Intel Drops Gamasutra Sponsorship Over Controversial Editorials

An anonymous reader writes Processor firm Intel has withdrawn its advertising from Gamasutra in response to the site's decision to carry feminist articles. The articles had drawn the ire of the self-described "Gater" movement, a grass-roots campaign to discredit prominent female games journalists. Intel was apparently so inundated with criticism for sponsoring the Gamasutra site that it had no choice but to withdraw support. An Intel spokesperson explained that "We take feedback from our customers very seriously especially as it relates to contextually relevant content and placements" and as such Gamasutra was no longer an appropriate venue for their products."

gtfo

[Anonymous Coward]

So called gater movement needs to fuck off and die.

There are people who don't like Anita Sarkeesian or Carolyn Petit or a lot of other people who make it their overbearing agenda to misrepresent reality and gamers and focus 155% on perceived feminism in video games or perceived gender-damaging things. Those people aren't a grass roots movement, or gaters, we're just people who hate bullshit and don't tolerate it. Never heard of these gaters referred to as a group before but wow, give me a break.

Re:gtfo

[LordLimecat]

Alternate headline:

Irrelevant movement about how gaming news continues to make itself irrelevant by being unprofessional finds new ways to be unprofessional and irrelevant.

Since the last 2 articles, my level of caring about this issue hasnt budged beyond "its mildly interesting just how much drama a non-issue can generate".

Re:

[CaptainDork]

I never heard of any of this shit before today. Who and what are these people and why should I care? I don't get it.

It's something about feminism vs game shit.

I read two (2) long articles of obscure crap and I am not enlightened at all.

I have no choice but to subscribe to the notion that gamers should stick to Candy Crush and avoid philosophy.

Re:gtfo

[PopeRatzo]

I never heard of any of this shit before today. Who and what are these people and why should I care? I don't get it.

You shouldn't care. Unfortunately, the people who should care do not. There is a lot of ugly misogyny in games. This is because such a large percentage of gamers are scumbags or young men who engage in the online equivalent of pulling a girl's pigtails because she makes them feel funny in the pants and they don't yet know why.

The problem is that, being online, there are no longer limits. If you're a woman gamer, and you don't respond to certain male gamers they way they want you to, you will get death threats, rape threats and doxxing. And it goes from 0-60 in nothing flat. Playing online games all day has left many of these young men completely without any sort of self-governance of their id. And people end up getting hurt. Sometimes in very real-world ways.

The fact that most games are written and told from an adolescent male point of view does not help. It creates a sort of greasy milieu where it's easy to believe that any behavior toward a woman is acceptable.

Lots of good gaming sites like Gamasutra are looking to include more female voices in coverage of games, because it turns out (much to our surprise) that there are actually women gaming out there and interestingly enough, they don't want to be treated like shit every single goddamn day of their lives. I don't know anything about these "gaters" (and when I google it I get a bunch of misspelled information about Florida college football) and I haven't read Gamasutra in a while (I don't see anything on their current front page that would indicate any striking feminist agenda at work). But I do know that Microsoft would throw a baby off a bridge for a dollar bump in stock price, so whatever the facts are in this story, there's a good chance that Microsoft is in the wrong. Because.

 

Re:gtfo

[khasim]

There is a lot of ugly misogyny in games.

Yes there is. And in society as a whole. And it isn't just misogyny.

If you're a woman gamer, and you don't respond to certain male gamers they way they want you to, you will get death threats, rape threats and doxxing.

I wish that someone with better gaming skills than me would do a few tests. As such:

Create an account with a female name and avatar. Play some games. Record the reactions.

Create an account that appears to be African American. Play some games. Record the reactions.

Create an account that appears to be LGBT. Play some games. Record the reactions.

Create an account that appears to be Jewish. Play some games. Record the reactions.

Create an account that appears to be Muslim. Play some games. Record the reactions.

Create an account that appears to be a teenage male. Play some games. Record the reactions.

I'd say that you'd find an amazing amount of hatred for each of those categories. Not because there really is that degree of specific hatred. But because the people losing are trying to hurt the victor with whatever insults they think might work.

The fact that most games are written and told from an adolescent male point of view does not help. It creates a sort of greasy milieu where it's easy to believe that any behavior toward a woman is acceptable.

While I believe that that is a MAJOR factor I think it is also an unconscious strategy on the part of the less competent gamers.

If a woman beats you at that game and you call her a whore and she leaves and never comes back then that is one less player who is better than you.

In my experience, no one bothers with directed insults at someone who is a worse player or who agrees with your opinions.

So, IMO, there is no solution in the larger context. But there are ways to mitigate it in the specific category of playing games. And the easiest to implement would be to restrict messages until a player has sufficient investment in a system to behave themselves.

I also hope that, someday, someone will come up with a variation of the Bechdel test to demonstrate how women are depicted in games. If the woman can be replaced with a bowling ball then there is a problem with the writing.

My daughter was kidnapped and is going to be auctioned into sexual slavery! I must kill all the peoples.
vs.
My bowling ball was stolen and is going to be auctioned on eBay. I must kill all the peoples.

Re:

[Xest]

"I'd say that you'd find an amazing amount of hatred for each of those categories."

On the contrary, when I played Dark Age of Camelot playing a female char was a massive advantage as all the desperate teenage boys assumed you were actually female, sucked up to you, gave you a load of free gear, and regularly invited you into groups. On large raids they were always given the best spots, and allowed first dibs on good items.

Females were always at a massive advantage in that game at least and any abuse they to

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

This tired old argument, huh? A is bad, but B, C and D are also bad so stop complaining about A.

Unless we talk about specific issues related to A, rather than just a general "there are problems in gaming", it's hard to see how any of this can ever be resolved. Feel free to complain about racism, homophobia, religious hatred etc. It doesn't devalue any of the points being made about the portrayal of women.

Re:

[HatofPig]

There is undoubtedly lots of sexist shit going on surrounding GamerGate (what you should have searched for), but most of the controversy is the nature of how feminists inserted themselves into gaming "journalism". There is no professional ethics in the industry, and the editorial boards of different sites basically handed the keys over to an ideological authority who is going to preach their message top down.

Lots of gamers resent feminism capturing their press and then immediately slandering the gamer iden

Re:gtfo

[PopeRatzo]

They decided to start their ventures reviewing games, and built names for themselves in their niche. But they can not solve misogyny in gaming.

I don't know that they cannot. Critical theory, my field, is practically a history of how criticism changed culture. There have been a lot of behaviors that were acceptable once and are no longer so. In Rome, they used to have slaves fighting each other, and wild animals, to the death for people's amusement. At some point, it became unacceptable and now is unthinkable. I believe the same can happen to this kind of casual misogyny.

I believe you when you say that gamers like you are turned off by the immaturity of the greater gaming community.

Nosiree. It's not the immaturity of the greater gaming community that turns me off. I'm immature (yes, it's true). Rather, it's the ugly verbal violence towards women that turns me off. The ugly verbal violence of gamers toward each other, too. I'm not talking about, "Man, I totally headshotted you, fucker". I'm talking about, "Man, I totally turned you over and fucked you up your ass". There's a difference. You will be surprised to know that women gamers don't like being called "cunts" and "whores" and "hose-monsters" and don't really enjoy it when other gamers talk about raping and torturing them. They don't mind so much when someone who just headshotted them says, "Nailed you, noob". There's a difference, you see?

As far as companies go, if you don't like pandering to gamers then get out of the business.

Those companies have the right to decide for themselves what that business is going to be and more important, who their target audience is going to be. The fact is, nobody wants to be around creeps. Even other creeps don't want to be around creeps. Did you ever read any of the creep gamer forums? They all talk past one another and will turn on each other in a heartbeat. There's no "business" catering to those people except maybe porn. And maybe the game writers don't want to be porn for creeps any more.

What if gun-control advocates start getting editorials into gun magazines, and then when complaints roll in the magazines start calling branding their readership as a bunch of paranoid crazies.

Well, you're offering me a fat, slow-pitch right down the middle there. The straight answer however, is that if there was a growing readership of responsible gun owners who were just as interested in the safety of their children and communities as they were in how to properly Stand Your Ground when encountering a black youth in a hoodie, I'd say it was the prerogative of the owners of the magazine to aim their editorial decisions to the most desirable demographic. Wouldn't you? Don't you believe that the owners of a publication of web site should be allowed to decide who they want to sell their product to and who they don't? Of course you do. As the consumer of a product you have a very binary choice: either you want the product or you do not. The choices of the editorial purveyors are a lot more complex. Are the members of the Woman Haters Club growing in number or shrinking? Do they spend money on the products our advertisers sell? Is the growing number of female gamers a better audience for us going forward?

I'm sorry to tell you this, friend, but you just don't get a say. You can read the site or you can not. You can write letters and make noise and demands all you want, but at the end of the day, the ugliness is just ugliness and nobody's going to cater to it forever. Some day, the Colosseum is going to be used for X-Sports instead of blood sports and you can stare into your lap and commiserate about the good old days when men were men and got to watch slaves getting murdered.

Or, you can go over and read PC Gamer or IGN. But be warned, they're starting to feel the wind blow, too.

And, by the way, as a gu

Re:

[HatofPig]

Don't worry, I don't take anything personally. I'm not even a gamer, never touch the stuff. But I am interested in social change, which is why I bother to have and share an opinion. Even though ending misogyny is a noble goal, it's huge. It would require role-models, champions with a strong voice who might arise within the community to prompt everyone to demand better of each other. Don't think that that's what's happening here.

Siding against misogyny is the obvious choice for most people who hear about th

Re:gtfo

[HatofPig]

It's not the gamer brand I'm worried about, it's the feminist brand. Bad feminists make feminism look bad, and stall progress on any noble goal they might be trying to achieve.

And yes, it's not up to me, but I can comment on them, tell them what will and won't work, and slap my head when they ignore common sense and drive their socially-just cause into a ditch.

Harrassing women is bad. Actions to diminish it are good. Actions which will not diminish it, but actually increase it are bad. That's what I'm against. These particular feminists are making gamers hate women more. Here is a feminist who agrees with me [youtube.com]. Again, I've been following this for months, I assure you there is nothing righteous in defending these companies choices to "get on board early" because they are sinking the ship. Earnestly, I mean this. It's like unintentional sabotage. If early radio stations made audiences hate Otis Redding through bungling decision-making then black music would have been pushed back, and racisism would have been emboldened. Crazy feminists are doing that sort of damage to woman's causes.

If you really care about actual social progress, you should be able to discriminate between good paths toward improving the world, worthy of defending, and catastrophic setbacks like this one. Otherwise, I assume you are just picking a the side in a fight that will make you feel like a good person. You're just saying "I'm for human rights! I'm for equality!" without examining the issue, and unfortunately RTFA isn't enough for this one, because TFA emblematic of how bogus this whole issue is. So trust me. Social change which makes everyone inclusive is good, and you are right for supporting it. But this isn't that.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

Thunderf00t doesn't make any good points. 90% of it is straw man arguments against things she never even said. Take the "SOOOOO BUSTED" video about Hitman. She never said that the game makes you murder strippers. Her point was that the advertising for the game uses dead female corpses in sexy poses, basically necrophilia. The game then allows you to do what the advertising promotes. Sexy female corpses used to sell a game and offered up to the player as toys. Sure, it's not the point of the game, but when e

Re:

[HatofPig]

Since I haven't posted many sources, here is an excellent, succinct Reddit comment [reddit.com] which will give you a whiff of why these social justice warriors don't deserve your support. They recklessly antagonise everyone spreading blatant falsehoods, and even other feminists argue against them and are slandered. This isn't about helping women, it's about aggrandising egotists.

Re:gtfo

[Shadow of Eternity]

If you care about women's voices and prejudice you shouldn't be calling "good" a website whose editor in chief is a blatant racist that threatens black men (using a racial slur) with violence for daring to eyeball her wrong.

Leigh Alexander and her ilk have been targeting women and minorities for doxxing, threats, and harassment so severe that two people (one a black game developer) have already been fired because of harassment and four more have had attempts made to get them fired. One of those was a prominent feminist supporter who received threats of mutilation and rape to her workplace. That's not even getting into the more than twelve other doxxings at this point including a transgender developer whose financial accounts were hacked. I've personally watched as a woman who built schools for little girls in pakistan tweeted about how she was afraid of reprisals for daring to be a "gender traitor". It's insane.

Here are some interviews with thirteen developers, industry insiders, and the feminist group whose female game jam was almost shut down before gamergate:
http://www.nichegamer.net/2014... [nichegamer.net]
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/... [techraptor.net]
http://apgnation.com/archives/... [apgnation.com]

The problem with protesting journalists is that journalists can and will write whatever they want about the people protesting them.

Re:

[Verdatum]

At least in the US, If you go to the police with an anonymous threat of rape or death from a random stranger on the Internet, the response is, "what exactly would you like us to do about it?". They can't put out a restraining order on a person without a positive identification. They can't exactly assign her a personal armed patrol. The police can't act without something solid. Until then, the victim of such threats is forced to just live with their fears and see if the threats turn out to be credible or

It's called Gamergate

[Kunedog]

The controversy is called Gamergate, and it is strange that the summary doesn't mention it by name. I've never heard "gater" used to describe it before. The anti-Gamergate side has a history of trying to alter the name--they've tried "Game Ethics" and hilariously "We Love Videogames")--in an attempt to take control of the narrative, so maybe that's happening again here.

This is a good summary of the events so far (though decidedly from the pro-Gamergate side):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

The wikipedia article is not much help, as it has adopted the anti-Gamergate narrative that the movement is about misogyny. Many of the primary sources cited are the same ones whose journalistic integrity has been called into question.

Here's an interview with a law and ethics professor about some of the journalistic behavior involved, and whether it's OK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

Probably the most disgusting (and damning) behavior of the anti-GG side is the attempt to silence discussion, from the fraudelent DMCA notice to the initial media blackout, and ongoing widespread censorship of user forums/comments.

Re:

[Stormwatch]

And then there is Ayn Rand:

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube.

Re:gtfo

[Nyder]

The problems is that there are two sides to the story. And it's difficult to find sources that will decently explain both of them. One side claims that Zoe faked everything and slept with lots of people to get good reviews and get mods of all sorts of websites to censor anything negative said about her. It is likely true that she was involved with at least one person in the review industry, but not expressly for the purpose of getting good reviews.

The other side claims that it is the result of an ex-boyfriend doing his best to vilify her which caused a decent sized chunk of the gamer community to believe it was now alright to treat to woman like garbage. People, often using spambots, have posted her home address on countless websites (the real reason for most of the moderator censoring), and posted copyrighted nude images of her. She received a number of (idle) threats of rape and violence, and thousands of people on message boards and such started calling her just about every negative term I've ever heard used against a person.

Anti-zoe people were hurt because she became the target both for the reasons why the game review industry is so horrible (who hasn't purchased at least one shitty game do to inaccurate, overly positive reviews?), and the representation of every woman that ever hurt them personally. A large number of guys are drawn to gaming because they are not too good at interacting with women. For a subset of these guys, these problems with interaction have lead to bitter misogyny. In a number of threads and articles, a number of these guys have attacked anyone trying to defend her, claiming that those people either were currently sleeping with zoe, hope/wish that defending her will let them get to sleep with her, or they are loser-white-knights and Social Justice Warrior bitches who need to fuck off and leave us true gamers alone.

So yeah, it's a mess, and this bitter subset has gone and made the gamer community look really bad.

So basically a bunch of kids are acting like they didn't leave high school? What a shock.

Re:gtfo

[LordLimecat]

Pretty sure I didnt say it was, but this hair-trigger reaction to anything thats not resounding support is exactly the sort of drama I was talking about. I didnt immediately come out and defend Zoe Quinn, so I must be "the enemy".

This "movement" sure has a way of turning people off before they even have heard the full story.

Re:gtfo

[Minwee]

In the glory gays of gaming you could swear and taunt and not have to worry about getting arrested for homophobia, racism, anti-semitism, misogyny etc.

Whereas nowadays SWAT teams are standing by to immediately arrest and imprison people for inappropriate use of language.

Heck, I'm still picketing the Supreme Court demanding the release of Mel Gibson.

Re:gtfo

[CronoCloud]

In the glory gays of gaming you could swear and taunt and not have to worry about getting arrested for homophobia, racism, anti-semitism, misogyny etc. None of it is was meant maliciously and it should be considered playful banter.

you know, it's possible to play a game competitively WITHOUT calling the opposing team "fags". By respecting them, you respect yourself. If they pull of good teamwork, don't claim they are "cheating fags" compliment them on it and figure out how you can do the same.

This " basket ball court style trash-talk" isn't necessary, it isn't even necessary THERE.

Re:gtfo

[PopeRatzo]

On the basketball courts I've seen there is plenty of trash talk, but none of it is of the "I'll bend you over and rape you" variety.

Mostly it's the "you can't touch this" stuff. Call someone a "cheating fag" on the basketball court and there liable to be bloodshed. It's a lot different when the object of your trash talk is standing right in front of you and has prison tattoos. Even the men.

I'm pretty sure the anonymous nature of online interactions allows the worst in some people to come out. Heck, it brings out the worst in me sometimes. I generally try to stay away from demeaning someone over their gender or their sexual orientation, though. I don't understand why those are even insults. The gay people I know tend to have about the same breakdown of smart/dumb, competent/incompetent as the rest of the population. They're just less likely to pick their nose or fart loudly in public, which I actually consider a plus. Same with women. Maybe I just happen to know a lot of capable women, but for some reason I just don't think "here's someone I can pick on" when I encounter a woman, which is pretty often considering I have a wife and daughter.

Re:

[PopeRatzo]

If you are so weak you can be hurt by mere words it is YOU who should leave and find some other group to play with.

And yet, in the case of Gamasutra and other gaming web sites, when they do find some other group to play with, all the non-weak bros start whining about how they're the real victims because their gaming web sites don't want them any more and nobody wants to play with them.

Expecting everyone to conform to your ideas isn't only selfish but futile.

Trust me, nobody expects anything from you. An

Re: gtfo

[CronoCloud]

Or I could not act like a faggot.

You use that word with people outside the internet? If someone says to you, "that was rude" do you say "stop acting like a faggot"?

No, of course you don't, that would get you social censure. Why should video games or the internet be different.

If you are so weak you can be hurt by mere words it is YOU who should leave and find some other group to play with.

It isn't weak to expect proper sportsmanship. That's what we should aspire to, not trash talk.

Expecting everyone to conform to your ideas isn't only selfish but futile.

Do you see people outside the internet behaving like you say you want to? No, because there's expectations. In fact in physical sports, bad behavior can get you or your team penalized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... [wikipedia.org]

This is what we should aspire to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... [wikipedia.org]
http://www.merriam-webster.com... [merriam-webster.com]

Re:

[Darinbob]

Playful banter is in the eye of the beholder. Most of it is a bunch of backwards people with no social skills. People who have to be homophobic, racist, or misogynist online need to get a life. These are emotional outbursts from people who have no self control, who likely function badly in the real world. Sure, they're probably just imitating moronic sports stars with their trash talking, but that's not an excuse.

The problem is that if everyone just says "boys will be boys" or "they're blowing off steam

Re:

[phantomfive]

Never heard of these gaters referred to as a group before but wow, give me a break.

Me neither. A google search brought this up as a top link [wikipedia.org].

Re:

[saloomy]

I would argue any movement for restricting one's free speech is a credible threat. The "14yo brat" is free to call anyone he or she wishes a faggot, and you and anyone else is free not to listen. Are you proposing limiting the free speech of someone who's right to exercise that free speech has been fought and won with the blood and lives?

I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.

Re:

[chill]

Horse shit.

Your right to free speech extends only to GOVERNMENT restriction of speech. Private venues are fully within their rights to limit your speech all they want in their venue. Don't like it? Leave.

Re:gtfo

[jtwiegand]

This is a common argument. While it is technically correct, these institutions should promote a culture of free speech, not merely obey the letter of the law. Legally private spaces, such as Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. have become, de facto, the space for public discourse. While it would be perfectly legal for these entities to censor speech, it would seem fitting for these spaces to promote cultures of free speech if for the sole reason than they are effectively the space for public discourse.

People are leaving, and they're taking their traffic and ad revenue with them. It is certainly within their power to not promote this culture of free speech, but those that are not are currently reaping the whirlwind.

Re:

[ausekilis]

My right to free speech ends where your rights begin. True, the government shall make no law abridging the right to freedom of speech (e.g. GOV restriction of speech), but in practice that right has been upheld to private sector too. That is exactly why customer clauses prohibiting negative reviews have been found illegal and unenforceable.

Penn and Teller put it pretty well in their first episode of Bullshit. To call someone a moron or an idiot is slander and you're open to lawsuits. To call someone an a

Re:

[Kunedog]

Horse shit.

Your right to free speech extends only to GOVERNMENT restriction of speech. Private venues are fully within their rights to limit your speech all they want in their venue. Don't like it? Leave.

Oh, they're leaving all right. And warning everyone about how pro-censorship those venues are.

As a side note, one of the initial sparks setting off the firestorm was Zoe Quinn's fraudulent DMCA takedown request against a youtuber (MundaneMatt) talking about the controversey. The government is arguably somewhat involved in that one important case.

Re:

[Concerned Onlooker]

Please note that the person you replied to was not advocating for a law to be passed. The poster was advocating for a "movement." That's important. I would argue that social pressures are more important than laws for keeping people acting basically decently.

Yes, I am for free speech as well, but all speech has consequences.

Re:gtfo

[liquid_schwartz]

Yes, I am for free speech as well, but all speech has consequences.

Sad but true in some cases. The problem with not tolerating speech that you don't agree with is that it keeps a rational discussion from happening. Need an example, try this:

[Person A] We should discuss the problems of massive numbers of undocumented people crossing the borders. Possible downsides include non-vaccinated people, economic costs, crimes committed by said people, etc.

[Person B] You are obviously racist. Why do you hate hispanics, they just want opportunity.

If Person A is white then maybe they'll add comments about white privilege. Not a single point Person A said was considered, just a blanket dismissal as racist. That's the problem with "hate speech" either by government or by the "PC crowd". Not addressing reality carries more severe consequences than offending overly sensitive people who get offended by just about anything and everything.

Re:gtfo

[ultranova]

[Person A] I have an agenda, and will try to hijack an unrelated discussion with my clumsy propaganda.

[Person B] I'm a strawman meant to paint A as a victim of persecution.

Fixed that for you.

Re:gtfo

[Russ1642]

Putting this in a different context if you ran a McDonalds and a table full of 14 year old were using language like that you'd have no trouble telling them to knock it off or leave. And nobody would think you're stamping on the free speech rights bought with blood.

Re:

[ultranova]

The "14yo brat" is free to call anyone he or she wishes a faggot, and you and anyone else is free not to listen.

Being called a faggot in an online game might affect your desire to continue playing online games. Thus, it affects interstate trade, and is clearly within the Federal Government's right to regulate. For that matter, since you listening or not listening to such insults will also affect your future gaming prospects, that too falls under the Federal Government's jurisdiction.

I may not agree with wh

Re:

[bluefoxlucid]

In fairness I don't think the Panthers belong with the others in this list.

But they, and the charicature that the masses imagine for them, are what comes to mind.

