#stopgamergate2015

I want to start by saying this: I’m going to try and take as many possible responses into account as I can think of, because I’d really prefer this being the last word from me on the subject. There should be no further questions where I stand after this, and I don’t intend to be an active participant in the discussion.

With that out of the way, the short, easy answer is that this is a gaming blog, in support of a gaming website, increasingly powered by gaming podcasts, and I find it troubling that there are influences on both sides of social politics trying to turn gaming (traditionally an escape from all of life’s garbage, politics included) into another battlefield on the political landscape.

To elaborate further, it’s true that I’ve opened fire on Gamergate a couple times over the last few months. Regardless of its advertised motives, any group or movement that takes on a disorganized, structureless, leaderless form, by default, takes ownership for anything that is done in its name. There is simply no getting past that. If you can represent Gamergate just by declaring yourself as such, then Gamergate is responsible for all the harassment and terroristic threats that have emerged in its name.

(If there was actually something to Gamergate underneath the vitriol, people who truly believed in it should’ve disowned the name months ago, and rebranded with a leadership structure, accountability, and scrutiny to filter out anyone involved with criminal harassment and threats. Polygon suggested starting a new gaming media outlet built around Gamergate’s own supposed mission statement. For the record, I feel that would’ve been a great place to start, as one thing I can say for sure is that they certainly do have a defined vision for the gaming media, regardless of what I might think of that vision.)

The problem I hadn’t anticipated is that because I’ve targetted Gamergate a couple of times in passing due to terroristic threats, and voiced my support for the threat targets, it generated the perception that I’m a de facto ally of its generally-regarded chief adversary (and frequent target of said threats), Anita Sarkeesian, and her campaign, and that’s where things get complicated.

false dichotomy (n.)

A situation in which two alternative points of views are presented as the only options, whereas others are available.

At the moment, I can’t say I’ve completely made up my mind about Sarkeesian. She seems nice enough, her arguments tend to wave back and forth (/thrash around like a tornado) between solid points and grasping at straws, and I don’t think she’s done enough to establish that she’s not a retread of battles the gaming community has fought in the past: Herb Kohl, Jack Thompson, and so on.

Perhaps a more pointed way to put that would be, gaming certainly didn’t get where it is by following the marching orders of an outraged peanut gallery, and as nice as Sarkeesian is (and believe me, it’s refreshing!), past industry conflicts have conditioned me to be skeptical whenever criticism arises from what appears to be outside the community.

Truth be told, I’d love to have her on the Day 0 Update. Not to discuss heavy topics like Tropes vs Women or Gamergate or whatever, but just to go through the show with us as we do it every week - what we’ve been playing, various industry news, and so on. I think after that, it’d be much easier to tell where exactly she’s coming from. Is it realistic? Probably not: we’re Smashpad and she’s been on Colbert. But it’s something I’ve wondered about, to be sure. With the authority from which she speaks falling under question, I think there would be a lot less uncertainty one way or the other after something like that.

Now, I want to make sure I’m absolutely clear on this next point, because the current mentality would be to automatically make assumptions and throw around labels. This is not coming from any kind of anti-feminist sentiment. Hell, my mom was one of the best feminist influences I could’ve had around me growing up, it was just a different brand of feminism than the one prominent in the cultural narrative today, one as consistently checked by logic and reason as it is fueled by the demands of equality. If she were around today, I’m sure she would find the intellectual laziness currently being perpetrated in the name of feminism troubling and maddening.

What I can’t tell is if Sarkeesian is intentionally one of said perpetrators or if she has simply been roped in by it, but she seems to inspire internal agreements and rebuttals alike within me, in almost perfectly equal measure. I’ve never encountered anything like it in all my years involved with the industry.

So, to put it in the simplest terms, condemning terroristic threats isn’t an automatic endorsement of the philosophies of those you’re defending, nor is failure to endorse those philosophies an automatic declaration of opposition to the cause they’re in support of.

If it’s that important to know exactly where an indie gaming media pundit stands, I consider myself “solidly liberal” and “basically feminist”, which means I strongly believe in equality as a mandatory cultural goal, but I still reserve the right to look at some of the current narratives and tactics employed in the effort to get there and say “hey, that’s actually pretty fucked up, I’m not going to be a party to this.”

Under the current narrative, that kind of objection gets me painted as a misogynist. “The narrative’s working, how dare you undermine it?!” Never mind the fact that, as I just mentioned, I believe equality must be achieved, and everyone should be civil to everyone else that hasn’t been proven unworthy of civil treatment (by, say, making death and rape threats).

With all of that having been laid out on the table, I have to add one more point. I have to draw a clear line between Anita Sarkeesian and the other targets of threats throughout this whole thing. At what point in the criticism process, especially when there are so many things you’re finding problems with, do you turn the finger you’re pointing to yourself and start asking, “Hey, what am I doing to fix this?” It’s easy to criticize, to try and talk/coerce/label people into editing their creative vision to support your world view, but it’s also wrong. Creative freedom is sacred, even if things are being done with it that you disagree with.

(And when I say it’s sacred, I mean it. Just to frame that properly, it’s unacceptable to me that developers have to purposely dodge the AO rating because it carries with it a default ban on sales in North America. I’m not saying Walmart needs to start carrying Jinkou Shoujo titles or anything over-the-top like that, but there’s also no good reason why mainstream video game retailers can’t follow the bookstore model of having a closed-off adult section. Steam, as well, could easily implement age verification for an adult section, and being a PC outlet, they have plenty of incentive to do so.)

But it’s never been easier to become a game developer. It’s never been easier to sit down, find some other like-minded individuals to collaborate with, and actually produce something to represent your own vision for gaming. Not to mention a creative contribution reflects a lot better on a person than just complaining about what everyone else is making and how they or their worldview aren’t being represented.

You know, kind of like how Gamergaters who genuinely want to change the gaming press and distance themselves from criminal threats that have been carried out in their name should strike out on their own and leave their mark on the gaming press from within…same premise, kind of funny how well that works.