In a debate on the nature of geek culture at its present juncture published earlier this week, my friend Frederick deBoer wrote what I think is a succinct and important summary of one of the more dismaying trends in cultural conversation today: the inability of people who love what is now the dominant culture to recognize that their interests have gone from marginal to hegemonic.
“My fear is not merely that the geeks will never come to acknowledge their triumph, as comfortable as they are in their self-professed victimhood,” deBoer argued. “I fear too that we have come to so thoroughly associate fandom with grievance that the two are now inextricable. That, I suspect, is the long-term consequence of the rise of the geeks: that we no longer know how to enjoy art without enjoying it against others.”
If being angry at someone who likes something else has become so inextricably bound up in our own pleasure in things that we love, it would go a long way toward explaining why debates about previously nerdy cultural objects and pastimes have become so heated — even at a moment when there are more of these objects being produced at a higher level of professionalism and consumed by larger audiences than ever before.
The numbers are undeniable. In television, the number of scripted shows on cable alone has risen 1,000 percent in the last 15 years, and that figure does not even account for the rise of aggressive new players like Netflix and Amazon. When a graph charting the growth in the number of video games released each year was circulated in 2010, the curve was so dramatic that Kotaku’s Luke Plunkett wrote that it made him feel overwhelmed. Superhero movies have also seen a steady climb in the market share they command.
Nobody is asking that Marvel and DC stop making movies and television shows about male superheroes until we have enough Black Panther, She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel and Wonder Woman movies to constitute parity or proportional representation. Instead, the request is that, in a market where the appetite for superhero movies seems to be infinite, a few of these non-white, non-male characters get some of the slots in an ever-expanding roster that may stretch as far out as 2028.
Explicitly feminist video game critics, like Anita Sarkeesian, and producers of alternative video games like Zoe Quinn, are not actually calling for video games that involve violent, exploitative or indifferent behavior towards woman to be yanked off the market. Instead, they are suggesting that the market still has room to expand, and that some of that expansion might come from a different sort of offering, be it more playable female characters in franchises like “Assassin’s Creed” or more choose-your-own adventure and casual gaming options with new perspectives.
And the boom in television means that there is more vastly more content out there than any critic can consume, much less any viewer who also has a job and a personal life. If we want to glut ourselves on our television genre of choice, we can watch our fill and still have there be plenty of room in the programming schedule for innovative offerings like Netflix’s prison drama “Orange Is the New Black” to be breakout hits. Tony Soprano and his ilk do not have to die so Poussey and Taystee can live.
Maybe this is a period of adjustment, and flag-flying geeks and nerds will emerge from this upheaval in a better place. Maybe people will see that the video game industry can survive both expansion and criticism. Maybe “Game of Thrones” fans will recognize that the show’s essence will survive even with fewer naked, threatened women on screen. Maybe the bomb threats will stop.
The essence of confidence is the ability to handle critiques and the existence of challengers with grace and security in your own position. If what deBoer is describing is a permanent state, though, then a certain subset of angry geeks will prove themselves to be exactly what the once-dominant culture said they were all along: myopic and insecure. The hysterical reactions to criticism and challenge do far more damage to the proposition that geek culture contains rich forms, stories and communities worth taking seriously than any critic ever could.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Interesting, Geeks do tend to be their own worst enemies.
Agreed... I've overheard some nerdy arguments where two people who are, ostensibly fans of the same thing have gotten to the insult phase, and one said to the other "you're not really a Batman fan, you didn't start with [THIS] run of his story" I really don't remember which it was, but I was in a shop, and the guy making the accusation was pointing at a particular "classic" Batman book.
I mean seriously. In that one instance, I instantly felt that hipsters were, in many ways "better" than us, simply because they *only* resort to "you probably haven't heard of it"... I mean, seriously. IF I were a Batman fan (I'm not... Marvel all day) how the feth could anyone say "you're not REALLY at Batman fan, because you don't own Detective Comics #27!!" as if reading EVERY comic of a particular character is the only way to *show* that you are really a fan of them.
Ahtman wrote: Explicitly feminist video game critics, like Anita Sarkeesian, and producers of alternative video games like Zoe Quinn, are not actually calling for video games that involve violent, exploitative or indifferent behavior towards woman to be yanked off the market. Instead, they are suggesting that the market still has room to expand, and that some of that expansion might come from a different sort of offering, be it more playable female characters in franchises like “Assassin’s Creed” or more choose-your-own adventure and casual gaming options with new perspectives.
Having not watched much of their material, all I've seen from them is that their material is poorly sourced and not a good argument for feminists. When their arguments are so bad as to be blatantly false and require extensive twisting to give the message they want to present I don't think they're worth listening to.
Few people care if more games are made that cater to more audiences - some people complained at the addition of gay relationships in Mass Effect, but it was mostly non-gamers iirc, more religious or conservatives that decried it as the "gay agenda". It's been proven that gamers (ie. geeks) are some of the most inclusive people that really don't care about race/gender/etc for the most part.