Progressives don't actually want to change the problems they whine about. Rather, they want cushy gubmint-funded non-profiteer jobs "managing" the ill effects thereof.

Not really. Mostly they're incompetent whiners and attention whores. We've attached the concept of "Progress" to the concept of "Progressive Politics", and attached the idea of change to progress, and then attached the idea that any action that creates or demands change from a perceived problem state to a new state is progressive and thus good. We've also connected backwards movement to being bad, thus creating a ne

Inflammatory description of article.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've written at length about this particular topic - it's a bane on the existence of the internet at the moment.
I am not endorsing abusing the woman by any means, but she wrote a deliberately inflammatory article which decided to single handedly lump all gamers in as trouble and make the label gamer a "dirty word" In doing so, she alienated a *LOT* of people who previously had no stake in this entire saga.

People are doing the wrong thing on both sides of the fence on this debate. As someone who has followed it for 6 weeks and dealt with excessive censorship in regards to discussing it too, I recommend simply avoiding this one, it's nasty.

Posting Anon, I really can't be bothered with potential backlash (and this post is hardly spiteful but you never know at the moment)

Re:Inflammatory description of article.

[Wonko the Sane]

The degree to which the SJW crowd has to resort to increasingly-inflammatory headlines and articles gives me a lot of hope, because it indicates that the collective unconscious of the Internet really does have a funcitoning immune response that can limit the damaged caused by that particularly nasty virus.

I was worried for a while.

Re:Inflammatory description of article.

[pedrop357]

I stopped being concerned for now because like all movements driven by thin skinned, entitled, whiners, the SJW movement will implode. There's no slight or offense too small upon which a small cadre won't demand that the full weight of the movement be brought to bear.

When some resist as they don't think it's warranted or proper or worthy, there will be butthurt for days as the newly aggrieved subset whines about how the resisting side are traitors, tainted, sell-outs, etc. and they will have to fragment and waste time driving their own campaign against some minor (at best) issue.

Re:

[Tanuki64]

Seriously, the anti-SJW movement can not take even a hint of criticism or examination.

Of course not. The SJW movement is sooo superior:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

Re:Inflammatory description of article.

[fey000]

And what precisely is the "SJW" movement. As far as I can tell, the so called "SJW" movent may as well be called the "don't be a cunt" movement. Somehow this is being portrayed as a bad thing by some people.

Interesting way to put it. To counter, I would like to share with you this wonderful picture: http://gamergateharassment.tum... [tumblr.com]
In case you are wondering, it has so far been a pretty common tactic from the SJW side to dox and threaten opponents to silence.
And if you think that this is the only incident where gamers get threatened (there's also a delightful log where SJWs send death threats to a 12 year old for not agreeing with them) here is a larger collation: http://gamergateharassment.tum... [tumblr.com]

Enjoy the moral fiber of the SJW. :)

Re:Inflammatory description of article.

[PopeRatzo]

The degree to which the SJW crowd has to resort to increasingly-inflammatory headlines and articles gives me a lot of hope, because it indicates that the collective unconscious of the Internet really does have a funcitoning immune response that can limit the damaged caused by that particularly nasty virus.

Now if only the Internet had a functioning immune response to misogyny, bullying, sick rape fantasies and adolescent jerkoffs whose hobby is making other people's lives miserable.

But thank goodness we've stopped feminism in its tracks, huh?

Is the immune system working?

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

The mass censorship of gamers over the last month has raised questions about how well functioning that immune system really is. Gamers and the game media have never gotten along. But the degree to which gamers were thrown out of sites for talking about Gamergate was disturbing, and the "trivial" nature of gaming as a subject matter does not soften the blow.

Gamers were ejected from all major game news sites/blogs, almost all major game forums, news media outlets, subjected to shadow bans and mass deletions a

Re:Inflammatory description of article.

[AmiMoJo]

This has nothing to do with what anyone wrote. It is about the fact that there is a fairly well organized [github.com] groups [github.com] and their sustained attack against an imaginary foe. Go read their guide on Github, it's full of information about how to misrepresent the situation and the site's position to manipulate advertisers into withdrawing their material.

The whole thing would have died down months ago if it were not for the anti-feminists keeping it going with endless videos and tweets, all talking about a war that isn't actually happening.

So Intel pulled out

[Colin Castro]

their advertising because the site will carry female journalists and articles about female gamers? That sounds like the type of decision that backfires on a company.

Re:So Intel pulled out

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel pulled out because one of the editors wrote an article about how Intel's customers "are dying" and "should be eliminated" as a group.

Not surprisingly, said Intel customers didn't take kindly to being told that they should be irrelevant and should be eliminated. And they told Intel.

It's not going to backfire on Intel. No one who buys Intel products is going to stop buying them over this. The feminazis who are going to whine about it don't play video games anyway and you can't boycott what you already don't buy.

It mean, Intel is pissing off the latte-drinking hipster "you aren't allowed to offend anyone" Apple crowd. They'll still be using their Intel-powered MacBook Airs regardless. It's not like they even realize they use Intel products.

Gamers, on the other hand, have a choice: Intel or AMD. And Intel knows not to piss off their enthusiasts.

Face it, Feminazis: Gamers still matter to real companies.

Re:

[ildon]

You are deliberately misrepresenting the article.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/... [gamasutra.com]

"Gamer" is in quotes because she's not talking about "people who play games" but adolescent boys or emotionally stunted man-children that have typically been the prime target audience for video games since marketers in the early 1990s arbitrarily decided video games were "for boys." [polygon.com] The "gamers" she is referring to are the same people who shout racist and misogynistic garbage over voice chat on Xbox Live, and are the very reas

Re:

[BarbaraHudson]

So Intell pulled out their advertising because the site will carry female journalists and articles about female gamers? That sounds like the type of decision that backfires on a company.

They should ask Facebook [slashdot.org] how discriminatory policies can so easily backfire.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of folk inside Intel are going "WTF just happened???"

Rubbish.

[Anonymous Coward]

>> "Processor firm Intel has withdrawn its advertising from Gamasutra in response to the site's decision to carry feminist articles. "

Nope. Intel removes advertising after Gamasutra lead a charge of articles saying gamers were dead. Obviously Intel are quiet taken with PC gamers and the millions they spend on CPU's each year. As Gamasutra was no longer a site targeted at that demographic they decided not to waste the money advertising to people who aren't there.

>> "The articles had drawn the ire of the self-described "Gater" movement, a grass-roots campaign to discredit prominent female games journalists. "

Nope. it's a campaign is to rid Gaming of shitty, biased, corrupt journalists who conspire against their supposed audience. Like whichever anonymous cockroach submitted this article. These same journalists like to hide behind feminists and minorities to avoid criticism.

>> "Intel was apparently so inundated with criticism for sponsoring the Gamasutra site that it had no choice but to withdraw support."

Nope. Intel realised that advertising on sites that are aggressive and hateful towards the demographics being targeted by an ad campaign is counter-productive and a waste of marketing budget.

As ever anti-GG brigade are there telling lies and twisting the truth. So which PR company did this submission company come from Slashdot? We know you know. Anonymous my arse.

Re:Rubbish.

[Luckyo]

It may come as a shock, but people who actually buy i7s instead of i3s and i5s for their gaming rigs tend to be active enough in their gaming hobby to care about industry articles.

Intel doesn't care about the content

[Higaran]

They only care that people are complaining, it's a PR thing. They are pulling their advertising because there is some controversy going on with the site, so it's easier to pull out then pick a side and anger people. Intel would plaster their logo on the side of churches if they knew that people wouldn't complain about it.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhhh, pulling their advertising is picking a side.

Re:Intel doesn't care about the content

[Luckyo]

Advertising is picking a side. Pulling advertising but not starting to advertise with other side is not picking a side.

Re:

[phantomfive]

Intel would plaster their logo on the side of churches if they knew that people wouldn't complain about it.

