General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCanada's feminist Prime Minister Justin Trudeau targets GamerGate in anti-misogyny call to action
"New Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has described himself as a proud feminist and named GamerGate as an example of an issue that society needs "to stand clearly" against. He made the comments prior to winning the national election as leader of the Liberal Party on Monday 19 October.
Speaking in a recent TV interview (via The Star) Trudeau said: "Yes, Yes. I am a feminist. Proud to be a feminist. My mom raised me to be a feminist. My father raised me, he was a different generation, but he raised me to respect and defend everyone's rights, and I deeply grounded my own identity in that, and I am proud to say that I am a feminist. The things we see online, whether it is issues like Gamergate, or video games misogyny in popular culture, it is something that we need to stand clearly against." "
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/canadas-feminist-prime-minister-justin-trudeau-targets-gamergate-anti-misogyny-call-action-1525176
==============
What a huge change in attitude from outgoing conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)boston bean
(36,222 posts)Two guys trolling this game room, pretending to be a girl and a boy with a lisp. It fits in perfectly with the gamergate dude attitudes.
Did you actually watch this garbage?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Many are much worse, very degrading, some people drink while they play, some rage like lunitics. I'm a bit old fashioned I guess when it comes to online games.
There are a lot of very young children who play all these games, many play daily. I don't think it's good at all for children to hear this kind of smack talk. But I don't know what can be done about that exposure, the kids are the parents responsibility.
boston bean
(36,222 posts)It was a man (really immature man) pretending to be one.
They were not little kiddies.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)I might be wrong and I respect the jury process how ever they decide, but this seems a bit like "concern trolling" as a way to post insensitive crap videos here on DU. Just my opinion though.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)frizzled
(509 posts)Two groups of people whose mission in life is to get offended screeching past each other like howler monkeys, failing even to agree on what they're arguing about.
Liberals: please, please don't hitch your wagon to this one.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Or join a guild where you know most of the players in real life
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)You really have to be dense to think that the hostility women in the game industry face is something that would magically disappear if only they chose not get offended by it. Must be so great to live in a world were credible death threats and bomb threats that drive you from home and get professional engagements cancelled is just you being "sensitive",
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)They'll attack in 'real life', game developers, even other players. Many have suicided, harmed other players, committed crimes in real life.
There are many woman gamers and game developers. If one gets threatened the authorities should be called. At the minimum their game account will be closed, at the max the Authorities will press charges.
I meant "ingame"people need a thick skin, It IS just a game, oversensitive people shouldn't even listen or play games.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)is not worth getting offended by, right? As is being advised by police to leave your home because said death threats are credible.
We certainly know your number, don't we, and it's not a very pretty one. Downplaying the hostility women in the game industry faces by claiming both sides do it is not very liberal.
frizzled
(509 posts)A lot of people on the other side would say it's about the ethics of sleeping with people reviewing your vidya games.
And, well, anonymous death threats just don't prove much. There are unhinged people online who'll issue death threats over anything. Some of them do it in a misguided or insane attempt to make "their side" look like victims.
Personally the last game I've ever played was Minesweeper on Windows 95, so I'll recuse myself from the discussion, just making a sociological observation.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)And you know it. If you think so, you are either misled, or are misleading. And that you drag out the "sleeping with people reviewing your vidya games (sic)" lie shows that in either case you don't have good intentions.
I think you would do best to withdraw from the discussion, if all you bring to it are lies.
frizzled
(509 posts)Video games are for little kids.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)To be able to sit there and make condescending remarks about something many people love, andcasually dismiss the real harm done to women who love games or whose livelihood is making them.
I don't want to have guys like you on my side, that you can blithely ignore the misogyny, the real harm that came out of gamergate - women on the internet couldn't ignore it like you can. We have to take it into consideration every time we post on the internet, the same way we do the calculations when we go anywhere - 'how will I get home, how long can I stay, who will be there' has now had 'will posting this mean disgusting messages in my inbox, what will happen if 4chan sees my posts, can I write that blog post without getting harassed?'
So, as I said, lucky you to not have to think about it, but thanks for letting us know that you are definitely not an ally.
frizzled
(509 posts)Nor is GG unambiguously "about" men harassing women online.
Sure, you've got every right to enjoy video games, the fact they seem childish and silly to me is neither here nor there.
