Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
He's targeting people who have webcams and identify as 'girl gamers' an insult to actual girls who play video games.

What the feth is that even supposed to mean? Are you drunk?

"Booth Babes"

Objectification.

I am using feminist reasoning. Thats what it says in my book I have to do see!

I have to tell women they don't know any better

Anyway, the main issue I find though is that they probably get a ton of a publicity and overprotective of any woman in the industry... As long as it suits themselves.

The main irk point though is that they draw attention with being a girl. Some Twitch girls do not. They just play and record. Because they like to play games. (Like Aurelyan, Minx, and Catabot)

It is a stupid objectcation thing.

A way to gain views, from a giant audience is to post pictures of boobs as a thumbnail.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I wouldn't target someone calling themselves a 'male gamer' and think this was an insult to the actual men who play video games.

Hahaha. Are you two not familar with the term gamer girl?

it is used mostly to target women. Its an issue in gaming. In general using women to objectify them and use them as propaganda and just makes the hobby look silly.

There is nothing wrong in what they do. It is the publicity that uses them that is the problem.



It reminds me quite a bit of the EA fiasco a few years ago. Where they had the lust competition.

As I have stated, there is sexism in the gamersphere that requires stamping out (Last of Us, Remember Me, and Bioshock Infinite all shouldn't have had to put up with what they did in order to be made....), and though I stopped watching the "How to Gank a Gamer Girl" vid within a minute, jail time is hardly something that needs to be involved. Kids an a-hole, but not a criminal.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
He's targeting people who have webcams and identify as 'girl gamers' an insult to actual girls who play video games.

What the feth is that even supposed to mean? Are you drunk?

Girl gamers has become a very specific term these days on twitch. It's essentially girls getting high stream numbers by pointing their webcam as far down their cleavage as possible. Not inherently bad obviously. But them being ganked is not something I'm going to lose sleep over.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
He's targeting people who have webcams and identify as 'girl gamers' an insult to actual girls who play video games.

What the feth is that even supposed to mean? Are you drunk?

I think his point was that they emphasise their gender and make a bid deal out of it instead of focusing on the game, thereby doing a disservice to and undermining other girls who just want to get on with the game instead of playing gender politics.

^ Wow people understood me!

Yeah!

I am not as stupid as I think I am!

 Asherian Command wrote:
I remember a few days ago someone said I must be a republician for supporting gamer gate. I replied with. "You do realize I am a hardcore egalitarian socialist right?"

Which they replied with. "Liar." And blocked me.

They did the same thing to Sommers. The next day four 'hit' articles came out, all of which made sure to use the word "conservative" in their headlines. Her response? "I'm a registered Democrat".

Good job Games Media...

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
If you want to reduce sexism in gaming, you need to reduce sexism as a whole.

It works both way. If you want to reduce sexism as a whole, one of the numerous aspect is reducing sexism in gaming.

"If you really want to change hearts and minds when it comes to gender roles in society, you’ve got to work on changing that society’s reality, not its media—especially media that so explicitly deals in fantasy."

Yeah I always thought I was pretty damn liberal (not Aussie Liberal) but this has been an eye opener for the crazies on "our side". It was interesting to hear Sommers talk about how everyone else rolled over to this agenda but gamers are the only ones fighting back so far... I thought we needed people like her, maybe they need a large, vocal riled up demographic like us. Maybe we need each other I guess ; p The widespread censorship makes getting your voice heard hard, so having Baldwin and Sommers as focal points really helps. I hate to ask more of TB, but we really need him to step up too I think ; p The bald bastard has so much clout.

Steam curators:
1. Totalbiscuit: 130K
2. PC Gamer: 42K
3. Jim Stirling: 29K
4. RPS: 18K
5. Just Good PC Games: 17K
6. Nerd Boxset: 17K
7. Kotaku: 15K
X. Jesse CoX: 4K (<3 Jesse)

Totalbiscuit so far ahead after a day, Kotaku dropping from 4th to 7th place and Jim going up to 3rd. It says a lot about the journalism in the industry that two individuals doing video content get so many followers looking for their critique.

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
He's targeting people who have webcams and identify as 'girl gamers' an insult to actual girls who play video games.

What the feth is that even supposed to mean? Are you drunk?

I think his point was that they emphasise their gender and make a bid deal out of it instead of focusing on the game, thereby doing a disservice to and undermining other girls who just want to get on with the game instead of playing gender politics.

The converse to that is the individuals that are all angry about it are more likely placing the biggest emphasis on the gender issue. If you get all hot n bothered by cleavage on a webcam an then give that cleavage money that is your problem. If a woman knows she can do something incredibly minor and get free anything out of it then good for her I guess. But that very much is not gender politics. That is human sexuality and capitalism at its best.

Female gamers that just want to play....just play. Male gamers that just want to play...play.

Dude that makes videos actually displaying misogyny is not okay nor should be defended in anyway.

Asherian Command wrote:^ Wow people understood me!

Yeah!

I am not as stupid as I think I am!

Understood, sure I suppose. A good line of thinking though I can not say it was.


Here is the deal. Does sexism exist in gaming? Answer is yes it does. Is gaming a major contributor to sexism? No it is not. However "gaming culture" is quickly becoming a safe haven for sexist mentality. I left the "gamer culture" a while back. Precisely because it was becoming exactly what it is now. Because of the internet groups have been able to meld with "gamer culture". So now we have the Fedora Dudes, Trolls, Mens Rights Activists, Friend-zoners that are a accept addition to the melding pot.

Those individuals are pretty much way I whole hearted do believe that it is time for "gamer culture" and the gamer to just die. Its been polluted and perverted. It honestly isn't about video games at all anymore. It is about the next crusade or the enemy (interestingly enough if it isn't EA it is probably a woman). Saying your a gamer is really just a fashion statement for the rest of the baggage that you carry to the pot.

Just play games damn it. Talk about games too. But is the rest of this stuff needed? Its just two sides of the same coin calling each other fake.

I'll never understand nerds who don't like tits. Kaceytron is my favorite Twitch streamer.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Here is the deal. Does sexism exist in gaming? Answer is yes it does. Is gaming a major contributor to sexism? No it is not. However "gaming culture" is quickly becoming a safe haven for sexist mentality. I left the "gamer culture" a while back. Precisely because it was becoming exactly what it is now. Because of the internet groups have been able to meld with "gamer culture". So now we have the Fedora Dudes, Trolls, Mens Rights Activists, Friend-zoners that are a accept addition to the melding pot.

Those individuals are pretty much way I whole hearted do believe that it is time for "gamer culture" and the gamer to just die. Its been polluted and perverted. It honestly isn't about video games at all anymore. It is about the next crusade or the enemy (interestingly enough if it isn't EA it is probably a woman). Saying your a gamer is really just a fashion statement for the rest of the baggage that you carry to the pot.

Just play games damn it. Talk about games too. But is the rest of this stuff needed? Its just two sides of the same coin calling each other fake.

I think you're misinterpreting general trolling as sexism. Any anonymous chat quickly turns to bollocks because trolls can run rampant consequence free. Moderation (not censorship) always greatly improves this - look at Dakka, it is for the most part very civilised thanks in a large part to its moderation. Women aren't targeted any more than men in online trolling (something like 13% of women reported it compared to 12% of men) - Sommers points to a study showing this, and attacks on women are made by other women 40% of the time in the study she refers to.

How did we go back to sexism in gaming again?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
I remember a few days ago someone said I must be a republician for supporting gamer gate. I replied with. "You do realize I am a hardcore egalitarian socialist right?"

Which they replied with. "Liar." And blocked me.

They did the same thing to Sommers. The next day four 'hit' articles came out, all of which made sure to use the word "conservative" in their headlines. Her response? "I'm a registered Democrat".

Good job Games Media...

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
If you want to reduce sexism in gaming, you need to reduce sexism as a whole.

It works both way. If you want to reduce sexism as a whole, one of the numerous aspect is reducing sexism in gaming.

"If you really want to change hearts and minds when it comes to gender roles in society, you’ve got to work on changing that society’s reality, not its media—especially media that so explicitly deals in fantasy."

First of all you can be a conservative and a Democrat. Neither a mutually exclusive and should never be considered as such.

Second if you establish knowledge of an issue but then go on to do nothing what does that say? Should not gamers take pride in leading the way where the rest of society fails? Seeing as most men are exposed to gamer culture wouldn't it then be a force of change capable of influencing millions?

Yonan wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Here is the deal. Does sexism exist in gaming? Answer is yes it does. Is gaming a major contributor to sexism? No it is not. However "gaming culture" is quickly becoming a safe haven for sexist mentality. I left the "gamer culture" a while back. Precisely because it was becoming exactly what it is now. Because of the internet groups have been able to meld with "gamer culture". So now we have the Fedora Dudes, Trolls, Mens Rights Activists, Friend-zoners that are a accept addition to the melding pot.

Those individuals are pretty much way I whole hearted do believe that it is time for "gamer culture" and the gamer to just die. Its been polluted and perverted. It honestly isn't about video games at all anymore. It is about the next crusade or the enemy (interestingly enough if it isn't EA it is probably a woman). Saying your a gamer is really just a fashion statement for the rest of the baggage that you carry to the pot.

Just play games damn it. Talk about games too. But is the rest of this stuff needed? Its just two sides of the same coin calling each other fake.

I think you're misinterpreting general trolling as sexism. Any anonymous chat quickly turns to bollocks because trolls can run rampant consequence free. Moderation (not censorship) always greatly improves this - look at Dakka, it is for the most part very civilised thanks in a large part to its moderation. Women aren't targeted any more than men in online trolling (something like 13% of women reported it compared to 12% of men) - Sommers points to a study showing this, and attacks on women are made by other women 40% of the time in the study she refers to.

Doing sexist things for the lolz is unlikely. Picking targeting to harass with your awful worthless views is much or in the reality. Trolls are worthless human beings and shouldn't be encouraged.
As for the study I have never seen it. Nor would know if it is actually accurate beyond the usual of statistics being what ever you make of them for your agenda.

Sining wrote:How did we go back to sexism in gaming again?

I'm guessing because all the other issues where never the issue. Merely the justifications for the issue. But that is only what I can divine from this big hoopla. As all my information has come directly and solely from this thread and those that have presented the sides.

If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_- I like how people responding to those two and arguing with them about how it isn't about sexism suddenly makes this issue about sexism.

Is there sexism in gaming? Yes, because sexism/corruption/whatever is going to exist where there are people. However, gamergate isn't about sexism, it's about corruption. I mean, ideally if you guys want to hijack a thread or #tag, go create your own. I'm pretty sure there are some suited for you guys to discuss your notions of sexism and how it can be prevented or if it exists.

More keeps coming out of the woodwork, journalists being fired for exposing corruption in the industry so sites can "preserve their relationship with game writers". Other attempts to get people fired thankfully the guy had a good boss. Baldwin was right, the industry is writhing in pain as sunlight gets shined on it for the first time.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
I'm guessing because all the other issues where never the issue.

You mean corruption in game journalism, that 'other issue', the one that's been fuelling this for over a month now? Nah I'm pretty sure that's still the issue.

 Asherian Command wrote:
I am using feminist reasoning.

No. No, no, no. No you are not.
If “your book” tells you that slut-shaming is feminist reasoning, then burn your book.

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_-

You do realize we are currently discussing something that Asherian Command brought up? You do realize I did not even knew that guy existed before Asherian Command posted about him? You do realize trying to pretend that it is only Peregrine and me turning the subject onto feminism is pitiful, ridiculous and doomed in advance?

Maybe you and whoeever wants to discuss feminism with you can go take it to another thread that can be titled Sexism in gaming

H.B.M.C. wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
I'm guessing because all the other issues where never the issue.

You mean corruption in game journalism, that 'other issue', the one that's been fuelling this for over a month now? Nah I'm pretty sure that's still the issue.

Going by this thread alone (and its predecessor) I am not wholly convinced by that. Maybe it is better to say then that it means much to many for differing reasons?

Sining wrote:Maybe you and whoeever wants to discuss feminism with you can go take it to another thread that can be titled Sexism in gaming

I believe the sexism is part of the scandal aspect of this particular thread? Maybe the removal of comments in reference to the secondary party to the debate would reduce talks of feminism and such? Because the moment you throw the feminist conspiracy angle into the mix you invite the debates.