And if it demonstrated good ROI

Umm, no

[Attila Dimedici]

I know that the submitter lifted this line from the article, "campaign to discredit prominent female games journalists", but I read the earlier articles on this subject. The attempt was not to "discredit prominent female games journalists." The attempt was to discredit specific female games journalists, at least one of whom acted in a manner which was calculated to stir up outrage and was possibly unethical (for those of you who want to argue about whether or not her behavior was unethical, I am not interested in spending the time looking at what she did in order to reach a conclusion).

Re:

[LWATCDR]

It is one of those odd things.
The simple truth is that the vast majority of gamers have never attacked women on line or threatened them. It is a tiny minority but it is often seems as if all males are targeted.
As to the why women are shown in games as super attractive always I have to just ask why are the covers of all the womens magazines full of attractive women? Why are all the men in games beefcake?

Over all you have a bunch of jerks causing a lot of problems for everyone.

Re:Umm, no

[meta-monkey]

You're absolutely right, and the "gamergate journalists," without irony, generalize an entire group of people (gamers) because of the actions of a very few people (assholes).

Sexism exists. There are those who, upon learning Steve is bad at math will say "Steve, you suck at math." But upon learning Amy sucks at math will say "girls suck at math." Not cool.

And if Amy (or Steve) threatens a man with sexual violence ("I'm going to cut your dick off and kill you"), we say that Amy (or Steve) is a deranged lunatic. However, if it turns out Steve threatens a woman with sexual violence, then it's because men are deranged lunatics.

Bullshit. I dislike the term "gamer," but yes I have been playing video games my entire life and do so to this day, PC and console. I am a man. But I have never threatened a woman and am not a misogynist. So quit breathlessly telling me how "gamers have a problem" and "men have a problem." No, no we don't. The problem consists of the one or two assholes who threatened these women.

Go after them! Punish them! Sarkeesian says she was "driven from her home" by these awful, awful threats. Did she call the police? No. No she goes running to the SJW blogs so they can berate millions of people for the actions of one.

And that's exactly how you know the real agenda. Follow the money. If these women were game developers for, say, Blizzard, and somebody made a credible threat against her in the course of doing her job, you know what would happen? She'd go to her boss who would say "shit, can't have that, I need this woman working so we can make money off her!" He'd call security, they'd talk to the police, talk to twitter, get IP addresses, talk to ISPs and bust the guy for harassment. It would be non-story, justice would be served and the woman could get on with her life.

But no, she didn't go to the cops because there's no money in it. The money is in the 500 clickbait blog posts to drive ad revenue and fund kickstarters and all that bullshit. That's why we have to hear about it.

To Zoe Quinn, to Anita Sarkeesian: I am so sorry somebody said mean things to you on the internet. But your issue is with those people, not the entirety of men who play video games. Leave us the fuck alone and go deal with real problems. Thank you.

Re:Umm, no

[skine]

The attempt was to discredit specific female games journalists, at least one of whom acted in a manner which was calculated to stir up outrage and was possibly unethical (for those of you who want to argue about whether or not her behavior was unethical, I am not interested in spending the time looking at what she did in order to reach a conclusion).

Even that's not accurate.

There was not attempt to discredit anybody, but rather exposure of corruption in the gaming press. Some of the people exposed were women, but most of them were men. This whole situation probably would have been ignored like every other instance of exposure of corruption in the gaming press, except about 20 articles were posted on the same day proclaiming the end of gamer culture because it was overrun with misogynists.

In particular, they pointed to a claim that a female game developer had had sexual relationships with male game journalists around the same time that they provided positive reviews of or financial backing for her game. The resulting ire was described by all (yes all, as in not one disagreeing) prominent gaming journals as misogyny and slut-shaming the woman in question, even though it was almost completely directed at the men she was purported to have relationships with.

As for what you have in parentheses, I also don't care whether or not one considers her behavior unethical. She is not a journalist. Rather, I care about whether the journalists acted unethically. Even if all of the original claims of corruption are false, it still seems dishonest and unethical that the games journalists have not yet addressed the claims at all, while instead accusing the accusers of being motivated by bigotry. Even if they are bigots, an ad hominem - or more specifically ad feminam - attack does not prove their accusations false.

Re:

[skine]

I intentionally didn't mention her name because, contrary to what the gaming media and Quinn herself say, she isn't the focus of GamerGate.

can relate

[Tom]

I can relate, in parts. To the anti-feminists, that is.

I'm sick and tired of getting feminism shoved down my throat absolutely everywhere. There's new laws, most companies have policies, our language is being policed for misunderstood "gender-equality" and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm in full support of women fighting actual oppression. If you can't vote just because you're female, I'm with you on that. If you can't drive a car because you're a female, I'm with you on that. If your boss tells you that short skirt is the appropriate dresscode, while he insists on long trousers for your male colleagues, I'm with you on that.
But the feminazis who insist that absolutely everything has to be exactly 50/50 male/female, then for all I care you can fuck off and die.
Also, let's be honest, many of the most vocal feminists quite publicly state that their goal is not 50/50, but female dominance.

Women in video games is one of the "soft topics". Yeah, it's ridiculous what armor female characters wear sometimes. But you're blind, deaf and stupid if you think it's a gender thing. Look at the male characters - they are all Schwarzeneggers, too. According to my female friends, I'm quite handsome, but most video game characters beat me hands down in both beauty and body shape. It's the same as in movies and magazines - we get idealized, unnaturally enhanced versions of humans.

Could video games improve their representation of women? Sure, they could. But the subject is by far not as simple and clear-cut as voting rights or such.

And frankly speaking, I play video games to relax and shut down. You could keep your politics out of my entertainment and work on improvements in the real world. You know, the one that matters.

Re:

[Spad]

For the love of God, if you think your games (or any media you consume, frankly) don't have any politics in them then it simply means they have politics that you already agree with. The number of truly apolitical games out there is vanishingly small.

This idea of "just let games be about the games" is as bullshit as saying "why can't my music just be about the music".

Re:

[geekmux]

For the love of God, if you think your games (or any media you consume, frankly) don't have any politics in them then it simply means they have politics that you already agree with. The number of truly apolitical games out there is vanishingly small.

This idea of "just let games be about the games" is as bullshit as saying "why can't my music just be about the music".

Really?

Take the top 20 games from any app store out there and show me where the hidden agenda is behind that pointless drivel that turns the average smartphone user into a walking Candy Crush junkie.

I guess I'm struggling to see the pro-communist message in Flappy Bird. Or the feminist movement buried in that 3rd shuffle of Solitaire. If anything, we have MORE entertainment out there that is rather mindless and without a hidden agenda, not less.

I get crazier things with my breakfast cerial

[Thud457]

Tetris didn't have any politics!

Goddamned Russki's building a WALL. Yeah, nuthin' political there.

And 'poof'! it's gone.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://midnightresistance.co.uk/articles/shitty-toys

Don't worry. Just because many games are sexist and/or misogynist doesn't mean they'll go away. Porn won't go away either. There's a market for these things, and that will stay that way.

People need to realise some things are sexist and misogynist. That is all. We don't need a world free of these things.

I watch Tom & Jerry and am very well aware it has racist elements. But I know these things as relics of their own time. By knowing it contains racist el

Re:can relate

[Anonymous Coward]

>You could keep your politics out of my entertainment

There is no such thing as non-political entertainment. Your entertainment came with political views, whether they were consciously put in there or not. You just can't see them because they're the defaults. So no, until you can find a way to engineer society in a way that there are no such things as "default settings", I will continue to inject my politics into everything, until they become the new default setting.

For the record, your examples of how "both genders get idealized" are stupid and don't equate. The muscular body-builder type of ideal is an ideal of strength, control, and power. The kinds of ideals we push women characters to aren't about those things - they're about looking attractive to men, and reduction of the character to a sexual object. When we reverse these ideals, the women who are idealized as strong, powerful, and in-control look about the same as the men who occupy that same niche. But if we look at how the men fare, well... If we just blindly apply the objectification tropes we apply to women, to the men, the kinds of people who think the way you do would be instantly offended. If we apply objectification, but tune it towards what women want, we get movies like Twilight and cartoons like Free, which again result in horrible backlash from the "I don't want feminism I want equality" people.

