DanneSandin said:
Please explain the bolded part a little for me, won't you? Thx. GamerGate started when Zoe Quinn was "exposed", and had nothing to do with Anita Sarkes...ian (?), but she soon found herself neck deep because she released a video regarding females in video games. GamerGate forced her in, more or less. The fun part about all of this is that GamerGate very fast attacked Zoe, but NOT the journalists that allegedly was bribed. Very personal attacks on Zoe, with naked photos of her being spread around the net by gamergaters. They all talked about how curropt the journalists were, but did in no way attack any of them in the same way Zoe got attacked. And why bring Anita into this? She was attacked by gamergaters as well, and don't try to deny that. Maybe the movement never changed, but that means that it was bad and rotten to begin with. |
Why do you generalize the entire gamer gate group as criminals because of splinters whose claims to be part of GG but clearly represents a different mindset?
Is that not the exact same thing as generalizing all gamers as "White, mysognistic males"
Should the gaming community be ignored because of a subset who are immature and make death threats? The mainstream media has called us psychopaths for years, Is that reason not to take offense when the media that has an audience of gamers does the same thing, because one idiot sent a death threat?
These generalizations are the reason this whole thing started in the first place. Gamers are a diverse group of individuals who only share the hobby of gaming.
We call the people sending death threats, crazy, but here you are saying it was all of GamerGate. That doesn't really make sense does it?
In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank