#GamerGate Link Roundup

I haven’t written anything about gamergate because others have said it so much better than I could. Here are some links and excerpts from my favorite pieces about this whole sordid situation. Feel free to leave your own in the comments.

1. Kathy Sierra at her blog:

I now believe the most dangerous time for a woman with online visibility is the point at which others are seen to be listening, “following”, “liking”, “favoriting”, retweeting. In other words, the point at which her readers have (in the troll’s mind) “drunk the Koolaid”. Apparently, that just can’t be allowed.

From the hater’s POV, you (the Koolaid server) do not “deserve” that attention. You are “stealing” an audience. From their angry, frustrated point of view, the idea that others listen to you is insanity. From their emotion-fueled view you don’t have readers you have cult followers. That just can’t be allowed.

You must be stopped. And if they cannot stop you, they can at least ruin your quality of life. A standard goal, in troll culture, I soon learned, is to cause “personal ruin”. They aren’t alltrolls, though. Some of those who seek to stop and/or ruin you are misguided/misinformed but well-intended. They actually believe in a cause, and they believe you (or rather the Koolaid you’re serving) threatens that cause.

2. Arthur Chu at the Daily Beast:

I’m not scared of desperately uncool cultural reactionaries like Jack Thompson or anti-witchcraft Harry Potter burners. I’m scared of the people who do hold cultural power, who have the loud voice, who are, in fact, the cool kids, but think they’re embattled underdogs. I’m scared of the people who think that because disco was “taking over music” they had the right to “fight back” bullying and attacking disco performers and fans.

I’m scared of people who look at someone like Zoe Quinn, an individual who makes free indie games, or Anita Sarkeesian, an individual who makes free YouTube videos, and honestly think that these women are a powerful “corrupt” force taking away the freedom of the vast mob of angry young male gamers and the billion-dollar industry that endlessly caters to them, and that working to shut them up and drive them out somehow constitutes justice. The dominant demographic voice in some given fandom or scene feeling attacked by an influx of new, different fans and rallying the troops against “oppression” in reaction is not at all unique. It happens everywhere, all the time.

But let’s be honest: It’s usually guys doing it. Our various “culture wars” tend to boil down to one specific culture war, the one about men wanting to feel like Real Men and lashing out at the women who won’t let them. Whenever men feel like masculinity is under attack, men get dangerous. Because that’s exactly what masculinity teaches you to do, what masculinity is about. Defending yourself with disproportionate force against any loss of power? That’s what masculinity is.

3. Jennifer Allaway at Jezebel:

#Gamergate, as they have treated myself and peers in our industry, is a hate group. This word, again, should not lend them any mystique or credence. Rather it should illuminate the fact that even the most nebulous and inconsistent ideas can proliferate wildly if strung onto the organizational framework of the hate group, which additionally gains a startling amount of power online. #Gamergate is a hate group, and they are all the more dismissible for it. And the longer we treat them otherwise, the longer I fear for our industry’s growth.

4. Mike Diver at Vice:

GamerGate, to date, has taught us nothing. OK, maybe it’s taught us that certain men are horrible and have no shame in announcing their hatred of women to the world in the most hideous manner available to them. If GamerGate really was about ethics, Wu or Sarkeesian wouldn’t be going through what they are.

Until female developers, critics, columnists, and bloggers feel comfortable doing their jobs—which is to discuss gaming and expand the medium to wider and wider audiences—the ethics debate will be backgrounded by boisterous boys complaining that their toys aren’t how they used to be: i.e., made by dudes and played by dudes. That’s living in the past, though. Today, Peach can spank Bowser’s backside on Super Smash Bros., one of the highest-rated action games of 2014 features a kick-ass woman protagonist, and 52 percent of gamers are female.

Something, not someone, has to die—and that something goes deeper than GamerGate. I don’t have the answer to the question of how we prevent bias in the media, but I sure as hell know that we can’t sit idly by and just hope that the hatred goes away. Gaming hasn’t even reached the middle of its own excellent adventure, but it’s gonna suck if it doesn’t pick up more princesses along the way. So how about we all calm the fuck down before someone really gets hurt?

5. Melissa McEwan at Shakesville:

What women like Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, Adria Richards, Kathy Sierra, and others have gone through, and continue to go through, all for having the unmitigated temerity to be women in gaming and tech, is incredible. And reprehensible. And shameful beyond description. And harmful.