It seems that, when women are pushed towards the sexual object ideal, people like you are okay with it; but when we turn men into sexual objects you guys scream bloody murder. Now imagine a world where every time you see a man anywhere, they are either engineered (in the case of media representation) or are engineering their appearance to look submissive, inferior, or passive. Imagine a world where every man aspired to look, act, and be like Edward from the Twilight series. I think you would be a little justifiably pissed - but you can't be, because now you're just pushing your politics onto everything, and why can't I just enjoy a night looking at hawt guyz OMG LOL - queue rabid hate storm of angry Twilight-playing teenage boys.

Oh and by the way, "feminism" is such a ridiculously big-tent ideology that Sarah Palin qualifies as one, as well as the transphobic crazies that want to remove all hints of masculinity from existence. As well as many millions more of people who are reasonable, and just happen to see the obvious problems you are continually missing.

Re:can relate

[Tom]

That's actually a really good reply.

There is no such thing as non-political entertainment. Your entertainment came with political views, whether they were consciously put in there or not. You just can't see them because they're the defaults.

In the immortal words of Tim Minchin:

Hm that's a good point, let me think for a bit
Oh wait, my mistake, it's absolute bullshit.

You confuse politics with culture and society. Let's ignore the 50,000 smartphone games that are so simple you would have to stretch a lot of things far beyond breaking to find any culture in them, to the point where Pong was some kind of social statement. But even with all those games ignored and restricting ourselves to PC games, yes they very often reflect parts of our culture and society. Some intentionally, some not. It's not a surprise, given that culture influences on us as members of society, and thus leaves a mark in our creative pursuits, just like greek culture influenced greek art and literature and any famous american book of your choosing would've been very different had it been written by a chinese author in China, for example.

Politics, however, is not the same as culture.

Merriam-Webster [merriam-webster.com] says:

polÂiÂtics
noun plural but singular or plural in construction \ËpÃ-lÉ(TM)-ËOEtiks\

: activities that relate to influencing the actions and policies of a government or getting and keeping power in a government

: the work or job of people (such as elected officials) who are part of a government

: the opinions that someone has about what should be done by governments : a person's political thoughts and opinions

Basically, politics is an activity. Writing a novel or creating a computer game is not a politicial act unless you intentionally make it so. There is no such thing as "unconscious politics".

Second:

This worrying about reflection of culture in our creations is vastly overrated. It's the same nonsense as the claim that violent games turn people into killers. I can play a game set not in todays culture, but in a culture where women have almost no rights, a medieval or fantasy setting, and I won't come out of the game wishing to take any rights away from women in the real world. On the contrary, it may make me more sensitive to gender issues.

When I look at female characters in video games, I see them as characters. I laugh about their ridiculous fantasy armor. I look at their boobs and think "yeah, suuure". Just like I look at the men and think the same.

It seems that, when women are pushed towards the sexual object ideal, people like you are okay with it; but when we turn men into sexual objects you guys scream bloody murder

You make too many assumptions about people you don't know. I'm not for turning all women into sex objects. I do, however, understand that sex and viewing a member of the opposite sex in a sexual way is normal human behaviour. Also, you can have your Chipendales, if you want. Why would I scream anything, let alone murder? You can look at me as a sex object, if it makes you feel good. I'm sure enough of myself to not be bothered. Heck, I've been hit on by gay men. Yes, it's a bit uncomfortable, but not a big deal. Yes, I wouldn't like having that as a constant part of my life which is why I feel for attractive women in clubs and understand why they prefer to go with a small group.

But all of these are a small selection of social imperfections, and there are thousands more of them, some related to gender and some not, some to the disadvantage of women and some to the disadvantage of men.

The muscular body-builder type of ideal is an ideal of strength, control, and power. [...] [women characters] appearance to look submissive, inferior, or passive.

True to some extent. Bu

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

The problem is you are not really listening to what is being said, just getting angry about it. There isn't some huge assault on men happening. Most of this kicked off because of a few short YouTube videos, FFS.

Look, it's not about 50/50 male/female. It's not about only women being portrayed badly in the media. Unfortunately the arguments being put forward are slightly more complex than that, so require more than 5 seconds to encapsulate in a soundbite. For that reason the anti-feminists can easily spread t

Re:

[Tom]

Who told you this? Did you decide with your male coworkers one day that women were out to get you?

No, I actually listen to people I disagree with. I've listend to right-wing extremists, left-wing extremists, even to christian and islamic fundamentalists (though it's really difficult to do that for more than a few minutes).

I've listened to feminists. There are moderate ones and extreme ones. The more extreme ones are quite open in what they want, and it's not equality. They cover it thinly, but basically they say women were oppressed for centuries, now it's time to turn the tables. I have citations, but

It's about liability

[DoofusOfDeath]

They're concerned about being sued by readers for repetitive stress injuries stemming from eye-rolling at these articles.

WOW, the propaganda never ends

[Anonymous Coward]

"in response to the site's decision to carry feminist articles. The articles had drawn the ire of the self-described "Gater" movement, a grass-roots campaign to discredit prominent female games journalists"

I am not going to attribute this to ignorance, this is plain malice trying to discredit #gamergate

the linked verge article is just as bad

[XaXXon]

as the stuff people were complaining about.

Intel has pulled an advertising campaign from video gaming website Gamasutra after it reportedly received a number of complaints from self-identified gamers upset that the site was championing fair gender representation in video games.

Wow, could this have been written to represent one side any more strongly?

That's one way to summarize it...

[DRMShill]

Another would be that video game players(intel's customer) are kind of sick of feminist extremists posting articles about about how all gamers are a bunch of basement dwelling woman haters.

This medium seems to get attacked a lot by people who don't understand it. Which I kind of understand. If you saw someone playing GTA you'd probably think they're a murderous psychopath.

First we had Jack Thompson blaming games for school shootings. And now we have third wave feminists blaming games for some kind of rape epidemic.

Re:

[DRMShill]

You're right. I see your point. Many gamers do prefer Intel but some also like AMD.

Re:

[Tanuki64]

If Intel stands to this decision, which I doubt, my next processor will be an Intel.

Misleading All Over

[Anonymous Coward]

The summary and article are both completely misleading. It's not a political movement. There's nothing political about it, they want a higher standard of journalism. The journalists have been using minorities and women as shields from criticism, hence, #notyourshield.

It isn't about feminism (esp. waves 1 or 2 of feminism), but about journalistic integrity. Third wave feminism actively seeks to undo the equality that waves 1 (and to some extent, 2) of feminism got for women. If you look into the facts, you c

Incorrect, and Perfect Example

[Necreia]

...The articles had drawn the ire of the self-described "Gater" movement, a grass-roots campaign to discredit prominent female games journalists....

The GamerGate movement had nothing to do with that at all, nor has it been about feminism. It actually started when a male Kotaku journalist published an article about a female game developer that he was sleeping with without disclosure, an act that is generally intolerable in any credible journalistic circle. From there, the mainstream gaming media outlets started with "defending it" to "attacking 'gamers'". It was almost funny how coordinated it was, because on August 28th almost every one of the gaming sites posted a "Gaming is Dead" article in unison (http://gamergate.giz.moe/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1409546711940__large.jpg) when they were unable to squash it.

This article is a perfect example of the problem. It's near impossible to get a truthful story, because it turns out that most of the big names in games journalism have similar skeletons in the closet.

Re:Incorrect, and Perfect Example

[ctid]

It actually started when a male Kotaku journalist published an article about a female game developer that he was sleeping with without disclosure,

This is untrue.

Re:

[Necreia]

Finding information about is pretty trivial. But since I made the claim, I'll back it up with a source. Link [8cn.tv]. Search for the names in the link on google, and you'll find a near-endless stream of information on it.

