Gaming sites turned into agenda pushing social justice sites

I guess the same thing that keeps film critics from becoming great filmmakers, or art critics from becoming great artists. Or, I guess, keeps automobile critics from making their own cars. I hope you're not trying to suggest that people stop debating about things that they aren't directly involved in. I mean, you and I can sit here and complain about journalists forcing an agenda, but I know I'm not personally a journalist. Should I not be allowed to debate it until after I've become a journalist?

EDIT: Although I guess it'd be nice if they decided to step into the industry and make their own games, but they're certainly under no obligation to do so. If they don't want to, then they don't want to. That doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with them debating the issue.

Bullshit strawman not addressing anything of what I said in the slightest. Good job.

Read my edit: the answer to "why don't they" is because "they either can't, or they don't want to." Which again, is pretty much always the answer to the question of "why doesn't this person do this thing?"

Today's feminism is nothing more then then fascist propaganda.

@MrGeezer:

"That doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with them debating the issue"

If the film industry or anything else was poised to being flipped over and changed to accommodate a very small yet extremely vocal group of people at the expense of a vast majority who actually pay to support that then yes, more people would feel inclined to care about it.

Its not just debating if things are actively changing.

Wow aren't you a bright one. I sure hope you're gonna get your ad honorem Harvard degree for such an enlightening and mindblowing observation.

How evolution and innovation have always happened because people who wanted it to happen made it happen. The most recent relevant example in gaming is the coming of indie games and use of crowdfunding that happened after years of the gaming industry being a valid example of dispotism where big publishers were the only ones with the power to decide if a game made it or not. The most relevant innovation before that was the introduction of digital downloads. Before that I'd argue DLC and the popularization of MMOs due to WoW's success.ALL of these things have pissed off plenty of people, yet now they are all considered standard. How come the "misrepresentation" of anything that isn't male not only has become an issue all of a sudden a few years back after over two decades of noone ever whining about it, but also none of the complainers seem to want to make it change? What, do you get your kicks out of picturing yourselves being internet paladins?

People also "make stuff happen" by complaining and/or voting with their dollars. Hell, the guy just above you is complaining about how this kind of social advocacy IS threatening to change games, I'm just wondering which is the case. If drawing attention to issues through debate doesn't make anything happen, then why the hell is the gaming community getting so goddamned defensive?

@MrGeezer:

He may have a different opinion about what he considers change than myself.

Voting with dollars and just complaining are vastly different. One method is more legitimate than the other. Can you guess which one it is and more importantly who does what?

I think the point he was trying to convey is "make itchange" would be referring to actually making games.

Maybe because there isn't any proper discourse being presented by these advocates? It has boiled down to nothing but advocates insulting a huge community of people under the guise of "social advocacy". Instead of actually addressing anything and putting forth ideas, advocates keep yelling "misogyny" and then are bewildered when the community they just insulted gets pissed off.

Which, again, would be irrelevant if gamers didn't think that this kind of advocacy actually had a chance of changing things. The gaming community is only getting this pissed off because they see that kind of advocacy as an actual threat.

@MrGeezer:

Threat doesn't automatically make it right.

I'm missing something here. I just pointed out the fact that all you SJWs are doing is bitch and complain, so how exactly are you going to "vote" with your dollars if there's nothing you can vote? If what you call "voting with their dollars" is what happened to Remember Me then you'll excuse me if I laugh.

As for the second part, because the gaming community is tired to be called names by people who obviously don't understand what gamers want (or how the world works, evidently, but that's another matter entirely). You SJWs bait with insults then say "WHY SO DEFENSIVE, I'M JUST SAYING", that's the kind of game kids play when they are about to get out of primary school. And frankly it's tiresome. Just play games and stfu.

Sounds like you're the one who's being defensive right now.

@MrGeezer: Umm the ONLY people I see actually putting forward any ideas on what to do to help change things is the gamers themselves while these social justice people do nothing but bitch and insult the gaming community.

And no, gamers are actually getting defensive because they are just being insulted every day by these social justice morons. What the hell else do you expect when the entire community is being attacked from people on the outside?

Until gamergate I thought society had matured enough to finally accept that gamers were way more than nerdy kids or neckbeard adults but apparently I was wrong. It is very shocking to suddenly be the target of broad hate like this. It also truely amazes me that people are OK with mass stereotyping and insulting of such a big and diverse group of people.

Also pertinent to this thread, so I'm posting this here as well:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite

Several prominent gaming journalists across America are part of a secret mailing list on which they discuss what to cover, what to ignore, and what approach their coverage should take to breaking news, Breitbart can reveal.

Well, when a person gets "attacked" by someone with absolutely no power, the NORMAL thing to do is to fucking ignore them and carry on with your day. No one gives a shit if critics say that Lars Von Trier's films are misogynistic, because at the end of the day his fans will keep watching them as long as he makes them and he'll keep making them as long as his fans watch them. You don't "defend yourself from attack" by condoning death threats and harassing people's families when the attacker has no teeth, any more than you'd punch a 13 year old kid in the face for trash-talking you.

And if the gaming community really DOES consider this to not be a threat, then what does that say about gamers? You know that whole "geek rage" stereotype, about how gamers will flip out and smash their controllers just because they're frustrated at a goddamn video game? Well, congratulations on perpetuating the stereotype. The next time the gaming community has a vested interest in appearing rational and level-headed, we can all point back to this time and remind ourselves how they "defended" the hobby against social advocacy even when they didn't think that social advocacy was a threat to them. If this is how this community responds to non-threats, then that is NOT speaking well of this community.

The irony

http://techraptor.net/2014/09/17/secret-game-journalist-mailing-list-gamejournopros-exposed/

What has this revealed overall? Some disturbing information for sure. The journalists named here as a part of GameJournoPros, and there may or may not be more we just don’t know yet, are working together to both silence one side of an issue (criticism of game journalism ethics) and bring attention to the other (harassment and Zoe Quinn’s work).

@N30F3N1X: What is it that forces them to ever only bitch and moan and keeps them from actually stepping into the gaming industry and making their own game?

Talent and a disdain for actual work.

@Aljosa23: Are you for real? Look at when Roger Ebert came out multiple times to say video games aren't art, you had legions of neck beards attacking him for his opinion.

Those "legions of neck beards" are a minority. Games aren't art.

@Aljosa23: I didn't even say anything about "sjw insanity and backlash"

That's what this thread is about. I had assumed your post had something to do with the op.

@Aljosa23:I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of gamers wanting to legitimize their precious medium in the eyes of others but at the same time not willing to go with the discussion that comes with it. You can't have it both ways was my point.

People like the tc are venting their frustrations at a group who seem bent on inserting their loony political and cultural ideology into the gaming hobby. I don't see the hypocrisy you're taking about.

The funny thing about agenda-pushers on gaming sites is the fact that they all like to post LGBT and feminist-centric articles. It's like they don't give a damn about racial minorities, lower-class struggles, or mental health awareness. Now I hate having any agenda shoved in matters relating to video games, but it seems very funny to me that people who say that they are for 'social justice' don't really pay much attention to those other groups.

I'm African-American, part a racial minority, but no one's rallying to have better representation for us blacks in video games; more black characters who aren't thugs, criminals, warlords, or traitors/cheats. The same goes for Asians, Latinos, Native-Americans, or any other racial group. How many games focus on things like classism or religious persecution? Or feature characters who have mental disorders? (And no, I'm not talking inide side-scrollers or text-based games)

The main problem I have with agenda-pushing is that some people think that as long as women and gay/trans/bi people can have their cake everything will be fixed and cover every social inadequacy. It makes it seem like some people think their plight is more important than others and they have a 'Me first!' attitude. To be honest, I see gaming as an art form, just as literature and photography are considered to be. I think agendas of any kind should be kept out. But what really irks me is how other issues are purposefully left out in favor of feminism and gay rights.

@ceromaster: In my opinion they need to just stop trying to make everything under the sun a feminist issue. "Gay men are oppressed! It's a feminist issue!" Yeah, no. Screw off, I don't want to categorized as a part of your useless movement that should have died off already. Keep it about women because the title "Feminist" indicates that it's only about women and that it isn't a movement for equality and should not be treated as such until the title is changed.

Incendiary articles get views. Hence Kotaku and co. fanning the flames with bullshit.

Feminism is about equality for all

Why should we care anyway? These games are aimed at a certain demographics. Believe it or not they're called young men.

Modern feminism at this point is nothing more then fascism and personal gains for money. Especially in gaming.

It's being done by fat ugly mannish looking women born after 1980.

Thank you.. Currently the community looks like it is a bunch of drama man-children on blowing up about something completely fucking trivial.. Which really makes me question these individuals and their "life goals" in actually caring about this shit to begin with.... And here I thought I moved out of high school 10 years ago, but nope it's alive and well in the pointless bullshit drama that really doesn't affect any one. Oh dear some tweets were made! Oh no, some one posted a opinion piece on youtube! Seriously the community has shown that really they are bunch of fucking children.. Nothing has changed, video games are still being developed, the series that have been going for years have been seeing sequels.. Why aren't we going after the bullshit that actually matters in the industry? Like publishers and developers dumbing down and butchering series and genres just to ensure they get the greatest target audience out there because shareholders are pushing for maximum and unrealistic profits?

All I know is that I pre-ordered Senran Kagura for Vita 'cuz it looks like it plays pretty decent for a portable beat-em-up.

The cooking game they have with women in the kitchen getting stripped down until they're featured in a person-sized sexy sundae, however...eh, it looks like a pretty crappy rhythm game.

Everyone has an agenda to push... I don't see the problem with having an agenda.

Try the Walking dead point and click game. It's really good and the lead character is an African american college professor.

persecution complexes up the ass

Honestly all this sounds like is a bunch of whining.. You guys are seriously fretting over the biggest bullshit of unimportant things... Gaming writers ( I refuse to call them "journalists", they are not) have absolutely no real say in the industry.. Money talks, regardless of what "agenda" they are pushing, devs and publishers go where the money is (for better or worse).. If you don't like what they are saying, stop talking about it, STOP visiting those sites.. These guys livelihoods are based around the fact that they have to have a audience..

i didn't know what a "SJW" was

i wish i still didn't

whiny bitches (m/f) on twitter <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< *

Feminism is about gender equality. And that's a concept. Yet one must see when the practice is aligned to the principles behind the concept. For example, feminism is a movement we've already seen be practiced according to it's principle many times, and thanks to that, we (most western cultures) have more gender equality than decades ago, and a good standard on that worldwide.

But it's quite common to see practice not be aligned with the concept. On paper, socialism is about equality. Concepts based on ideals are one thing... we must pay attention not just to the purposes, but the means used to achieve them, to know what we're really looking at.

I'd be very glad to see that everyone that declares themselves as aligned to any movement practices it as set by the core principle behind it. I consider myself a feminist, and I'd never use, for example, shaming tactics for getting a point across. This is a rather complex issue though, a very rich one to be discussed, but I don't think we can simply assume things are about their purposes because it's conceptually what they're about. Not just hear the words, see the acts as well.

That is a respectable way to address issues.

@BranKetra: Thx BranKetra, nice to see I'm not alone there. Though I think I'm not saying anything new to Dave, he's an understanding poster.

Just to add to the Topic, what about we talking about fair ways to address issues, which means, looking at both sides involved in every way we can? Without using swearing, insults, guilt shaming or hate-speech of any kind? This is meant to just further what I said earlier, now with this great speech by Emma Watson at the UN:

Women today are raised with an unbalanced sense of entitlement. They keep all of the traditional methods and values that best serve them, while shedding anything that specifically blocks them from what they want, all at men's expense without bating an eyelash. The best examples i can find for this in how women look at relationships and men in general. They still very much expect a "traditional" man. It wouldn't be a stretch to say the entire dating/marriage/relationship process is typically controlled and paced by the woman. Everything from initiating communication to proposing/ring purchasing to divorce laws. Women also have an unbalanced level of control over child birth. You typically see women fighting with religious groups over birth rights but that is because they can't really fight with a man. Comparatively speaking, a man has zero rights to an unborn child. If she wants it but he doesn't, too bad its his responsibility to support it. If he wants it but she doesn't, too bad it's her body, her choice. There is absolutely nothing equal about that. That is what feminism has created today.

Now when you look at men and how they are raised, its obvious where the SJW / Manginas are coming from. Its an interesting mix of traditional male with feminism, that comes together to create the perfect little puppet women can use for whatever they want. The traditional male doesn't care about other males, its his job to support and protect women because they don't have any rights and can't fend for themselves and not bitch about it in the process. Any man complaining about something, is just pathetic. Of course its simultaneously drilled into their skulls that women are oppressed and need to be treated as equals. These boys who grow up hearing all of this have no proper scale to compare any of it so they blindly believe it until they grow up and realize just how much bullshit they have to put up with. My guess is this is where all the "nice guys" come from. Men who typically fall in line with a feminist view while simultaneously providing traditional male features because lets face it, if he wants to find a desirable woman, this is whats required. Of course when he finds out exactly how flawed his woman is and that she really isn't the divine Goddes society has led him to believe well.... it'll induce rage and quite a fall from grace. I'll assume Zoe's ex would fall into that category.

When i talk about feminists and women, there is actually quite a difference between the two. A real feminist may speak out about how she is fighting for true equality and is perfectly fine with trading any traditional roles with men.... but a typical woman is actually quite different. She ISN'T ok with trading anything, doesn't really care to research any issues for herself to find out real statistics but will obviously listen to and support anyone attempting to give her more rights/power. The takeaway point from all of this is that no one cares about men.