Actively, ongoingly, profoundly harmful. Individually harmful, and reverberatingly harmful, as other women see what happens to women who do what they do and calculate whether it’s worth it to pursue their passion, in exchange for, potentially, their lives.

Women are being harassed, and abused, and threatened, and terrorized. Women have killed themselves. If the word “hurt” is to have any meaning at all, we need to stop saying that things need to change before someone gets hurt, and start saying plainly that things need to change because people are already being hurt.

6. Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon:

1) The main target of #GamerGate is not a journalist. She’s a video game developer. Holding her accountable for “ethics in journalism” is like telling your accountant that it’s his job to negotiate peace treaties in the Middle East. While the attacks on Zoe Quinn aren’t, like the rest of this list, attacks on ethical journalism itself, the fact that this all started off with a non sequitur shows that, on the long list of shit #GamerGate cares about, integrity in journalism doesn’t even rate.

2) The second biggest target of #GamerGate is an exemplar of clean journalism. If what you don’t like about gaming journalism is that it’s too cozy with the industry and therefore the writers are afraid to be critical, then your fucking hero should be Anita Sarkeesian. She funded herself with Kickstarter and not industry money. She is harshly critical of video games, even as she is a fan. She is the ideal of what a critical gaming journalist should be: Knowledgeable, critical, fair, thorough and utterly non-corrupt.

7. Jenni Goodchild at the Flounce:

Throughout GG, I’ve undertaken a survey to find out what people want from reviews. Some of the answers highlight the above issue:

“Basically, a review that describes the game without involving the author’s personal opinion on it.”

“Focus on the gameplay and technical aspects, not the story and art style.”

“I mean that I want a game to be judged solely on its mechanics, story, immersiveness, strength of character and level of involvement, and judgement be based solely on that. Not whether a game is “problematic.”

These are all totally valid things to want from a review – it’s okay to not care about social critique – but the inclusion of these things isn’t corruption. It’s just a style of review people don’t like.

8. Lesley at xoJane:

The irony of this situation is massive enough to develop its own gravitational field. These harassers want Sarkeesian to stop talking about misogyny in video games. So they unleash horrifying misogyny on Sarkeesian herself. To, I guess, make the point that video games are just fine? That misogyny in games is having no broader cultural effect? That there is no problem here? Because this kind of behavior is normal? If I wasn’t half convinced that the men harassing Sarkeesian weren’t in fact actual trolls — like, the kind that live under bridges with only rocks for friends — I would wonder how they’d feel if their mom or girlfriend or wife was receiving the same threats.

9. Brianna Wu at the Washington Post:

My friend Quinn told me about a folder on her computer called, “The Ones We’ve Lost.” They are the letters she’s gotten from young girls who dream of being game developers, but are terrified of the environment they see. I nearly broke into tears as I told her I had a folder filled with the same. The truth is, even if we stopped Gamergate tomorrow, it will have already come at too high a cost.

10. Poopsock Holmes at Medium:

So when Anita Sarkeesian tweeted that “gamergate is the new name for a group that has been harassing me for 2 years,” she was factually correct. Many of the most consistent users of #GamerGate are inextricably linked to harassment of Ms. Sarkeesian and other women. I’ve just shown you 20 of them, all of whom are happily welcomed into the GamerGate movement and not censured in any way for their actions. I’m sure this list will grow as more people share their experiences.

These people have spent the last two years harassing and demeaning women in and out of the games industry. You know what they haven’t spent the last two years doing? Talking about ethics in journalism.

There may be ethical, honest people involved in #GamerGate. But a few good apples won’t magically make a rotten barrel edible. And #GamerGate is rotten to the core.

11. Amanda Marcotte at the Daily Beast:

It’s being referred to by those engaging in the harassment as the “Zoe Quinn cheating scandal,” a phrasing that implies, ridiculously, that the private relationship snafus and infidelities of a video game developer rise to the level of public interest. But even the misogynist harassers of the Internet know it’s a stretch to justify abusing someone for garden variety infidelity. So, in a desperate attempt to justify this nonsense, Quinn’s ex and the harassers are accusing Quinn of an “ethics” violation, accusing her, no joke, of using sex to get a favorable review from Kotaku.

The fact that the review she was accused of “buying” doesn’t exist hasn’t slowed the self-righteous haranguing, of course. That’s because the “ethics” question is a paper-thin excuse for what’s really going on, which is that the video game world is thick with misogynists who are aching to swarm on any random woman held up for them to hate, no matter what the pretext.

