (not Angry Birds and Farmville) were bought by 50% women.

There is nothing wrong with selling to your audience.

Please start arguing that heterosexual Romance novels have unrealistic depictions of men. Please rally hard for that to be fixed.

Also, while you're fighting the good fight for women to get into STEM fields by any and all means necessary... Know some other fields women are underrepresented in? Garbage collectors, loggers, truck drivers, construction workers. You know, the most dangerous, destructive, and shit paying jobs. There is absolutely no parity there. But something tells me you aren't going to give a shit.

It's almost like you're not really interested in true egalitarianism.

@EnduranceFun: So is it like a cult if someone says we have to acknowledge that sexism and racism are things that exist? Privilege is similarly supported by evidence, so...

BTW, I've also seen you say on this thread that internet anonymity should never be compromised. Ideas like this are what helped create Violentacrez and the overall creepy culture of Reddit. The most reasonable stance here is "you give up your own right to anonymity when you compromise someone else's anonymity or do something else equally horrible to them", period.

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

@ghostNPC said:

Constantly disappointed in so many users on this site. Most of you people are really that horrible, aren't you? It really makes me sad.

I think it's a loud vocal contingent. I don't think they represent the majority.

@Zetetic_Elench said:

lol. misandry doesn't actually exist, fyi.

Thank you for this and your other posts here! "Misandry" is the "reverse racism" of gender issues, nothing more.

For those who don't understand, misandry would require women to have far more power than men in order to be real, since (again) sexism and racism are institutional phenomena. And I don't know of a society in this world where that's true.

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

@ghostNPC said:

Constantly disappointed in so many users on this site. Most of you people are really that horrible, aren't you? It really makes me sad.

I think it's a loud vocal contingent. I don't think they represent the majority.

@RagingDaemon said:

If you're railing against women being legitimately discriminated against via hiring practices, pay discrepancies, promotion denials, etc, you have a legitimate issue.

If you're fighting for women to feel perfectly comfortable at all times, you don't have a legitimate issue. Real life is rough and messy. Conflicts happen. Social faux pas' are made. Feelings are hurt. Misunderstandings happen. Sexual Harassment laws exist if it goes beyond that. Being mistaken for a secretary, being hit on, being told you don't look like you're a programmer or whatever, are bullshit victim hysterical complaints. The world is not obligated to be sensitive and perfectly attuned to your personal set of hangups, no matter who you are. You are only deserving of human rights and a fair shake under the law.

Are you going to advocate for litigating "niceness"? Will you be happy once all language is fully neutral, the only allowed words denoting negative things are strictly regulated, and offenders fined and punished? How would you regulate interactions to prevent anyone from being offended ever? How far would you take it, if you were fully in charge?

Next, as has already been stated many times, the 47% figure is clearly BS.

The publishers would have gone out of business if the cash cow AAA titles (not Angry Birds and Farmville) were bought by 50% women.

There is nothing wrong with selling to your audience.

Please start arguing that heterosexual Romance novels have unrealistic depictions of men. Please rally hard for that to be fixed.

Also, while you're fighting the good fight for women to get into STEM fields by any and all means necessary... Know some other fields women are underrepresented in? Garbage collectors, loggers, truck drivers, construction workers. You know, the most dangerous, destructive, and shit paying jobs. There is absolutely no parity there. But something tells me you aren't going to give a shit.

It's almost like you're not really interested in true egalitarianism.

I wish we could up-vote posts. I would be really interested to see Patrick's response to this, or if he lumps this well-reasoned and interesting counter-argument in with all the trolling.