Remember the thread is about "The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption" which involves the entire topic not just the stuff you want to talk about. What ever that may be.


Speaking of which what is exactly the Gamergate end game agenda and how is it being obtained? As of right now it looks more like the stuff I would see from 9-11 Truthers (which I have no strong opinions of in any direction). This stuff seems to be the rough equivalent to trashy day time tv then a movement with a message.

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_-

You mean like the people I keep replying to when they bring up issues about sexism? It seems like every time I step away from this thread it's back to someone posting another article about how Anita sucks or how feminism is ruining everything. Remember this little summary image that the OP posted in the middle of complaining about how everyone keeps talking about sexism?

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Speaking of which what is exactly the Gamergate end game agenda and how is it being obtained? As of right now it looks more like the stuff I would see from 9-11 Truthers (which I have no strong opinions of in any direction). This stuff seems to be the rough equivalent to trashy day time tv then a movement with a message.

Given our voices are being stifled in many common discussion areas - the two most popular gamnig subs on reddit, 4chan, even twitter has had bans for covering gamergate, it's pretty hard for us to get a unified voice on the topic. There are some attempts coming out to outline our main goals but they're still being refined and discusses, mainly on 8chan and kotakuinaction on reddit.

The main things are:
- transparency on relationships
- no censorship
- balanced reporting
- no collusion to push agendas

There are some others of course.

There is ample evidence of substantial censorship and other wrongdoign against GamerGaters. Yes, there are some pieces where some have jumped the gun, but there are many where people have been confirmed to have been harassed at work, some losing their jobs, others having syringes sent to them and much more. There are many examples of journalists attacking gamers in their journalistic articles and on twitter. These people need to be held to a much higher standard than a random poster on the internet.

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_- I like how people responding to those two and arguing with them about how it isn't about sexism suddenly makes this issue about sexism.

Is there sexism in gaming? Yes, because sexism/corruption/whatever is going to exist where there are people. However, gamergate isn't about sexism, it's about corruption. I mean, ideally if you guys want to hijack a thread or #tag, go create your own. I'm pretty sure there are some suited for you guys to discuss your notions of sexism and how it can be prevented or if it exists.

I think we have enough comments from those two on that subject, I mean FFs those two are more profligate on sexism than Melissia is.

 Yonan wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Speaking of which what is exactly the Gamergate end game agenda and how is it being obtained? As of right now it looks more like the stuff I would see from 9-11 Truthers (which I have no strong opinions of in any direction). This stuff seems to be the rough equivalent to trashy day time tv then a movement with a message.

Given our voices are being stifled in many common discussion areas - the two most popular gamnig subs on reddit, 4chan, even twitter has had bans for covering gamergate, it's pretty hard for us to get a unified voice on the topic. There are some attempts coming out to outline our main goals but they're still being refined and discusses, mainly on 8chan and kotakuinaction on reddit.

The main things are:
- transparency on relationships
- no censorship
- balanced reporting
- no collusion to push agendas

There are some others of course.

There is ample evidence of substantial censorship and other wrongdoign against GamerGaters. Yes, there are some pieces where some have jumped the gun, but there are many where people have been confirmed to have been harassed at work, some losing their jobs, others having syringes sent to them and much more. There are many examples of journalists attacking gamers in their journalistic articles and on twitter. These people need to be held to a much higher standard than a random poster on the internet.

I will stick to here and what is said here.

Transparency on relationships- I would say that is reasonable to a degree. Exactly how transparent should they be about relationships that they have?

No Censorship- That one should be a given.Though were game review articles ever actually censored? And sometimes I would like to see the Trolls outright banned for the stuff they like to say.

Balanced Reporting- Given the nature of the medium I would say that is only ever going to be a work in progress. Video games tend to be a personal experience. A review should and will reflect that aspect. It is on the consumer to find a reviewer that is offering a point of view they are friendly towards.

No collusion to push agendas- This Is censorship and needs to be dropped. You can not ask some one to not censor you but then in turn ask them to censor themselves. If a group of journalists believe strongly in something then it is their right to make it a point of issue in the manner they best believe they will get it across. It is the responsibility of the consumer to move on if the disagree with the journalists underlying message. If transparency is achieved then you will know who the journalist knows or rather who also agrees with who and how they translate that message into their work.