12. Liz R at her blog:

one of the biggest sources of paranoia i took from reading through my first 4chan thread about this issue is that social justice activism will inevitably destroy communities like 4chan. these people feel so disempowered in their lives that they head to communities like 4chan or reddit to be able to feel some sort of empowerment, to act out on something, to feel part of something bigger. this is where the whole mythos of Anonymous comes from. that a lone person with a computer has a tremendous power to take down the shadowy elite. but in that act, there’s no accountability, and no moral code. anyone with the resources can mobilize people to target anyone they see fit. sometimes it attacks against the interests of power, but just as often it’s a conservative, reactionary anger that comes out of disillusionment and fear, and gets constantly externalized onto marginalized people, especially women and queer people.

13. Andrew Todd at Badass Digest:

“Social Justice Warriors” is a term used often by these sort of people, and it’s a term whose pejorative use perplexes me, because aside from the source of its invention, it sounds like a really badass thing to be. I’d much rather label myself a Social Justice Warrior than a warrior for…whatever it is that these people are warriors for. Social justice is such an inherently positive thing – literally everyone benefits from greater equality – that it’s impossible to see its enemies as anything but sociopathic. Hatred of Social Justice Warriors can be seen as a broader hatred of social justice itself.

Central to the self-centred psychology of these people is that they see themselves as the targets of a grand conspiracy of feminist, progressive journalists and game developers that seeks to destroy their ability to…something. They have no actual issue. It’s all perceived persecution at the hands of political correctness. These “theories” are so narcissistic, so devoid of substance, that the only way to explain them is through delusion. And I mean, I get it – justifying one’s shitty behaviour with a made-up conspiracy probably feels better than confronting the painful truth that one is an asshole. They think they’re part of a “silent majority”, but the real silent majority is the one that either isn’t aware of their ridiculous conspiracy theories, or understands that there’s simply no reasoning with people who are so obviously out of their minds. It’s the same kind of fictional oppression old white folks claim about foreign immigrants who are still generally less well-off than they are. The moment a woman – or even someone who empathises with women – muscles in on “their” territory (which hasn’t actually ever been “theirs”), they’re off, spouting slurs, giving the fingers at intersections, and publishing their banking details on hate sites.

14. Zennistrad at his blog:

Fun fact: Morgan Ramsay, founder of the Entertainment Media Counsel, did an objective study of how much of gaming journalism talks about sexism or social justice.

To do this, he downloaded 130,524 articles from 37 RSS feeds of 23 outlets, including The Escapist, Rock Paper Shotgun, CVG, Edge Online, Eurogamer, Gamasutra, Game Informer, GamePolitics, GamesBeat, GamesIndustry International, GameSpot, GamesRadar, IGN, IndieGames, Joystiq, Kotaku, Massively, MCV, NowGamer, PocketGamer.biz, Polygon, Shacknews and VG24/7, published over a period of twelve months. He then did a search on how often these games articles mentioned sexism, feminism, or misogyny.

The result? Over a period of one year, 0.41% of 130,524 articles referenced feminism, feminist, sexism, sexist, misogyny, and misogynist explicitly.

15. Garrett Martin at Paste:

That’s who is behind this entire situation: anti-woman trolls who intentionally distort the meaning of the word “ethics” to further their own agenda and mislead their followers. There are some beating the #GamerGate drum who sincerely believe that it’s not related to misogyny or the persistent attacks on Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn, that it’s simply about keeping the games press accountable. It’s impossible to extricate that hashtag from its roots, though, which grew out of unconscionable smears and threats against two prominent women in gaming merely because they are prominent women in gaming. All the conspiracies and trumped-up claims of “evidence” of collusion among developers, press agents and the press spread by the #GamerGate founders are lies and distortions aimed at driving Quinn, Sarkeesian and other women out of videogames. Whether it’s hate, fear or simply the grotesque joy horrible people find in maliciously denigrating others, this entire #GamerGate nonsense is built on silencing women and shutting them out of games.

That’s the scandal here. Not that some journalists are friendly with some game designers, or that review copies of games are often sent early to critics (an entrenched practice that occurs across the entire spectrum of tech and entertainment journalism, and which is crucial to informing readers in a timely fashion). It’s that a vocal minority of videogame fans who tend to congregate at sites like 4chan and Reddit, who blanket twitter and comment sections with hate and anger, and who adopt the exclusionary identity of “gamer” have united to intimidate and silence videogame fans, developers and writers who aren’t like them or don’t think like them. And the leaders of that movement, the ones who stir up the most resentment and convince their followers that it’s not about hate but ethics, the YouTube “personalities” and condescending Breitbart hacks and, uh, Firefly’s Adam Baldwin, are all well-established opponents of equality and social justice. Some are trolls, some are disingenuous, politically motivated bullies, and none of them are worth the attention.