This event was the catalyst in bringing to light the corruption in commercial gaming journalism. It all spun out from there.

Ethics in journalism

[ITEM-3]

The bias in the summary is overwhelming. Gamergate has nothing to do with feminism in video games and everything to do with journalistic ethics and integrity, specifically the close relationship many gaming journalists appear to share with the gaming industry they cover. Yes, Gamergate started as a story about a young woman who made a game and reportedly slept with several game journalists who went on to write positive articles about her game, donate money to her Patreon, and, in one case, a man she had a close relationship with was a judge at an indie award show, and whadayaknow, her game won an award.

The story of that woman (I will not say her name for fear of censorship as on Reddit and 4chan) revealed the unethical relationships game journalists had with game developers, but that was only the beginning. Recently it came out that EA had discovered that about 40,000 of its user accounts' passwords were stolen, but they asked the game journalists who knew about it not to report it, and they happily obliged since they were friends.

The collusion and intense cover-up of the corruption inside gaming media by various media sites has been astounding, and the article and summary here and another example of that. The anti-gamergate crowd seems to hold onto the initial perceived misogyny in order to push an agenda. I will repeat one more time: this is not about feminism. It is about ethics.

Obviously

[Spad]

Clearly the best way to combat the supposed corruption and unethical behaviour in the games media is to encourage their advertisers to demand editorial changes or risk having their funding removed.

The headline and article misrepresent the issue

[quietwalker]

The issue is video game reviewers and sites providing unearned positive praise for a product due to:
    - Bias from personal relationships, including those of a sexual nature
    - Political pressure to over-represent games which claim to be the product of a given minority group

If the 'customer' in this case, is the person expecting a fair and non-biased review of upcoming and current games, they are not served by these biases, especially when they're not revealed from the beginning. This is a basic failure of journalistic integrity.

This was further compounded by a backlash that centered around censorship of any discussion of these issues, no matter how applicable or tangentially related, which pointed these issues out, which is seen as patently unfair - not to mention draconian.

Perhaps the worst part of it all is that those trying to hide this discovery - or promote their side with no argument - chose something ethically sound to stand against, Women's Rights. This is unfortunate, because women's rights have nothing to do with this issue, and pretending it does only weakens future ACTUAL complaints that involve Women's Rights.

Re:The headline and article misrepresent the issue

[MozeeToby]

This is like complaining that professional food critics have personal relationships with many high profile chefs, it's true but it misses the point. Reviewers who make bad (as in, inaccurate) reviews lose readers, no one wants to waste money on a lemon.

I'm much more concerned about AAA publishers leaning on reviewers for good reviews or outright buying them, as has been shown in the past, than I am concerned about some shadowy conspiracy to... promote games by indie developers who happen to be minorities or women? I guess...?

And finally, in today's world of aggregated reviews, it's incredibly difficult to game the system in the way you are describing. It wouldn't be enough to convince one or two or even a dozen reviewers to give you good review. Even if you managed good pre-release coverage the user reviews would sink you after the fact (see the latest SimCity for an example).

(And finally again, there's no evidence, at all that any of the accusations that started this mess are even true. The only thing known for sure is that she had a relationship months in the past with one person who worked at a website which reviewed her game. Jesus H Christ, can we please just let this die already!?)

Dear Intel

[PvtVoid]

Read this article [gamasutra.com] five times, and then promptly fire the brain-dead fuckwit who decided to pull your ads because of complaints from a mob of psychos.

"These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers -- they are not my audience. They don’t have to be yours. There is no ‘side’ to be on, there is no ‘debate’ to be had. "

Re:Dear Intel

[Piata]

I actually applaude Intel's decision because of articles like that. As someone that grew up playing Atari, NES, Genisis and everything that came after, the contempt most gaming sites show for people that actually buy and play games is abhorent. It's about as tone deaf as those stupid "don't pirate movie" ads they play in movie theatres before the movie (that you paid to see) starts.

The Articles Intel Dropped the Site For

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

For anyone interested, here is a link to the article Intel pulls ads from Gamasutra over [archive.today]. It is ... colourful in its descriptions of gaming to say the least.

'Game culture' as we know it is kind of embarrassing -- it's not even culture. It's buying things, spackling over memes and in-jokes repeatedly, and it's getting mad on the internet. ...

It's young men queuing with plush mushroom hats and backpacks and jutting promo poster rolls. Queuing passionately for hours, at events around the world, to see the things that marketers want them to see. To find out whether they should buy things or not. They don't know how to dress or behave. ...

Traditional "gaming" is sloughing off, culturally and economically, like the carapace of a bug. ...

These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers -- they are not my audience. They don't have to be yours. There is no 'side' to be on, there is no 'debate' to be had.

About ten or so articles like this appeared over the course of a few days at the end of August across most of the top game news sites. Apparently, a lot of gamers were upset enough to write into site advertisers to request they stop sponsoring the offending site with ads. Intel have evidently made a dash for the door out of a building the owners have decided to set on fire.

The author of the piece, Leigh Alexander is a described feminist critique of video games and video game culture, as well as wider "geek" cultures. Her personal views on geeks and their fandoms are ... equally colourful [leighalexander.net].

Why do you sometimes mock 'nerds' and 'gamers' so virulently? Isn't that the same kind of bullying you rail against? ...

Self-identified nerds are often so obsessed with their identity as cultural outcasts that they are willfully blind to their privilege, and for the sake of relatively-absurd fandoms â" space marines, dragons, zombies, endless war simulations â" take their myopic and insular attitudes to "art" and "culture" with tunnel-visioned, inflexible, embarrassing seriousness that often leads to homogeneity, racism, sexism and bullying.

Nerds escaped high school. Some of them made millions making video games. Digital literacy doesn't make you special anymore, it makes you baseline employable. Fantasy is on mainstream cable. ...

The fact you got a Game Boy for Christmas and liked it so much you stopped doing anything else doesn't entitle you to a revolution. Your fandom is not your identity. Your fandom is not a race.

I am not convinced that this person is not an ultra-conservative plant sent to discredit feminist and progressivism in geek and gaming culture. If she is, she's making a spectacular effort at doing so. This entire furore is doing real damage to the genuine participation of women in the video game and even wider tech. Intel's pulling of ads might help take the oxygen out of this fire before the industry gets burned.

Re:

[Areyoukiddingme]

It's young men queuing with plush mushroom hats...

What I want to know is where is my plush mushroom hat? I've been gaming on PCs since the '80s and I never got my standard issue plush mushroom hat. I want my hat.

Re:

[BarbaraHudson]

Intel has pulled an advertising campaign from video gaming website Gamasutra after it reportedly received a number of complaints from self-identified gamers upset that the site was championing fair gender representation in video games.

When you write:

However, Women's Rights activist/advocates should be firmly expressing their disdain towards this horrible movement of Femi-nazi's.

Why? When people point out that "gamer" no longer includes just a small hard-core subset of males who orgasm over every new video card and think that all female characters in games should have "vital statistics" that would put a Barbie doll to shame, they're not being "femi-nazis." The appeal of games like Minecraft (58% female) [blogs.com] shows that the word "gamer" is either an archaism or needs to be updated to include the new reality.

If the old guard doesn't like that women are "invading their

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Either gamers are all sexist pig men who rape women at every change they get, or gamers are a mix of people and all these feminist gamer rape articles are BS.
You can't have it both ways. The feminists use gamer to mean whatever they want. Oh look, a sexy female game character: gamers are rapists.
Oh look, minecraft is a game. Gaming needs a safe space because women game.

Oh and btw, where are all the complaints when a game character is a muscled 6 foot tall guy who can lift a ton?
The problem with these femini

Re:

[Rennt]

Either gamers are all sexist pig men who rape women at every change they get, or gamers are a mix of people and all these feminist gamer rape articles are BS.
You can't have it both ways. The feminists use gamer to mean whatever they want...