Some of this stuff is borderline entitlement issues. The I WANT philosophy that permeates the gamer community as of late. I do not think it is the driving force mind you but it could easily cross into that territory.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
No collusion to push agendas- This Is censorship and needs to be dropped. You can not ask some one to not censor you but then in turn ask them to censor themselves. If a group of journalists believe strongly in something then it is their right to make it a point of issue in the manner they best believe they will get it across. It is the responsibility of the consumer to move on if the disagree with the journalists underlying message. If transparency is achieved then you will know who the journalist knows or rather who also agrees with who and how they translate that message into their work.

No. A list of journalists colluding to decide how to present a certain topic is absolutely not acceptable. If an individual decides to publish something like that on their own - fine. It's not censorship to stop vested interests in investment or politics, it's certainly not censorship to do it here either.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Balanced Reporting- Given the nature of the medium I would say that is only ever going to be a work in progress. Video games tend to be a personal experience. A review should and will reflect that aspect. It is on the consumer to find a reviewer that is offering a point of view they are friendly towards.

Given the collusion to present a single opinion and the ostracising of those who present different opinions, it becomes increasingly hard to find a reviewer offering a diseenting opinion. We have multiple examples of those losing their jobs.

 BrotherGecko wrote:



Some of this stuff is borderline entitlement issues. The I WANT philosophy that permeates the gamer community as of late. I do not think it is the driving force mind you but it could easily cross into that territory.

Yes, damn those consumers for having desires for the products they purchase! Monsters, the lot of them.



As an aside, for the whole "There are misogynists and a-holes and whatnot in the gaming community so I think the gaming community and the gamer identity should die" idea....

What groups are we cool with then? Because no group in the history of the world with more than like eight members hasn't had an a-hole or five in it. Sexual assault is fairly common in the armed forces. Should we disband the armed forces? Should we be against anyone who self identifies as a 'soldier' or 'marine' because there are indeed dicks in the services? It's the same for every group. I think the feminist identity needs to die because there is a minority of rabid a-holes in it. I think the entire world of sports should be shut down because some athletes and some sports fans are a-holes. Gearhead as an identity should be torn down because a guy in a rebuilt '67 Impala cut me off the other day. It's always easy to attack entire groups based on the actions of a small percentage of that community if you don't like them.

So maybe take a more nuanced outlook, hey?

Obviously all groups must die then. In fact, i think I see the common denominator in all these problems. Humans -_- Well, you know what we have to do then

 Yonan wrote:
A list of journalists colluding to decide how to present a certain topic is absolutely not acceptable.

Why not? Nothing is preventing you from publishing your alternative point of view. Why do you care so much about other people organizing to decide how to present their opinions?

If an individual decides to publish something like that on their own - fine. It's not censorship to stop vested interests in investment or politics, it's certainly not censorship to do it here either.

IOW:

People opposing a point of view that you agree with = censorship.

You opposing a point of view that you disagree with = not censorship.

Given the collusion to present a single opinion and the ostracising of those who present different opinions, it becomes increasingly hard to find a reviewer offering a diseenting opinion.

So start your own website and publish some reviews. It seems like your issue here isn't censorship, it's the fact that you might have to work to get your own ideas out there instead of just sitting back and demanding that someone else give equal time to your point of view on their own website.

We have multiple examples of those losing their jobs.

And this is a surprise? If your boss says "write X" and you write Y instead why shouldn't you be fired? A writing job isn't a completely independent position where you're free to say whatever you want to say and still collect a paycheck, it's a job where you write what the company wants you to write. This is like expressing surprise that a GW store manager was fired for posting "go buy Infinity models instead" on their store's facebook page.

 BrotherGecko wrote:


Speaking of which what is exactly the Gamergate end game agenda and how is it being obtained? As of right now it looks more like the stuff I would see from 9-11 Truthers (which I have no strong opinions of in any direction). This stuff seems to be the rough equivalent to trashy day time tv then a movement with a message.