16. Zack Kotzer at Motherboard:

Claiming not all gamers, Redditors, or Channers are responsible for despicable behavior is as deflective, tone deaf, and self-centered as the now lampooned ‘not all men’ response. It’s obviously ‘not all,’ but it’s still far too many. Gamers are being played, and not by journalists.

If people want to save these communities they’ll have to do better than throwing their hands up and saying “it wasn’t us!” when the world breaks into their speakeasies. Smoke them out and band up these silent majorities you speak of. As with anyone, you have to earn the respect you think you deserve.

17. Kyle Wagner at Deadspin:

The default assumption of the gaming industry has always been that its customer is a young, straight, middle-class white man, and so games have always tended to cater to the perceived interests of this narrow demographic. Gamergate is right about this much: When developers make games targeting or even acknowledging other sorts of people, and when video game fans say they want more such games, this actually does represent an assault on the prerogatives of the young, middle-class white men who mean something very specific when they call themselves gamers. Gamergate offers a way for this group, accustomed to thinking of themselves as the fixed point around which the gaming-industrial complex revolves, to stage a sweeping counteroffensive in defense of their control over the medium. The particulars may be different, and the stakes may be infinitely lower, but the dynamic is an old one, the same one that gave rise to the Know Nothing Party and the anti-busing movement and the Moral Majority. And this is the key to understanding Gamergate: There actually is a real conflict here, something like the one perceived by the Tea Partier waving her placard about the socialist Muslim Kenyan usurper in the White House.

There is a reason why, in all the Gamergate rhetoric, you hear the echoes of every other social war staged in the last 30 years: overly politically correct, social-justice warriors, the media elite, gamers are not a monolith. There is also a reason why so much of the rhetoric amounts to a vigorous argument that Being a gamer doesn’t mean you’re sexist, racist, and stupid—a claim no one is making. Co-opting the language and posture of grievance is how members of a privileged class express their belief that the way they live shouldn’t have to change, that their opponents are hypocrites and perhaps even the real oppressors. This is how you get St. Louisans sincerely explaining that Ferguson protestors are the real racists, and how you end up with an organized group of precisely the same video game enthusiasts to whom an entire industry is catering honestly believing that they’re an oppressed minority. From this kind of ideological fortification, you can stage absolutely whatever campaigns you deem necessary.

18. Brianna Wu at xoJane:

There’s no easy way to say this. I am a massive target for Gamergate/8chan.coright now and it is having horrible consequences for my life. They tried to hack my company financially on Saturday, taking out our company’s assets. They’ve tried to impersonate me on Twitter in an effort to discredit me. They are making burner accounts to send lies about my private life to prominent journalists. They’ve devastated the metacritic users’ score of my game, Revolution 60, lowering it to 0.3 out of 100.

With all of this, my only hope is that my colleagues in the industry will stand by me — and recognize the massive target I made myself standing up to these lunatics.

I woke up twice last night to noises in the room, gasping with fear that someone was there to murder me. I can barely function without fear or jumpiness or hesitation. I’ve been driven from my home. My husband says he feels like he’s been shot.

But I have to be honest: I don’t give a fuck.

I am mad as hell at these people, and I’m not going to let them keep destroying the women I love and respect.

#GamerGate Link Roundup

20 thoughts on “#GamerGate Link Roundup

  1. 1

    I don’t play video games and I’m not an expert on “gamergate”, but from what I’ve seen, I think gamers might have a point when they say they are being unfairly painted as a horrendously abusive community. And I say this because actually, I’m not convinced that most of the really dedicated gamergaters are hardcore gamers at all. There seems to be a weird crowd of people on social media who basically spend all their free time harassing feminists or social justice people or whatever, and I think those folks have found an unusual level of traction and social support under the “gamergate” moniker.

    I mean look at that “Montreal Massacre” threat that Sarkeesian got- it doesn’t even mention video games at all. To me it reads like someone primarily preoccupied with feminism more generally, as opposed to its specific presence in the gaming community.

