@koriar: A couple of things. First, I agree about not being able to speak openly. People seen as even partially supporting GamerGate are marginalized and discouraged from speaking, essentially regardless of what they have to say.
Second, there is some segment of GamerGate that wants journalists whose opinions they disagree with to just go away and some of those people are willing to go after advertisers to silence them. I can understand being insulted by some of the things which were written about 'gamers' the past few weeks. I can understand disagreeing with a journalist's views about where videogames should be headed. If you want to boycott those folks because you don't like their stuff, then go ahead. But, organizing a campaign to write sponsors with the goal of getting that person fired or harming the publication is intolerable. When you start trying to get the person fired or the publication closed, then you prove that what you REALLY want to erode is that person's ability to speak and not just their ability to speak to you. So, I can't give the pro- group full marks when it comes to tolerating different views.
Finally, the anti- crowd has done some good. Notably, a group of critics and developers has been harassed and the anti- crowd has rallied in their defense. That's really important. You sort of brush it off as just giving money to individuals, but supporting people in the face of harassment is absolutely vital.I know there almost all of the people in the pro- crowd despise the harassment, but I don't think there's any question that folks on the anti- side have done more to directly help those affected.
I feel like there's a difference between being able to speak your opinion and coordinating with people to create a narrative. If someone wants the narrative to be "All gamers are misogynists and they should die" then I personally see no problem with letting their sponsors know that they are attacking their consumers. I would see no problem with doing the same thing to sponsors of any group that promotes bullying and harassment. I don't want to take away anyone's voice, but if people are throwing their weight around to hurt people then I think that their voice shouldn't be given as much of a platform as it is. Look at Leigh Alexander, she's straight up said that she will try to ruin the career of anyone who disagrees with her... I don't want someone like that in charge of representing the gaming community.
The problem with the idea of anti-gg people directly helping those affected is that the people on the pro-gg side that have been harassed don't instantly follow it up with "I got a death threat! Here's a link to my patreon!" they say "no, this isn't about me, I don't need money, I need this message to get out." So there isn't a public meter showing "here's how much this person made off of their harassment" but instead an outpouring of verbal support towards these people. That's a lot harder to measure. Though I'll say that I look forward to Steven Totilo writing an article on GGFeminist, as he appears to have reached out to her for comment.
Log in to comment