I think the biggest crime about this whole thing is that now people have been divided into "Gamergate" and "Anti-Gamergate" when, in fact, most of this forum doesn't give a damn shit about the distinction, including a lot of people that have been de facto labelled "anti-Gamergate" for daring to point out that MRA dudebros are asshole and will be assholes - as if they were somehow talking about all of Gamergate.
Fact of the matter is, dudebros LOVE to hurl abuse at any woman saying something they don't like. I'm not even talking about mysterious anonymous threats that may or may not be the person sending it to themselves. I'm talking about real people leaving abusive, shitty comments all over the fucking place telling everyone how much they would love to beat Anita Sarkeesian to a bloody pulp, and even making a flash game where you do just that. It exists. I've not only seen it, but we've even had a dudebro on this very forum post a screenshot from it proudly.
Fact of the matter is, the anti-Gamergate crowd has a bunch of radfems and other SJWs. This is true.
But it does not invalidate the fact that Gamergate DOES have a lot of abusive MRA fuckwits in it.
There is no "Good guys and bad guys" scenario here. What we have are a bunch of fuckwits infesting both sides of a debate. We have two people who are guilty of other things that a lot of dudebros have outright stated in public forums that they wish they could beat to a bloody pulp. These things are not faked, and just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean they don't exist.
So don't give me your pure, unadulterated bullshit about how no one is being abusive towards Quinn and Sarkeesian. Because it is. I've seen how entitled male gamers act. They will always speak up in any situation that even slightly concerns them, and many situations that don't. Gamergate concerns them. Gamergate may have a diverse gathering of different people, and that diversity includes MRAs, fedora-wearing "nice guys", and gamers who think games are only for men and no one else.
There is a lot of sexism in the gaming community, like you wouldn't believe. And right now, I have seen several people deny this.
Do not sacrifice your intelligence to blindly follow Gamergate. Do not.
I am not a part of Gamergate. Nor am I anti-Gamergate. I am simply a feminist gamer who is sick and tired of the bullshit we men inflict on women and ourselves, and you are an asshole if you think you can sort me into one house or the other.
Okay, so you're not anti-GamerGate. And you made some good points. However, the crux of your argument (that GamerGate is dominated by misogynistic dudebros) is demonstrably wrong. Ergo, your argument that there are "no good guys or bad guys" is incorrect.
I never said that there was no harassment against Quinn or Sarkeesian. Furthermore, I strongly condemn cyberbullying. However, I have reason to believe that the more extreme examples they claim to have suffered since this shitstorm began were false-flag attacks. The first is that both have a history of dishonesty. Anita claimed to be a "Gamer Girl", when in reality, she isn't. She also completely misrepresents the games she discusses. As for Zoe, she lied to her boyfriend about her affairs. And if the story about her affairs is wrong, then why did they try to suppress it?
The second is that in both cases, evidence exists to suggest that they faked the attacks against them. There may not be any smoking gun, but if they hadn't had a history of lying and untrustworthy behavior, I might be more inclined to believe them.
And it's certainly true that the "neckbeard" crowd is involved in GamerGate. That's objective truth. However, it's also an objective truth that they're only a small minority. The RadFems and SJWs in MiniJust, however, make up just about anybody who isn't a corrupt journalist or a well-meaning but misguided/misinformed follower.
You're also ignoring the fact that men in MiniJust get harassed too. Phil Fish probably got the worst of it. I don't like him, but I also don't think he deserved the vitriol he got. This raises an important question: why wasn't he brought up as an example of GamerGate extremism? Simple: the mere fact that he has a penis and is okay with that would undermine their narrative about sexist bullying.
The fact that MiniJust has to resort to censorship and logical fallacies demonstrates that they don't have a leg to stand on and they know it. They're hypocrites, they're liars, they're bullies, they hate and resent their audience, and they have a proven record of corruption.
Now, let me talk about the "boy's club" that is gaming journalism. The fact is that most gaming journalists are white male cishets from backgrounds that are at least middle-class- exactly what they accuse their detractors of being. GamerGate, on the other hand, represents gamers (and non-gamers too) from a lot of different backgrounds. You have gamers who are sick of being stereotyped and talked down to, women and minorities who resent being used as human shields against criticism, muckraking investigative journalists, more moderate Social Justice advocates who don't want their movement to be tarnished, reasonable gaming journalists who have had their opinions and stories suppressed, developers who are tired of being told what to do, white male cishets who've had enough of being demonized for something they can't control, intellectuals who want more honest discourse, and people who are generally against corruption. And I think I may have left more than one group out. The fact that MiniJust focuses myopically on the worst parts says more about them than it does about GamerGate.
The fact remains that the MiniJust faction of gaming journalists are very much a closed circle. More to the point, they've been proven to collaborate and conspire, and they flagrantly ignore professional boundaries.
Zoe Quinn's infidelity and the subsequent coverup were just the spark that ignited the powder keg. Resentment towards the industry has been building for quite some time. And when it blew, it ignited a firestorm of controversy. And we got to see gaming journalism's true face: the face of haters. It exposed the fact that they were dominated by elitist snobs who had nothing but contempt for their audience. They pissed on an entire subculture from atop their ivory tower, and now that tower's being torn down. I've seen gaming journalism's true colors, and the dominant one is a very obnoxious shade of yellow. The fact is that they use sensationalism to their advantage, because controversy sells and keeps them in the spotlight. And they're cowards: afraid that gaming has outgrown them, afraid of being called out, afraid of honest discourse.
The fact that you're not automatically swallowing MiniJust's story speaks volumes about you. I know you're a reasonable guy. You're not a SJW. And I don't blame you for being on the fence, because I was there for a while myself. But for goodness sake, do your research before passing judgment on an entire movement. I've done my research on MiniJust, so I feel I have the right to criticize them. Also, I'd like everybody, including myself, to try and refrain from using logical fallacies.
This conflict has been raging for quite some time, and it's not showing signs of settling down anytime soon. This is more than a flame war. This is the birth of something new, something great. If we win, we will have demonstrated once and for all that the internet is a force to be reckoned with. We will demonstrate that it can unite as much as it can divide, that it can be used for truth as much as it can be used for lies, that it can do good as much as it can do bad. Nothing will be the same after this is over.
Fight the power! Smash corruption!