I really don't think that the feminists you listed just want more games made that cater to them - they want "blatantly misogynistic" things like killing strippers to not be part of games, for example.
So no, I think our worst enemies are those that try to control our hobbies based on outside agendas but no desire to be part of the hobby.
Sports fan get mad if you like other teams. They get even more mad if you *gasp* like other sports! And woe to those that didn't follow Team X since 1994 and just started to follow in 2004 because they are bandwagon fans!
As geek I don't really feel we're our own worst enemies. I'm not even sure geeks argue more than any other subgroup. I'm also not sure why we need to convince people that geek culture contains rich form/stories/etc whatsoever.
“My fear is not merely that the geeks will never come to acknowledge their triumph, as comfortable as they are in their self-professed victimhood,” deBoer argued.
And speaking of kettles...
Nobody is asking that Marvel and DC stop making movies and television shows about male superheroes until we have enough Black Panther, She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel and Wonder Woman movies to constitute parity or proportional representation. Instead, the request is that, in a market where the appetite for superhero movies seems to be infinite, a few of these non-white, non-male characters get some of the slots in an ever-expanding roster that may stretch as far out as 2028.
Umm... what? The most common requests for movies that Marvel is getting are for Black Panther and Captain Marvel movies.
Explicitly feminist video game critics, like Anita Sarkeesian, and producers of alternative video games like Zoe Quinn
Oh here we go...
Explicitly feminist video game critics, like Anita Sarkeesian, and producers of alternative video games like Zoe Quinn..., are not actually calling for video games that involve violent, exploitative or indifferent behavior towards woman to be yanked off the market. Instead, they are suggesting that the market still has room to expand, and that some of that expansion might come from a different sort of offering, be it more playable female characters in franchises like “Assassin’s Creed” or more choose-your-own adventure and casual gaming options with new perspectives.
Way to completely miss the point, and to put two things together (Anita and Zoe) that have nothing to do with one another. They're right about Zoe Quinn. She's not calling for games to be yanked off the market. Anita on the other hand is a censor, and wants to have the things she disagrees with removed.
Maybe “Game of Thrones” fans will recognize that the show’s essence will survive even with fewer naked, threatened women on screen. Maybe the bomb threats will stop.
As above, who's saying this? And "threatened women" in Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones is full of incredibly powerful and forceful women. This writer is an idiot.
H.B.M.C. wrote: As above, who's saying this? And "threatened women" in Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones is full of incredibly powerful and forceful women. This writer is an idiot.
Yep GoT has a huge attraction to both genders for a lot of reasons. As you say, there are a lot of really powerful women, both mentally and then physically and "lesser" women aren't treated any worse than "lesser" men.
Also, criticising it for female nudity is amusing when South Park did this song covering the abundance of naked males too.
---
Is the Internet Safe for women by the American Enterprise Institute went up today. Once again using actual data in their arguments which is always nice.
Humans, by our nature, fear things that we don't understand. It can take the form of 'fight or flight', but more commonly takes the form of a good old fashioned argument. As mentioned earlier, sports fans get tribal as do nerds/geeks about quite a few things. 'Batman sucks! Superman is where it's at!', that sort of thing.
What makes me smile is that almost everyone has an 'inner nerd', wether its Football, Video Games, Table top and Role play Games, TV, Movies, Cartoons, Cars, Trains, the list is endless. The people I really feel sorry for are the people with no real interests or hobbies to speak of.
The people that laugh at us because of our 'nerdy' hobbies are often the ones with no significant interest in their own lives and so have nothing better to do...
Yonan wrote: It's been proven that gamers (ie. geeks) are some of the most inclusive people that really don't care about race/gender/etc for the most part.
Spoiler:
I do not agree with the idea that gamers and geeks are the same thing, but I do not think either group is especially inclusive.
TBH I think gamers probably are more inclusive than average, but it has way more to do with the population that gamers are drawn from than anything about gaming itself. Gamers tend to be on the young end of the scale, and younger generations are more inclusive than older generations. For example, contrast gaming with one of my other hobbies, flying airplanes. That's a hobby that is dominated by older people, most of them fairly well off financially, and leans pretty strongly libertarian/conservative. But if those two groups magically switched hobbies I don't think you'd see any change in their beliefs as a result.
Yonan wrote: It's been proven that gamers (ie. geeks) are some of the most inclusive people that really don't care about race/gender/etc for the most part.
Spoiler:
I do not agree with the idea that gamers and geeks are the same thing, but I do not think either group is especially inclusive.
Apparently you missed #notyourshield where a large variety of non-white males refused to let themselves be scape goats for ridiculous arguments. First googled article on the topic if you wanted to look into it. These are people of all walks and they're welcomed with open arms in gaming. Or read through the #notyourshield tweets.
