A you trying to make me a feminist?Follow

I don't want to legitimate the movement by associating it with my good name.

Then remember the password for your bad name and use that.

So be it. The cycle continues. SpoilerNot really. I think TB is making progress.

And I continue to believe you a radfem, since you refuse to show yourself different.

Edit: And seriously, what the hell was misogynist about what you quoted?

Edited, Oct 30th 2014 8:44am by Poldaran

Because you used "radfem" in exactly the same way feminazi is used, except that you ALSO completely dismissed an entire school of feminist discourse in the process.

You also equated the feminist position with crying misogyny when no one was criticizing the women.

That's misogynist in that it dismisses the actual issues women are having with regards to active, apparent instances of misogyny coming from gamergate, and it's misogynist because it ignores the systemic bias against women that leads women's opinions and ideas to be more frequently and more severely critiqued than men's in the first place.

And, put bluntly, I don't believe in the slightest that women like Quinn aren't being attacked for being women. At all. So dismissing the idea that that's what the crazy feminists are defending them from really pisses me off. No, all feminists care about that a whole ******* lot, and they're not going to stop caring about it just because you'd rather pretend it's not happening.

See, here's the thing about misogyny - it's a systemic prejudice like racism and homophobia. Refusal to engage and evaluate the ways in which your own actions support those systems is the tacit endorsement of those systems. Sorry, that's just how it works. YOU'RE in the place of power here, and dismissing the women who call you out on it as "radfems" is ******* misogynistic.

If you don't believe those systems should be in place, then ******* act like it. Until then, yeah, you're a misogynist.

Guess your feminist friends are all misogynists, too.

I mean lasting change regarding what gamergaters SEEM to want in terms of journalistic integrity. It just won't happen. Ever.

For one, subjective content (from the actual writing to the curating) is always going to be subjective and you're never going to have any clue how influenced a piece is by outside forces (and all of them will be heavily influenced). That will literally never change, because it's the nature of subjective pieces. And because journalists have limited resources, they're going to be using their personal networks to discover the elements they put in stories. So yeah, the girl you're interested in who is also a game designer? You're probably going to mention her game, if it's appropriate for the piece.

And the audience isn't ever going to know which of those mentions would have made it in if the journalist knew about them and didn't have any relationship to them. And editors aren't going to know. And the writers probably aren't going to know, unless they're aware that they're actually giving them a promo.


And in the other issue - that of what gaming sites choose to cover, or not - it's definitely not going to change because gaming news sites are businesses who need to cater to industry powers. Kotaku needs EA WAY more than EA needs Kotaku. They need their goodwill for access to events, for review copies of games, for tours of the offices, for testimonies and interviews, etc. Sure, EA gets publicity out of it. But EA only cares as long as that publicity helps them. So Kotaku HAS to protect its image, and it HAS to be discerning in what it publishes about industry giants, because that's the only way it'll ever survive.

So they'll try to walk the line between promises and reality so they can get the attacks against their advertisers to stop, and then they'll continue on as ever. Because they cannot sustain the changes gamergate wants.

Is there a gamergate group who does video game reviews yet? I mean I'm with idiggory that changing the system isn't going to happen. Seems the logical choice would be to have your own source of news on video games. Given the publicity the group still has this would be a prime time to launch something. Be the change you want to see in the world and all that.

Edited, Oct 30th 2014 8:53am by someproteinguy

For the love of god! Would you please quit putting words in my mouth?!

I don't want to squash feminist discourse. I want the people who are LITERALLY calling people misogynist for arguing against people's positions because the person they're arguing against is a woman to stop doing that. And where Anita is concerned, that's literally what happens. If you criticize her words, suddenly people come out of the woodwork to call you a misogynist. That's it! That's what I was saying!

I used radfem as you did! As a subset of people in your group that are making the rest of you look bad. People you said you were against! I just shortened it because I'm lazy. For ****'s sake! The hell is wrong with you?

Mother. Fuck. Seriously?

If you don't believe those systems should be in place, then ******* act like it. Until then, yeah, you're a misogynist.

Soo..
You either agree with us or you a miso soup and beyond contempt; got it.

Ahh very cool. I half-guessed something probably existed I just wasn't aware of. Figured you'd come here and set the record straight at the very least.

Edited, Oct 30th 2014 9:34am by someproteinguy

You can hire Brett Larson. I'm sure he'd expose that Gawker feller the same way he got that hacker, 4chan.

I said that I generally disagreed with radical feminist theories, and that they're the group that most closely fit the "man hating feminist" stereotype. But essentially all schools of feminism are unified in finding gamergate misogynistic, because it perfectly fits the established mold of what large-scale gender policing looks like.

And while we may disagree with theories, feminism at large suffers by alienating any group involved in the discourse. We grow by challenging each other, not decrying a school so that we can be better accepted into a misogynistic construct.

More specifically, what I need you to understand is that the language you just used is literally a textbook example of one of the most common ways feminism is dismissed. I need you step back and think about that for a second.

SpoilerBecause I know that's not what you were trying to do. And I know you didn't think that's what you were doing. And I know you still don't understand that you did it. Just step back, for one second, and think about it. Because you still don't understand what misogyny is.

You wrote that sentence, the way you did, without thinking there was anything problematic with it. The same way you didn't think there was anything problematic with the vow against harassment. Etc. But what you USED was the language and formatting classically used to dismiss women as whiners, misandrists, trouble-makers, etc.

That's not the result of chance. It's because that's the way you've learned to approach the topic, the way you've learned to speak about it, etc. And it's a deeply misogynistic way of thinking and acting.

And that's NOT because I think you want all women in the kitchen, and that they should be silent sex slaves. We're discussing misogyny as the standards and systems that subvert womens' rights to their liberty, and misogynists are people who perpetuate and reinforce those systems by either knowingly supporting them OR unknowingly (or willfully unknowingly) doing so.

And THAT'S why feminists find gamergate misogynistic. SpoilerIt's not just the harassment, it's the underlying reinforcement of misogyny; the reasons for gamergate's existence and what it ultimately seeks in terms of new controls on journalistic discourse (and why new controls are necessary); the fact that it has reinforced the idea that things like a woman's sexuality should be considered journalistically relevant before it's confirmed as a factor in an alleged problem, and that public opinion on the issue is even a thing; the reinforcement of the narrative that issues surrounding the treatment of women in gaming is a narrative created by self-interested media sites rather than an actual expression of real issues real women face; etc.

I believe that you've made the choice to try and live your life respecting women. I believe that. But I need you to understand that misogyny is deeply ingrained into the systems and mechanism by which we grow and learn, and so it becomes deeply ingrained into the ways we think and act. That means seeing the ways your actions and beliefs damage women can be really, really hard until it's DIRECTLY in front of you.

So you can be pissed off that I'm calling you a misogynist, but I don't care. Because I'll keep calling you a misogynist, and it will be true, until you apply the self-reflection necessary to be less of one. And I'll keep doing it forever, the way people keep challenging me to do it, because that's the only way you unlearn this ****.

You also said that "The movement is nothing more and nothing less than the sum of people who declare solidarity for it. Whether you approve the abuses or not, the abuses ARE originating from within your movement." If the gamergate side can't be separated from their harmful element, you sure as hell don't get the luxury either.

Edited, Oct 30th 2014 1:58pm by lolgaxe