| QuintonMcLeod said:
But there's proof that shows that she did trade sex for favors. Quite a bit of it, actually. This guy does a pretty good job with sourcing the material in question: But I believe the whole issue with Gamergate isn't with misogyny or inclusion/exclusion. It's really just about corrupt video game journalists. It's really that simple. However, those who are being accused of the corruption appear to be deflecting the issue to completely different and unrelated matters. All this is doing is causing more confusion and rallying people against the cause based on misinformation and lies. |
I didn't watch the whole video because it's very long and InternetAristocrat employs a lot of the same awful arguing techniques as the anti-Gamergate side (e.g., if Zoe Quinn behaved badly here, then we have to assume the worst about everything she's done). But I believe I caught the relevant portion and I have to say, that's pretty thin gruel. I seriously doubt Quinn oinked Nathan Grayson in exchange for him mentioning her game in passing a couple of times. If so, she got fucked in more ways than one. I mean, again, it does highlight that there is a problem with people who write about games being way too chummy with their subjects. It should be enough to say, "Look, she's friendly with writers and made the sort of trendy Important Game With A Message that these bloggers wet themselves over, so she got more coverage than she properly deserved." That's a fair point. But there is zero evidence that she traded sex for favors, and Gamergate insisting on that is irresponsible and self-defeating.
Some gaters are indeed misogynists, while some are not. Many of them seem to have neither the desire nor even the ability to articulate what "corruption" means. A thousand different people will be drawn to the same movement for a thousand different reasons, and often the result is what just looks like a lot of noise and inchoate rage to the outside viewer. So I don't think there's anything simple about Gamergate or similar anti-establishment movements, except this: there is a clear break between the games media and much of its audience. It isn't really a question of the media being corrupt or not. The media certainly doesn't see itself as corrupt, and in fact by tackling social issues instead of being a mere disseminator of corporation-approved information about huge commercial games, probably sees itself as becoming less corrupt. A lot of the complaints against them are simply a matter of bias and not of corruption. But whatever the reason, they no longer represent the interests or reflect the views and concerns of a large portion of their readership, and so we have this mess.