Can you point to any examples of minorities being ridiculed on dakka for their taking part in our hobby? I've never seen it. That said, I've been here a little longer than you, perhaps those who have been here a lot longer could chime in.
Emma Watsons recent speech at the UN was amazing tbh. Feminism that I'd happily stand beside - I highly recommend watching that video.
Yonan wrote: Apparently you missed #notyourshield where a large variety of non-white males refused to let themselves be scape goats for ridiculous arguments.
But that doesn't actually prove anything. Nobody is suggesting that every single non-white-male person who attempts to enter the hobby is immediately abused and forced out. Even in a fairly unwelcoming hobby there will still be people who manage to fit in and have good experiences. So the fact that there are some people saying "I didn't have any problems" doesn't negate the opposite stories from people saying "I had problems".
Can you point to any examples of minorities being ridiculed on dakka for their taking part in our hobby? I've never seen it.
Of course not, because this is a heavily-moderated forum where such behavior would result in bans and deleted posts.
d-usa wrote: So nerds are just like any other subgroup?
Sports fan get mad if you like other teams. They get even more mad if you *gasp* like other sports! And woe to those that didn't follow Team X since 1994 and just started to follow in 2004 because they are bandwagon fans!
Yes, everyone being equal is a great goal to strive for. You cannot pick and choose, and attempting to only deal with one part of the problem is not only going to alienate others, it's not going to work. Looking at gender roles as a whole is going to be far more productive than vilifying one gender that has many problems of it's own. While I was always open minded about this sort of thing, being exposed to a lot more of it (especially trans) lately has being eye opening for me and I really hope the situation can improve for everyone. Radicals of all types don't help the situation, in this case specifically Anita I think really sets back the feminist cause in video games because yeah, there is some good discussion to be had there when it's reasonable, rational nad based on solid evidence.
"Geeks are too comfortable in their victimhood, but there are plenty of new tv dramas on tv, and Black Panther needs a movie, so gaming feminism for all."
Yonan wrote: Can you point to any examples of minorities being ridiculed on dakka for their taking part in our hobby? I've never seen it. That said, I've been here a little longer than you, perhaps those who have been here a lot longer could chime in.
Emma Watsons recent speech at the UN was amazing tbh. Feminism that I'd happily stand beside - I highly recommend watching that video.
You know what I find amusing about the internet's acceptance of Watson's speech on feminism? A couple of weeks ago, those same people that are now supporting her were really upset that nude photos of her hadn't been leaked with the rest of them. But now, because it suits the argument, it's all about respect and treating people decently and 'yay feminism'. (Obviously I'm not suggesting that everyone is like this, or even a majority is, but it is occurring in places like reddit)
Anyhow, I don't have any examples of minorities being ridiculed, but I do have an example of someone wishing that the Sony Hack a few years ago led to large scale credit card fraud and that PS3 gamers had their money stolen because they deserve it due to consoles causing dodgy PC ports, which I'd say is pretty hateful and possibly worse than if it were just minorities, because it's hating *everyone*, whereas if he were hating minorities he'd just be written off as a racist. That same poster is now busy popping into the VG forum thread on women in games to insist that nothing is wrong, and so why should we do anything? Yay, Vitriol!
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
The big problem that this fails to address, though, is that many "geeks" and "nerds" have suffered and been bullied both for who they are and what they do. Oddly enough a group that has a large number of people who have suffered from bullying and social exclusion tend to fear these same things and feel victimized when people attack them.
Also:
Maybe “Game of Thrones” fans will recognize that the show’s essence will survive even with fewer naked, threatened women on screen
That shows the essence of what upsets people. Someone has not read the source book and wants to change the world it is based on for an ideal. You go telling people what they should and should not do without knowing the vision behind it, of course they will be upset. Especially when your view (as shown by others here) is biased in ignoring everything that dose not fit.
As I said, it's not a majority, But considering the extent of 'the fappening' and the extent of the sudden support for Watson, there will be some overlap. (For example, a guy my brother goes to school with. And I very very very very much doubt that he is the only person)
And again, the 4chan response to it is really really disgusting. The fact that people seem to think it's okay is not cool.
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
Yes, 4chan is no longer associated with GamerGate. That was moved over to 8chan.
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
I'm not quite sure how you managed to turn 4chan members threatening to leak personal photos of Emma Watson into an attack on journalists/SJWs, but you did. Congratulations.
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
I'm not quite sure how you managed to turn 4chan members threatening to leak personal photos of Emma Watson into an attack on journalists/SJWs, but you did. Congratulations.
You not being sure of it means you haven't read the proof I take it?
edit: This article is a good one and should explain it, but that's not all it covers.