That's a false dichotomy. And did you realise you are talking about "the feminists" as if they are single monolithic group right after you just finished complaining about how people think gamers are a single monolithic group?

Oh and btw, where are all the complaints when

Re:It's not feminism at this point.

[Anonymous Coward]

Intel has pulled an advertising campaign from video gaming website Gamasutra after it reportedly received a number of complaints from self-identified gamers upset that the site was championing fair gender representation in video games.

When you write:

However, Women's Rights activist/advocates should be firmly expressing their disdain towards this horrible movement of Femi-nazi's.

Why? When people point out that "gamer" no longer includes just a small hard-core subset of males who orgasm over every new video card and think that all female characters in games should have "vital statistics" that would put a Barbie doll to shame, they're not being "femi-nazis." The appeal of games like Minecraft (58% female) [blogs.com] shows that the word "gamer" is either an archaism or needs to be updated to include the new reality.

If the old guard doesn't like that women are "invading their space", they need to realize that it's simply not just "their space" any more.

You are missing the point.

Most gamers, male and female alike, just want to play video games. They want to be able to simply ask, "Hey, wanna play Street Fighter/Quake/Halo/Warcraft/etc?" without any drama, and 99% of the time that is how it goes amongst friends. Random idiots online are trying to get a rise out of you, don't pay attention to them. For most gamers, it doesn't matter if someone is male or female. There are plenty of creepy males and females online, but they're not the norm.

http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/girls-and-software is related to the above statement.

Apparently, also, Anita Sarkeesian, being a horrible human being undeserving of the attention they get, may have very well fabricated the death threats against herself. http://www.staresattheworld.com/2014/09/anita-sarkeesian-fabricate-story-contacting-authorities/

The major, and salient, point is the fact that there is an endemic corruption in journalism as pertains to gaming. Not just that, but most of them, except for IGN strangely enough, are connected to a sort of PR company (Silverstring Media) that is more focused on generating controversy than on anything related to gaming, equality of sexes, improved representation of strong women in video games, etc.

They're pushing a hardline, militant form of feminism, attempting to pervert the word further to gain more legitimacy, Feminism used to be about equality of the sexes, removing all institutionalized discrimination and attempting to foster an environment more conducive to viewing each other as equals, or perhaps even, view each other as just other human beings. Rather than "that black dude", or "that asian chick", etc, you think of them as people like yourself.

Another equally important point is the over-exaggeration of all gamers (and I myself view anyone who sets aside some of their free time specifically for playing a video game of SOME SORT (computer, console, handheld, cellphone even!) to be a gamer, hardcore gamer being the more nebulous term) as being mysogynists and constant desire to sexualize women in games as if their lives depended on it. I understand, in say, Dragon's Crown that the male characters are probably not even close to every woman's fantasy of their perfect man, and that the female characters (except the thief, whom is more modestly dressed) are quite sexualized... But I can accept the ridiculousness, you know why? It's all part of the game's style and aesthetics. Most of it is ridiculous!

Take a look at Mount & Blade, without any modifications mind, and play as a woman. You put on plate armor, it's the same shape as men's armor, because boob-plate would be ridiculous in a game attempting some realism (and make melee blows more likely to strike the center of the chest). There are other games like that, and other games that are on the more ridiculous sexualization side, though I feel it'd be better to

Re:

[BarbaraHudson]

I read your post all the way through, and you make some very good points. Misandrists are an extreme reaction to misogynists, and reverse discrimination violates the rule most of us learned as kids, that two wrongs don't make a right. People who attack someone based on their gender are idiots, doesn't matter whether they're men or women. But Intel pulling advertising over a bunch of griefers? Of either sex? That's equally idiotic.

Hard-core, bra-burning anti-male feminism was a reaction to the barriers

Re:It's not feminism at this point.

[fey000]

I read your post all the way through, and you make some very good points. Misandrists are an extreme reaction to misogynists, and reverse discrimination violates the rule most of us learned as kids, that two wrongs don't make a right. People who attack someone based on their gender are idiots, doesn't matter whether they're men or women. But Intel pulling advertising over a bunch of griefers? Of either sex? That's equally idiotic.

Hard-core, bra-burning anti-male feminism was a reaction to the barriers women had to overcome. There's still plenty of sexism, lots of "glass ceilings" and silly assumptions related to competency for various tasks depending on your gender and stuff, but I'd like to think we're making some progress as time goes on.

And not just for women. 20% of all nurses are now men. And let me tell you, when you're ill, really ill, you don't care about the gender of the person helping you.

Since you use the term "bunch of griefers" I will assume that you have never heard of Leigh Alexander. You will be hard pressed to find a more vehement, vitriolic, and chauvinistic person even if you lived 500 years. In fact, here's a shortlist of some of the more interesting things http://theralphretort.com/game... [theralphretort.com]

I especially like where she states (way back in 2010 already) that all core gamers are maladjusted losers looking for maladapted coping via games. It's hard to find a broader brush than that.

If anything, Intel pulling out is not enough.

Re:It's not feminism at this point.

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

The majority of the gamers who wrote Intel agree with you. In fact, the entire furore over the past month seems to have cemented the idea of "gamer" as a inclusive, universal identity into the collective mind of the gaming community across the web.

However, that was not the argument the Gamasutra and other articles made. The gaming press collectively declared that "Gamers were dead" [slate.com], that gaming as a descriptor was obsolete, that the "identity was dead", or referred only to a obsolete subset of exclusionary, female unfriendly, "selfish", "conservative", "tribalistic", and -- implied by the accompanying stock images -- fat angry unkempt adult males.

Meanwhile, games companies, marketing firms and online game fansites were still actively using the term to refer to everyone who, well, plays games. Even Forbes magazine [forbes.com] was shaking its head in disbelief at the game media's attack on its own consumers. People are now asking how much damage [blogjob.com] recent controversies may have done to the public image of the gaming industry.

A $80 billion dollar industry which had achieved almost universal consumer acceptance and success may have just been torpedoed as a woman-hating "Cathedral of Misogyny" by its own press publications. Intel is cutting its losses before the conflagration spreads to the rest of tech.

Re:

[rochrist]

Feminazi. Ok, so much for you.

Re:

[what2123]

Ha, so I dropped the terror word. After spending more hours on everydayfeminism.com than and normal human should I am much more of a believer in that term.

It's amazing how some people will stop at nothing to loudly express how much they need to allow .0001% the ability to fit in. It's a great way to further alienate themselves rather than making it easier for them to fit in with everyone else.

Re:

[rochrist]

The poor oppressed straight white man. Saddest thing in the fucking universe.

Re: This white-knight shit needs to stop

[frikken lazerz]

Amen to this. I know it's a controversial position to take,but women have equality (if not superiority) to males. The only reason women don't run the world is because they choose not to. They choose to have children instead. Fair enough, but you can't have it both ways, ladies. And as for the lack of equality in gaming, IT, tec., women simply have different interests. We hate to admit things are biological these days (seems to upset the PC liberals), but women naturally are drawn to more childcare type pos

Re:

[Yunzil]

But then again, the whole thing about GamerGate was punishing a game developer for the crimes of game development while female, having sex while female,

No, actually, it was about exposing the hypocrisy of a terrible person (who happens to be female, although that was irrelevant).

Re:

[Rakarra]

"Hey guys, when you're alone on an elevator with a woman you've never met before, leaning in close and inviting her to an orgy is kinda creepy. Don't do that."

Yes, and that's a fairly insulting thing to say to a stranger. It's like if I walked up to you and asked you to stop beating your wife and neglecting your daughter. It presupposes: 1) That you obviously ARE a wife beater, and 2) that you must stop that. If you show insult, the response to that only mentions point #2: "What, so you think beating your wife is okay? Are you just a complete asshole?" The incorrectness of point #1 is not questioned, nor is the insult that assuming that people in a group conform