You're speaking as if the people who support gamergate has a common hive mind. Hint, we don't. This has been pointed out before in previous pages. We can in fact disagree on a lot of things except for the fact we think gamergate is a legit issue


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:


And this is a surprise? If your boss says "write X" and you write Y instead why shouldn't you be fired? A writing job isn't a completely independent position where you're free to say whatever you want to say and still collect a paycheck, it's a job where you write what the company wants you to write. This is like expressing surprise that a GW store manager was fired for posting "go buy Infinity models instead" on their store's facebook page.

Because a GW store manager carries the same connotations as a journalist. Ah Peregrine, your replies amuse me.

Sining wrote:
You're speaking as if the people who support gamergate has a common hive mind. Hint, we don't. This has been pointed out before in previous pages. We can in fact disagree on a lot of things except for the fact we think gamergate is a legit issue

The point was that nobody seems to be able to agree on just what legit issue "gamergate" consists of. There are a lot of people who are unhappy about various semi-related things, but so far the only unifying issue seems to be "WE ARE UNHAPPY FOR REASONS".

Because a GW store manager carries the same connotations as a journalist.

Who cares what connotations you decide to attach to the job? You're not the one signing the paychecks. These were clearly jobs where the writers had very little independence and were expected to write what their bosses told them to write.

LOL. OK

 Peregrine wrote:

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_-

You mean like the people I keep replying to when they bring up issues about sexism? It seems like every time I step away from this thread it's back to someone posting another article about how Anita sucks or how feminism is ruining everything. Remember this little summary image that the OP posted in the middle of complaining about how everyone keeps talking about sexism?

Sexism does not exist in the industry itself, but in the community it does. You are confusing the industry with community.

They are two seperate entities. That post is completely correct. There is no sexism that we know of in the games industry. As far as we know.

Women are treated extremely well in the gaming industry.

But in the community not so well.

Some of this stuff is borderline entitlement issues. The I WANT philosophy that permeates the gamer community as of late. I do not think it is the driving force mind you but it could easily cross into that territory.

I don't think labeling your sources and your opinions and saying whether not you are biased is hard to do.

I do it in every paper I do. And my teach always asks why. And I said because the entire piece is my opinion, no matter what I do that is still an opinion it may be objective, but it does not mean it is fully objective

Transparency on relationships- I would say that is reasonable to a degree. Exactly how transparent should they be about relationships that they have?

By labeling their articles as either editorials (opinion) or news (Objective)

I mean its not that hard. None of their articles have clearly labeled it.

Sources are also incorrect and are not put into a certain way under the guidelines for writing sources. These 'journalists' are not journalists as long as they continue to demonize their market.

I believe the sexism is part of the scandal aspect of this particular thread? Maybe the removal of comments in reference to the secondary party to the debate would reduce talks of feminism and such? Because the moment you throw the feminist conspiracy angle into the mix you invite the debates.

Remember the thread is about "The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption" which involves the entire topic not just the stuff you want to talk about. What ever that may be.

Correct. IT is an issue but not in the industry itself. The main issue is that there is this whole idea that women need to be protected. In itself white knighting for someone of the opposite sex, because you think they are defenseless and need help.

Is completely and utterly sexist.

If they ask them to help them. Then it is not.

But all I see is idiots with swords and shields clanging and crying out into the sky say we are lower than them, say gamers are dead, we are nazis, we are worse than ISIS. We are homophobes.

Which is quite interesting.

I think the biggest problem is this broad brush people seem to paint the community. IT isn't really helping the community.

Anyone saying that gamers are acting too entitled. May I ask who has control over someones job the customer or the employee who's job is at risk?

The Customer is the consumer and by right they can demand for a quality product. If they are not given this quality product it is in violation of this sacred agreement.

I mean come on its like the first thing you learn in consumer management courses.

The same can be said about journalists.

If a journalists refuses to improve, then their boss should fire their ass faster than a bullet.

It is something in this media and community though. That the Media believes that they are more entitled and that they don't need the community. Which is funny because the media is useless to the community. They don't need.

They have never needed it. And now that gamers have learned that, they are becoming productive getting together moving against the bigots in their own community.

This is a stone that will start something more.

Maybe this is the entire gaming community, industry and media finally growing the hell up?

Maybe. Maybe it is heralding something new.