New Janitors, New Image The above picture is not a joke. It is part of the large-scale rebranding of 4chan. An explanation of what has happened can be found here. I’ll give a short summary: as a result of 4chan’s raid of tumblr, a girl related to one of the owners of Gawker media tried to commit suicide. Moot wanted to stop the animosity between tumblr and 4chan, while most mods objected. Those that did object were booted from their duties and replaced by outsiders, aimed at ‘cleaning up’ 4chan. Among those new janitors are the same group of people implicated by #GamerGate, whose revelations also involved Gawker media-owned website Kotaku. Other new janitors are appointed from his new group of friends.
Moot is finally making moves to try to clean up 4chan, but 4chan doesn’t want to get clean. They love the way things are now, and openly oppose any changes to the way 4chan operates. The below picture accurately describes how most regulars feel right now.
People feel betrayed, and rightly so. The people they tried fighting for over a decade now have the power to delete their words from their beloved website. When this became public knowledge, people immediately started making posts planning to leave 4chan. Another website, resembling 4chan, has already been embraced by a large portion of the active user base: 8chan.co. In response, 4chan banned every mention of 8chan from their boards.
Users haven’t given up the fight. The old 4chan is dead. Will it continue to exist? Probably. Would it be as revered and creative as it was? Probably not. Moot is finally trying to cash in on 4chan. He’s trying to rebrand it as an edgy forum, but safe. To answer to how the biggest forum was brought down is answered. From the inside. 4chan became too mainstream to survive in its current form.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Isn't this one of those articles that came out in Gamergate's wake to try and divide people?
I don't think so, but Steve, above you, has hit on something that I'd been thinking:
Steve steveson wrote: Someone has not read the source book and wants to change the world it is based on for an ideal.
He's right, and the whole article feels like it was written by someone who's heard of these various issues but hasn't actually looked into any of them beyond surface detail. They're talking about changing something that they clearly know very little about.
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
I'm not quite sure how you managed to turn 4chan members threatening to leak personal photos of Emma Watson into an attack on journalists/SJWs, but you did. Congratulations.
You not being sure of it means you haven't read the proof I take it? Do you want me to show it to you or will you ignore it?
I have indeed seen the proof, I'm not denying that there are new janitors in place. My point was that it took quite a leap to get to your point, and that 4chan having new janitors is unrelated to 4chan members threatening to invade someone's privacy. You managed to go from a point about some people on the internet being disgusting, jump over to how people on 4chan are threatening to leak images, and then tootle onwards to 'but that doesn't matter because 4chan sucks because journalists'
Unless you'd see a comment on police brutality and respond with 'he must be talking about Stevetown, they got a new mayor the other day, he's a democrat, I'm sure you can see the problem', in which case it's still silly, but at least you'd be consistently silly.
Classy move with 'do you want me to show you or will you ignore it?' By the way.
Goliath wrote: And again, the 4chan response to it is really really disgusting.
That sentence has no meaning. 4Chan is not a hive mind, and the range of topics covered by 4chan's board are so broad that to paint them all with the same brush is a waste of time.
Goliath wrote: And again, the 4chan response to it is really really disgusting.
That sentence has no meaning. 4Chan is not a hive mind, and the range of topics covered by 4chan's board are so broad that to paint them all with the same brush is a waste of time.
I was referring to the response that Yonan mentioned, of 'Emma Watson supports feminism, let's leak her nudes'. I probably should have been a bit clearer with that.
But even so, trying to imply any real level of organisation within 4chan is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. It's a formless bunch that occasionally congeals to form something, but it's gone just as quickly as it arrived.
But even so, trying to imply any real level of organisation within 4chan is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. It's a formless bunch that occasionally congeals to form something, but it's gone just as quickly as it arrived.
I'm going to steal that last part and use it every time I hear someone IRL complain about 4chan "doing this" or "supporting that". That part cannot be emphasized enough.
But even so, trying to imply any real level of organisation within 4chan is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. It's a formless bunch that occasionally congeals to form something, but it's gone just as quickly as it arrived.
oh, yeah, I've been on the internet long enough to know that That is probably the best description I've seen for 4chan though.
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
I'm not quite sure how you managed to turn 4chan members threatening to leak personal photos of Emma Watson into an attack on journalists/SJWs, but you did. Congratulations.
You not being sure of it means you haven't read the proof I take it? Do you want me to show it to you or will you ignore it?
I have indeed seen the proof, I'm not denying that there are new janitors in place. My point was that it took quite a leap to get to your point, and that 4chan having new janitors is unrelated to 4chan members threatening to invade someone's privacy. You managed to go from a point about some people on the internet being disgusting, jump over to how people on 4chan are threatening to leak images, and then tootle onwards to 'but that doesn't matter because 4chan sucks because journalists'
Unless you'd see a comment on police brutality and respond with 'he must be talking about Stevetown, they got a new mayor the other day, he's a democrat, I'm sure you can see the problem', in which case it's still silly, but at least you'd be consistently silly.
Classy move with 'do you want me to show you or will you ignore it?' By the way.
You'll notice I edited it out quickly if you check the edit timestamp, long before your post as yes I realized it was inflammatory.
The point is you're under the perception that the "emma watson feminism / we'lll leek nudes" thing is related to the pro gamergate crowd because 4chan was pro gamergate. Moot cleaning house means they've all left, and been replaced by anti-gamergate people. So if 4chan is now saying something like that it's not gamergate people saying it. Combine dwith as HBMC says of course they're not a hive mind, and it's just another example of cherry picking.
Maybe “Game of Thrones” fans will recognize that the show’s essence will survive even with fewer naked, threatened women on screen
That shows the essence of what upsets people. Someone has not read the source book and wants to change the world it is based on for an ideal. You go telling people what they should and should not do without knowing the vision behind it, of course they will be upset. Especially when your view (as shown by others here) is biased in ignoring everything that dose not fit.
I read all the books and I was surprised by the amount of nudity on the small part of the show I watched. Really, you could tune down the amount of nudity a LOT and still stay pretty close to the book. Not all of it though.
As for the threatened… well, yeah, that you could not remove .
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yonan wrote: Apparently you missed #notyourshield where a large variety of non-white males refused to let themselves be scape goats for ridiculous arguments.
So? Does that means “fake geek girl” is an expression that was invented by evil anti-geek people to make the true inclusive geek people look bad? Does that mean I have not been told that my Sisters of Battle should not have black skin because they had to be “pure” ? Does that mean that the link in Melissia's signature is all false? Does that mean tau tse tung's anecdote are all a byproduct of his too active imagination?
Or does it just mean that those people disagreed with the ridiculous argument?
Yonan wrote: Can you point to any examples of minorities being ridiculed on dakka for their taking part in our hobby?
Thankfully doing that would be a ban-worthy offense on DakkaDakka.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yonan wrote: you're under the perception that the "emma watson feminism / we'lll leek nudes" thing is related to the pro gamergate crowd
Is he under that perception, or are you turning paranoid?
The fact you are paranoid does not mean they are not out there to get you! Quick, jump to your guns!
Maybe they're referring to the 4chan "emma talks about feminism, we post her nudes". 4chan however has been cleaned out by moot and is now "anti-gamergate" with gamergate threads completely banned as Moot tries to rebrand 4chan as edgy but safe populated by mods from his new group of friends... I'm sure you can guess the type of people they are.
I'm not quite sure how you managed to turn 4chan members threatening to leak personal photos of Emma Watson into an attack on journalists/SJWs, but you did. Congratulations.
You not being sure of it means you haven't read the proof I take it? Do you want me to show it to you or will you ignore it?
I have indeed seen the proof, I'm not denying that there are new janitors in place. My point was that it took quite a leap to get to your point, and that 4chan having new janitors is unrelated to 4chan members threatening to invade someone's privacy. You managed to go from a point about some people on the internet being disgusting, jump over to how people on 4chan are threatening to leak images, and then tootle onwards to 'but that doesn't matter because 4chan sucks because journalists'
Unless you'd see a comment on police brutality and respond with 'he must be talking about Stevetown, they got a new mayor the other day, he's a democrat, I'm sure you can see the problem', in which case it's still silly, but at least you'd be consistently silly.
Classy move with 'do you want me to show you or will you ignore it?' By the way.
You'll notice I edited it out quickly if you check the edit timestamp, long before your post as yes I realized it was inflammatory.
The point is you're under the perception that the "emma watson feminism / we'lll leek nudes" thing is related to the pro gamergate crowd because 4chan was pro gamergate. Moot cleaning house means they've all left, and been replaced by anti-gamergate people. So if 4chan is now saying something like that it's not gamergate people saying it. Combine dwith as HBMC says of course they're not a hive mind, and it's just another example of cherry picking.
What? I never in any way whatsoever implied that it was the pro-gamergate crowd that was threatening to leak the images. At all. I do not think it, I did not say it, and I certainly never typed it. I was talking about feminism and it's critics completely separate from #gamergate.
Do not listen to him, Yonan. He is just playing tricks with you. He is an infiltrated journalist trying to do terribly bad things. You should shoot first just to be sure. Also, throw away your computer, it has certainly been compromised by journalists that are out to get you!
Goliath wrote: What? I never in any way whatsoever implied that it was the pro-gamergate crowd that was threatening to leak the images. At all. I do not think it, I did not say it, and I certainly never typed it. I was talking about feminism and it's critics completely separate from #gamergate.
If so my bad, it's a pretty muddled topic, hard to say what's what sometimes haha. Also it being late doesn't help with comprehension of complex topics I guess.
Yonan wrote: If so my bad, it's a pretty muddled topic, hard to say what's what sometimes haha.
Well, Goliath never took part in any GG thread, as far as I can tell, and he never mentioned GG in this thread either. Seems crystal-clear rather than muddled to me.
squidhills wrote: Our worst enemies are Jocks, Cheerleaders, and Preppies. Everyone knows that.
Yonan wrote: If so my bad, it's a pretty muddled topic, hard to say what's what sometimes haha.
Well, Goliath never took part in any GG thread, as far as I can tell, and he never mentioned GG in this thread either. Seems crystal-clear rather than muddled to me.
squidhills wrote: Our worst enemies are Jocks, Cheerleaders, and Preppies. Everyone knows that.
What about the goths? Those are okay, right?
I've been involved in a couple, but not heavily. I'm somewhere in the middle of the topic, which might be why people seem to not notice me. Both sides have faults that seem to get taken as an excuse to dismiss everything, both sides have valid criticisms.
Most of the time I don't really argue for any particular position, I just argue against bad arguments or people that are being rude.
It depends on what you consider a geek or a nerd. I think of myself as both, and my worst enemy is not myself, but those who refuse to understand me. Those who look at me and genralize. Those who judge me for what I am, not who I am. When you genralize, you destroy the person. You destroy their identity. I've had people assume that I am sexist because I am a gamer, I'm not (quite the opposite actually, I hate it when people are treated less than others). I've had people assume that I am anti-social because I am a geek and don't have many friends when it is completely opposite, I am quite outgoing, just a strange enough that most people don't give me the chance to become friends. I have lived through stereotypes, bulling, and ignorance throughout my entire life, and there is one thing I can tell you, I am not the one holding me back. I am not held back. I am one of the few people who have allowed themselves to be free. I have thrown off the shackles of normalcy and express myself fully and completely. My mind is free, and my actions are my own, not dictated to by what the social norm is. No fashion. No trends. Nothing. I am what I am and I do what I can to be free. And no one can hold me back from that. And that is the only thing that holds anyone back.
People have been generalizing left, right, and center. That is wrong. That is ignorant. That is lazy.
The only thing that holds you back is the idea that you have to go along, whether propagate by yourself or others.
d-usa wrote: So nerds are just like any other subgroup?
Sports fan get mad if you like other teams. They get even more mad if you *gasp* like other sports! And woe to those that didn't follow Team X since 1994 and just started to follow in 2004 because they are bandwagon fans!
Yeup.
Oh... don't forget about the Fantasy Leagues.
Technically cosplayers aswell...
Nice Shirt Ronaldo!!
Im sure no male has ever been exposed to violence or threatened in GoT...
d-usa wrote: So nerds are just like any other subgroup?
Sports fan get mad if you like other teams. They get even more mad if you *gasp* like other sports! And woe to those that didn't follow Team X since 1994 and just started to follow in 2004 because they are bandwagon fans!
Yeup.
Oh... don't forget about the Fantasy Leagues.
Technically cosplayers aswell...
Nice Shirt Ronaldo!!
Im sure no male has ever been exposed to violence or threatened in GoT...
Certainly not the men in the Stark family. Those guys are super privileged.
d-usa wrote: So nerds are just like any other subgroup?
Sports fan get mad if you like other teams. They get even more mad if you *gasp* like other sports! And woe to those that didn't follow Team X since 1994 and just started to follow in 2004 because they are bandwagon fans!
Yeup.
Oh... don't forget about the Fantasy Leagues.
Technically cosplayers aswell...
Nice Shirt Ronaldo!!
Im sure no male has ever been exposed to violence or threatened in GoT...
…
Well, yes. Because as a gamer, I have a hard time imagining his experience as really that bad. But maybe there is an explanation, for instance if he lives in an environment very different from mine. Hence the question. Personally, I had way, way more annoying reactions when I tell people I am vegetarian, or that I do not drink alcohol, than when I mention I play video games.
I would add to that that if he can “throw off the shackles of normalcy [and] social norm” without having society make him crawl into a corner to cry his pain away, he is pretty damn lucky, but I will personally go for social norm and normalcy.
…
Well, yes. Because as a gamer, I have a hard time imagining his experience as really that bad. But maybe there is an explanation, for instance if he lives in an environment very different from mine. Hence the question. Personally, I had way, way more annoying reactions when I tell people I am vegetarian, or that I do not drink alcohol, than when I mention I play video games.
I would add to that that if he can “throw off the shackles of normalcy [and] social norm” without having society make him crawl into a corner to cry his pain away, he is pretty damn lucky, but I will personally go for social norm and normalcy.
I live in mid-state NY, where being a nerd means that you get bullied relentlessly. It was pretty bad, so much so that it affected my relationships and work. People are cruel when nobody stops them. I am not masculine. I am not athletic. I love books. I play MTG. I don't care about popular culture. That singles me out. I am possibly the nerdiest kid in existence, and I reacted to the bullying, which made it worse. If someone knows they can get a reaction out of you, they will push all that much worse. I finally figured out that, I don't have to care what people think of me, but I still hear it. Honestly, I hated the bullying, but I would not be who I am today without it.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I am not masculine. I am not athletic. I love books. I play MTG. I don't care about popular culture.