    1. 1.1

      I think I know what you’re trying to say, but have you compared what happens to prominent figures in the gaming community to what happens to similarly prominent figures elsewhere? There seems to be a lot more violence coming out of gaming than out of comic book fandom, for example.

      1. Maybe. I’m not defending gamers here. I’m well aware that their “community” is terrible, even worse than the atheist “community”, which is quite an accomplishment.

        But I do suspect that the most violent and unhinged threats (ie, repeat the Montreal massacre, shove a crowbar up your whatever, die screaming, and so on) are coming from pretty scary people who are primarily concerned with feminism, and who have been doing this sort of thing since long before gamergate.

        However what maybe has happened is that these people have found a sort of haven in GG, because it has a platform, it has a gauzy transparent slip of credibility, and the rest of the gamergaters (being terrible but not criminal) refuse to distance themselves from even the worst of the worst. The regular GG’ers might also engage in more low-level harassment or obnoxiousness that’s not horrifically violent or scary, but that contributes to an atmosphere in which the really dangerous people feel emboldened and validated.

        These are just my semi-organized speculations.

          1. Yes, but many of those people are just the sort I’m talking about. One of the accounts that article cites is @AVoiceForMen, the MRA hub, and I’m pretty sure there are a few other individuals on the list who are affiliated with AVFM. Those guys aren’t gamers; they’re in it for the anti-feminism. For that matter, I doubt Adam Baldwin or Milo Yiannopoulos game much either.

            Like I said, I think there are a significant number a) right-wing vultures, and b) rabid anti-feminists who have co-opted gamergate as a platform/recruitment opportunity, and also I think that without them, this whole situation would not have escalated to the level that it has.

            Which isn’t to say that gamers aren’t engaging in harassment under the hashtag too. I admit that I have been very startled at the level of raw hatred, specifically misogyny, that is on display in pretty much any public conversation amongst gamergaters, be it on twitter or 4chan or some unmoderated forum. Their treatment of Zoe Quinn is particularly vile. I don’t think anyone should be harassed, but it is especially dangerous to do it to someone with a history of depression. They are morally bankrupt cretins.

        1. If you did not intend to defend gamers, then the wording of your post was heavily misleading. You said they were “unfairly accused”. To say the accusations are unfair is a defense – a defense with no particular evidence behind it, either.

          If it bothers you as a gamer to see ‘gamers’ being attacked for awful stuff you didn’t do, let me give you advice as a male hopefully-feminist: when someone publicizes bad behavior by members of your group, they are doing two things. First, they are denouncing the people doing bad things – not all [x], the people doing bad. Second, they are telling you, as an [x]>, what not to do.

          The people in Link #10 are villains supported in their villainy by the GamerGate movement. Don’t support them.

          1. I’m not a gamer, and yes my original post was worded poorly. Like I said above, all I was trying to say is that the gamergate situation is in significant part driven by non-gamers with a political axe to grind, and I also think the worst of the threats are probably not coming from gamers. This doesn’t mean some gamers aren’t enabling these people and/or engaging in harassment themselves.

          2. @queequack: If I understand you, the point you’re trying to make is that the degree of awfulness seen in #GamerGate is not as well explained by saying the gaming community creates bigoted sociopaths as by saying that it welcomes them in.

            I’m still not happy with the wording, but the hypothesis seems remarkably likely. And it suggests a line of approach that seems … well, only almost impossible: provide people with the tools, the education, and the social support to lock predators out, instead.

    2. 1.2

      queequack, I am like you in that I neither play video games nor do I follow the “gamergate”. I’ve always seen gamers as just one more exotic community, somewhere on the fringe of my consciousness. A bit like Wiccans, perhaps. I wish it could stay this way.

      I read a bit though about the abuse and the examples are truly horrible. Now, here are two fragments of a text linked by Miri as #4.


      Let’s be clear: pro-GamerGate people, those who are trying to serve as media watchdogs, are not all horrendous misogynists. Some of them are even female. And yet with every instance of straight-up hate against women, most recently with Wu’s case, there is some strange “they brought in on themselves”–style reaction.


      GamerGate, to date, has taught us nothing.

      The first fragment is – as I see it – an attempt to answer your sort of worries. If the fragment can be taken as representative of people criticizing the Gamergate movement (I have no idea if it can), then the problem is *not* that “gamers = misogynists”, it is even not that “being pro-Gamergate = being a horrible person”. The problem is rather the inability of the movement to get rid of these horrible elements. Perhaps even worse than that: as I understand, the critic (Mike Diver) hints at something more than a mere inability: he suggests that even those who are not “horrendous misogynists” are in fact reluctant to counter the abuse. And if this criticism is true*, it sounds like a serious matter.

      *as I said, I don’t follow the Gamergate and that’s the only reason why I formulated it as a conditional.

      The second fragment is just sad. Normally such movements – even if you don’t share their aims and indeed, even if you are one of the opponents! – can teach you something. Usually there is (obviously) a lot of rubbish, but there are also some good insights. What is sad is that if the second quote is correct, then this particular case is not like that. Here the horrible abuse overshadows everything and in effect no one – including the non-abusers – seems to be able to learn anything at all. Understanding and learning became simply two more victims on the already long list. All in all, it looks like the worst possible outcome.

    3. 1.3

      I have been following this fairly closely, and my observation is that most writers, especially mainstream writers, have bent over backwards to both acknowledge that gamergaters are a tiny minority of gamers as a whole, and to accept that not even all gamergaters are abusive misogynists. Many people have also noted that the whole bandwagon has been jumped on by a bunch of people who don’t care about (or are even actively hostile to) gaming and gamers in general.

  2. 2

    They are making burner accounts to send lies about my private life to prominent journalists. They’ve devastated the metacritic users’ score of my game, Revolution 60, lowering it to 0.3 out of 100. [B. Wu in xojane]

    Wow, that behavior that is aimed at her sure is super ethical!!!! (Yeah, this is sarcasm.)

  3. 7

    Are we allowed to post links here like in the other roundups? If not this can be removed, but Andrew Sullivan showed up in my feedly the other day, talking about Gamergate.

    It’s a very even-handed take, maybe overly so, but we’ve had plenty of articles unequivocally condemning GG – not unreasonably, but it’s interesting to see a more nuanced take by an intelligent person.

    I think he’s right in one of his implications – which is that the nastier elements of the online feminist/”social justice” community (unfunny “misandry” jokes, sneering at “white dudes”, and so on) have contributed to the rise of a general anti-feminist sentiment on the internet, which in turn has contributed to Gamergate misogyny. This is not me assigning blame or shifting responsibility from the people spewing hate – this is just me pointing out what I see as an exercise in cause and effect.

    Put bluntly, I think some of the aforementioned rhetoric feeds the persecution complex of some young white men who spend a lot of time online and who are already inclined to see themselves as a beleaguered underdog, for any number of reasons (some legitimate, some not, but I don’t think that really matters.)

    He goes off the rails here, though:

    […] these people do have a point; they have long been ostracized and marginalized; their defensiveness exists for a reason; and, in the last couple of months, they have also been the target of truly out-there dismissals and vitriolic abuse – often from other men, and often from those who were not bullied in high school at all.

    The problem with this is that even if you grant what he’s said, the Gamergaters aren’t actually targeting the people who direct “vitriolic abuse” at them. He cites some guy named Sam Biddle being a dick on twitter, but Sam Biddle has not actually been subject to significant harassment, at least as far as I can tell. Neither has Chris Kluwe, despite the fact that he’s the apotheosis of a jock who wrote a pretty mean article about Gamergaters that might best be described as the internet equivalent of a wedgie.

    Instead, Gamergate targets Zoe Quinn, a really nerdy-looking girl who made a free choose-your-own-adventure game in an effort to raise awareness of depression. They target Anita Sarkeesian, who makes pretty dry academic videos that I find to be mostly uncontroversial. Gamergate is not reactive; they aren’t the bullied lashing out at their abusers, as Sullivan seems to suggest. They are picking on people who have not done them any harm.

    1. 7.1

      It also strikes me as strange that a gay man would describe these people as having long been ostracized and marginalized. I think you would be stretching the truth to say that straight men have been ostracized for as much as fifty years; LGBT people are only just coming out of the far end of … what, twelve hundred years of widespread discrimination?

      That said, your point is the better one to make.

  4. 9

    An interesting article by Arthur Chu. It’s not that well-written, but he has some good insights.

    I know what it’s like, to feel like things only “count” when a pretty girl says them. […] I know what it’s like, never quite believing that girls could ever suffer the same loneliness that I did. I know what it’s like to feel that frustration that everyone always seems to instinctively side with “pretty girls” over you.

    Yes. This is undoubtedly how a lot of Gamergaters feel; it’s how a lot of young men feel in general. Another log on the fire of the anti-feminist hatred.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.