But personally, I wouldn't ever write something online under my real name or with an email attached. I assume that the internet is full of assholes and psychos, and I protect my identity as much as I reasonably can. I wouldn't write a blog or use Twitter with any kind of recognizable real life handle attached to it.
I've had plenty of people online saying they want to murder me for being gay, though I'm not going to get into a who's-more-oppressed competition. Women certainly have a bad time of it online.
Maybe that's a generational thing. Isn't it basically unwise to put your identity out there no matter who you are? Would you go around writing your phone number on bus shelters and public toilets?
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)Many women cannot be anonymous on the internet. Their jobs or their activities, or even their activism, require them to go by full name. Or do you expect women interviewed by magazines or promoting their work or publishing their articles to use pseudonyms (male ones, of course?) Why not ask women to wear metaphorical burqas online to avoid harrassment, which you are right didn't start last year. But it did get organized into a movement last year, though.
Twitter, for example, has become a great platform for activism, especially among women of color. Do you expect them to hide behind gender neutral or male nicks, or to cease speaking altogether, or perhaps they should just ignore all the vitriol they face? If you think the latter, I think you should volunteer to receive messages every day spewing vitriol at you, and see how silly the sticks and stones verse is when you get constant messages threatening rape or murder, telling you you are ugly and fat and stupid, and that the world would be better off if you killed yourself. Because that is what minorities are up against on the internet.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)can report threats and have that account banned?
personally I don't like or use twitter, I don't have the patience for or enjoy staring at a cell phone.
frizzled
(509 posts)If you want to be a public figure, you're going to have to put up with vitriol and assholes. It's been this way basically forever, even a long time before the internet, and that affects both men and women.
A certain small proportion of the population are unhinged assholes, and they'll write death threats to prominent public figures given any opportunity to communicate, especially anonymously. That can't be changed in a free society. The only way to avoid it is not to be a public figure. I suppose you could call for a China-style police state that monitors every word everyone says online. Some extreme liberals do like that idea.
But it did get organized into a movement last year, though.
Again, that's really not something there's much proof of. Actually, I think some religions have a several thousand year head start on organized hatred and oppression of women.
I think you should volunteer to receive messages every day spewing vitriol at you, and see how silly the sticks and stones verse is when you get constant messages threatening rape or murder, telling you you are ugly and fat and stupid, and that the world would be better off if you killed yourself.
That's actually more or less exactly what the inbox of my pseudonymous social media inbox looks like when I say things a lot of people disagree with. Well, since I'm advocating gay rights it's less "you're fat and ugly" than "die of AIDS". Sharing controversial opinions online means that the 1% of people who are complete assholes will all line up to cuss at you and tell you to kill yourself.
Bottom line: I'm anonymous, I don't like assholes, and I would never put my name into the public eye for exactly this reason. It's asking for trouble. If anything, what's "privileged" is the expectation that you can be an asshole-free public figure. "Online activism" looks naive and putting your real name on it is unwise.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Fucking awesome hobby.
Let me guess.. Goatee, little beret hat, skinny jeans, and when you clap you snap your fingers.
frizzled
(509 posts)nt
trumad
(41,692 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)Seriously, maybe some of you should devote more a couple brain cells to the subject before giving advice? Videogames haven't been a children's only medium of entertainment and expression for decades. Hell, it's arguable that was ever the case. Even if it was, that's still no reason to dismiss Gamergate with an intellectually lazy and dishonest "two sides" argument.
We are also not just talking a few public figures getting harassing emails. We're talking about women being driven from an entire industry through harassment over email, phone, and in person, threats of violence, swatting and the removal of positive representations of women in a media that a lot of children do consume.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)for bringing misogyny on the internet into the discussion.
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)who REALLY REALLY REALLY INSIST that this is a subject of ZERO significance.
Oh, and K&R.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)It's just video games, and video games are for kids, doncha know? Never mind that it is a billion-dollar industry with millions of adults enjoying them. And never mind that a considerable number of women have had their personal and professional lives turned upside down and inside out because of harrassment and threats of rape and murder.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)Thanks for responding so articulately in this thread.
"And never mind that a considerable number of women have had their personal and professional lives turned upside down and inside out because of harrassment and threats of rape and murder."
Indeed. Thanks again for taking the time to refute the nonsense.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)that says a lot