Me neither. When I entered middle school, clamoring that I hated football (soccer for you Yankees) was a pretty damn bad move. I was taken last at every sport too. I found myself quite isolated during the whole middle school, high school to a lesser degree, and even afterward. But as a matter of fact, that was likely not because of me being geek because I found myself basically surrounded with geeks, learning computer science at the ÉNS…
Now, when you say “all your life” and speak of work, how old are you and in which kind of workplace are people bullying other people over nerdiness?
Also, how did anyone ever told you personally that he or she thought you were sexist because you liked video games?
Co'tor Shas wrote: I am not masculine. I am not athletic. I love books. I play MTG. I don't care about popular culture.
Me neither. When I entered middle school, clamoring that I hated football (soccer for you Yankees) was a pretty damn bad move. I was taken last at every sport too. I found myself quite isolated during the whole middle school, high school to a lesser degree, and even afterward. But as a matter of fact, that was likely not because of me being geek because I found myself basically surrounded with geeks, learning computer science at the ÉNS… Now, when you say “all your life” and speak of work, how old are you and in which kind of workplace are people bullying other people over nerdiness? Also, how did anyone ever told you personally that he or she thought you were sexist because you liked video games?
I'm 18. All my life isn't exceedingly long, but it is for me. I never said workplace (I have yet to have a full time job). I think you might be assuming a bit here. I'm a first year college student.
I have not been called sexist to my face, but have been in a discusion over the srkeesian thing. It's just an example.
This explains a lot.
Expect a lot of positive change coming your way.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I have not been called sexist to my face, but have been in a discusion over the srkeesian thing.
A discussion on this with non-gamers ? How did this happen?
Comments sections of course . They are ridiculous. I corrected someone, and they came back at me with a ridiculous tirade. One of those people who are "feminist" but aren't actually. The types who get really angry about preserved injustices instead of real issues like pay inequality.
When you start complaining about what people say in comment sections of internet articles, it is usually a good sign that you are actually pretty lucky to have nothing worse to worry about .
When you start complaining about what people say in comment sections of internet articles, it is usually a good sign that you are actually pretty lucky to have nothing worse to worry about .
Just an example. Mostly, I wanted to get my point across about how people generalize.
This explains a lot. Expect a lot of positive change coming your way.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I have not been called sexist to my face, but have been in a discusion over the srkeesian thing.
A discussion on this with non-gamers ? How did this happen?
Comments sections of course . They are ridiculous. I corrected someone, and they came back at me with a ridiculous tirade. One of those people who are "feminist" but aren't actually. The types who get really angry about preserved injustices instead of real issues like pay inequality.
It's a comment section; of course it's going to be like walking necked into a honey badger pen, coated in jam.
It looks like there may have been more to the whole "4chan against Emma Watson" thing:
The people behind the "Emma Watson your next" thing, currently trying to frame 4chan, might be a company called rantic. Seems like it's a company that basically creates drama and then profits from it. Or perhaps they were doing it at the behest of some third party. What else have they done? Evidence in the thread I linked. Wait for more evidence before completely freaking out though. The research is in progress. If you can help them out, by gathering and (as importantly) archiving evidence, do so please.
If this pans out, it looks like there are outside groups with agendas to push that's seriously impacting online/gamer culture which is pretty fethed.
They're probably working for Emma Watson. Go read a tabloid sometime. The whole reason those things exist is to be fuel for flame wars so people with too much time and dedication can argue over their favorite celebrities
Co'tor Shas wrote: I am not masculine. I am not athletic. I love books. I play MTG. I don't care about popular culture.
Me neither. When I entered middle school, clamoring that I hated football (soccer for you Yankees) was a pretty damn bad move. I was taken last at every sport too. I found myself quite isolated during the whole middle school, high school to a lesser degree, and even afterward. But as a matter of fact, that was likely not because of me being geek because I found myself basically surrounded with geeks, learning computer science at the ÉNS…
Now, when you say “all your life” and speak of work, how old are you and in which kind of workplace are people bullying other people over nerdiness?
Also, how did anyone ever told you personally that he or she thought you were sexist because you liked video games?
I'm 18. All my life isn't exceedingly long, but it is for me. I never said workplace (I have yet to have a full time job). I think you might be assuming a bit here. I'm a first year college student.
I have not been called sexist to my face, but have been in a discusion over the srkeesian thing. It's just an example.
Buddy... I hate bullies too... I wear hearing aids and an avid gamer. Not a great combo in my school days.
Learn the zero feth given mindset. You'll go far dude
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Damn. I would not have guessed my analysis of Yonan was that much spot-on. I hear tinfoils hat protect from gaming journalists mind control devices!
I shouldn't reply to you, but did you at least look at the evidence collected so far? "emmayouarenext.com is owned by a PR/marketing firm by the name of http://www.rantic.com/ " which funnily enough if you go there is now "Rantic Social Media Marketers. is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance."
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Damn. I would not have guessed my analysis of Yonan was that much spot-on. I hear tinfoils hat protect from gaming journalists mind control devices!
I shouldn't reply to you, but did you at least look at the evidence collected so far? "emmayouarenext.com is owned by a PR/marketing firm by the name of http://www.rantic.com/ " which funnily enough if you go there is now "Rantic Social Media Marketers. is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance."
It appears foxweekly wanted to gain some clicks by creating a story and hired a painfully dumb pr firm. Problem is that it picked the wrong beast to be a scapegoat. Feminist agenda I highly doubt, really bad marketing ploy is very very likely. Or a really annoyingly clever troll as it is out of nowhere hitting all the right buttons at exactly the right time.
Also best part is how 4chan members spam the sight with racist, sexist and homophobic comments. -____- 4chan is never one to prove their stereotype wrong it seems.
BrotherGecko wrote: Also best part is how 4chan members spam the sight with racist, sexist and homophobic comments. -____- 4chan is never one to prove their stereotype wrong it seems.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Damn. I would not have guessed my analysis of Yonan was that much spot-on. I hear tinfoils hat protect from gaming journalists mind control devices!
I shouldn't reply to you, but did you at least look at the evidence collected so far? "emmayouarenext.com is owned by a PR/marketing firm by the name of http://www.rantic.com/ " which funnily enough if you go there is now "Rantic Social Media Marketers. is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance."
" We have been hired by celebrity publicists to bring this disgusting issue to attention. The recent 4chan celebrity nude leaks in the past 2 months have been an invasion of privacy and is also clear indication that the internet NEEDS to be censored. Every Facebook like, share & Twitter mention will count as a social signature -- and will be one step closer to shutting down www.4chan.org. "
Shutting down 4chan, that's laughable. What they don't seem to understand is that 4chan s sort of like a blob of gunk with a very weird face, amorphous, impossible to destroy, kind of discusting, and often makes you laugh. No I don't n where I was going with that. I really need to start thinking about what I'm writing before I write it .
The only thing that can kill 4chan is 4chan - and 4chan is destroying itself atm. Moot (the owner) basically switched camp in an attempt to monetize it and all the anons are abandoning ship to 8chan. Censorship doesn't go down too well.
Co'tor Shas wrote: Shutting down 4chan, that's laughable. What they don't seem to understand is that 4chan s sort of like a blob of gunk with a very weird face, amorphous, impossible to destroy, kind of discusting, and often makes you laugh. No I don't n where I was going with that. I really need to start thinking about what I'm writing before I write it .
It seems like people keep talking about 4chan as if the shenanigans of /b/, and probably the NSFW pages, are the only part of it that exists and that they all do things as a collective. As far as I can tell places like /tg/, /tv/, /toy, ect haven't really changed at all or had some mass migration.
The denizens of 4chan have already migrated to another image board.
No, a few of the kinds of people who give 4chan its bad rep have left /v/. 4chan is so big at this points it's practically immortal. Really this should probably be seen as a good thing in the end, though it's baffling why it's only just now m00t decided to put his foot down and say "enough of this bs."
d-usa wrote: The denizens of 4chan, or the denizens of /b/.
Both it seems. It appears the general consensus on 8chan is that m00t sold out. Not everyone left of course, but it is getting larger. It resembles 4chan at this point, though /tg/ still appears to be quite tiny :/
d-usa wrote: Whatever happened to the hacker known as 4chan?
He is waiting for the chance to strike. You won't know when, you won't know how, but one day you will find your butt all over the internet
characterizing real life people into stereotypical arch-types is stupid. there are hundreds of thousands of factors that affect a person's personality, and trying to say that people fit into one of what? twelve? stereotypes is ridiculous. the 'geek' does not exist, therefor they cannot be their own worst enemy.
The proof that an outside source is screwing with internet/gamer culture here reinforces my belief that they're the worst things for nerds. It's like the religious trying to ban Dungeons and Dragons because it made people satan worshippers, or Jack Thompson on his video game violence crusade.
The proof that an outside source is screwing with internet/gamer culture here reinforces my belief that they're the worst things for nerds. It's like the religious trying to ban Dungeons and Dragons because it made people satan worshippers, or Jack Thompson on his video game violence crusade.
To be fair, the topic is nerds vs nerds. Not outside source vs nerds.
anons throwing a fit and packing up their bags and going to another chan is actually pretty topical.
Edit: although it seems that at this point this thread could easily be merged with the gamergate thread...
? Does that mean that the link in Melissia's signature is all false? Does that mean 
