I’ve had a few conversations in which I had to explain the difference between Asperger’s Syndrome and sociopathology – to my mind, they’re practically opposites – and following that, I prefer to make a distinction between empathy and compassion. Because it’s one thing to have a hard time recognizing what another person is feeling, and quite another to be unable to care what another person is feeling, and having trouble with the former doesn’t imply difficuly with the latter.
1 Like
I think you misunderstand… My point isn’t that we should feel bad for the guys pulling this BS because they are just confused little men-children, because we absolutely shouldn’t. I’m trying to say that making people into monsters doesn’t help OUR cause, which is trying to illustrate what they’ve done to others and how it’s hurt them. We should ALWAYS call them out on their bullshit, precisely because they are human beings, meaning that they can possibly be directed to another path, a better path.
Empathy means we work to understand others, sympathy means we feel the pain of others, and compassion means action. The less we’re able to connect with others through sympathy and empathy, the less we’re able to able to enact compassion in the world.
I think you guys know me well enough to know I’m not saying we should just let these assholes continue on as normal, but until there is some proven sociopathy and if we assume only that mindset (psychology?), which I’m not sure we can figure out a way to redirect this whole thing. and true enough, some of these guys are kind of beyond saving and aren’t worth our time precisely because they are sociopaths and they won’t change anyway. But I think already, we’ve seen a shift in this “movement”… some people are already starting to recognize the reality of the whole thing.
Basically, there are probably psychopaths or sociopaths involved in this, but we can’t assume they all are, even if their actions (in a virtual environment, especially) as evidence of that. I say empathy, not compassion and I’m not conflating the two, really. The more we push the point home of how destructive they’ve been towards their fellow human beings, the more the dividing line between sociopathy and those who are not sociopathic will probably shake out.
I’m not sure I’m making any sense… I just don’t think that people who engage in bad behavior should be assumed evil, I guess.
[edited to add] Plus, when we only think of them as monsters or sociopaths, we let them off the hook, as the article stated. I don’t want to do that.
2 Likes
My general theory is that 99.8% of humans want the same thing: To work at something meaningful, love their families, and generally be left the fuck alone to go about their business. Tell somebody that X is threatening one of those things, and they’ll start looking to fight back. Tell them that Y will help achieve those things, and they’ll join up.
The Russian and Chinese revolutionaries never said anything about gulags and cold wars- They promised equality and abundance. The Nazis were sold on proving they were a strong and noble people who could recover from the hardship forced on them by others after WWI and oh by the way, it’s all the fault of the Jews. Look at most white supremacist literature and you won’t see a single word about other races- It’s all “pride in their heritage” and “preserving their culture”. It’s not until after you drink the kool-aid that they fill you in on the “by getting rid of the brown people” part.
So I’m reasonably certain that there are plenty of people who heard “corrupt journalism” and “want to take away GAME_X”, and threw themselves into the cause only to hear once they’ve gone all in that it was all the fault of feminists and SJWs and other Outsiders. At that point, they’re too invested to think otherwise.
With that in mind, I suspect that trying to call them on misogyny is counterproductive, in that it just reinforces the us-vs-them mentality they’ve adopted- The way Christians adopt the whole persecution complex when you try to explain that other people have rights too. The real solution would be to pull the rug out from under the initial assumptions, to try to convince them they’re hurting their own cause, to break their frame of reference. Only when you’ve managed to crack that worldview can you effectively show them a better one.
Try to empathize and understand where they’re coming from. Then use that superior knowledge to crush them. Like a Machiavellian Buddhist.
3 Likes
I’ma leave this here for any gamergaters who don’t think this is about misogyny:
12 Likes
I’m unsatisfied with how I explained the deceptiveness of that gater’s topsy.com numbers. I worry it wasn’t clear enough (I could barely understand it and I wrote the fucking thing) so I’m going to have another go at this and I’m going to use the same methodology as the gater.
Here’s that gater’s search request: #GamerGate -SJW -ZQ -@femfreq -femfreq -“Sarkeesian” -“Anita” -Quinnspiracy -@Quinnspiracy -“Zoe” -“Quinn” -“LW” -“LiterallyWho” -“LiterallyWu” -“LW1” -“LW2” -“LW3” -feminism -feminazi -“Brianna” -“Wu” -SJW -women -woman
As you can see there are 1,736,213* tweets with the #gamergate hashtag and 1,564,693 of them contain no reference to the LWs. This means that the gater was indeed right: only 9.8789722% of #gamergate tweets mention the LWs. Looks good, doesn’t it?
Not so fast. We can’t just assume that the rest of the tweets discuss the alleged corruption scandals and DMCA abuse. We need to make sure so let’s perform the same search request but let’s substitute the alleged corruption scandals and the DMCA abuse for the LWS: #gamergate -grayson -nathan -mordor -wb -warner -bethesda -mcv -ausgamers -ea -gameplanet -joab -gilroy -patricia -hernandez -igf -indiecade -gamejournopros -mailing -list -dmca -takedown -kotaku -destructoid -rock -paper -shotgun -rps -sagal -chloe -pinsof -allistair -gonzalez -yanier -niero -dahlen -chris -deesing -jonathan -riendeau -danielle -green -holly
As you can see there are 1,736,213 tweets with the #gamergate hashtag and 1,699,347 of them contain no reference to the alleged corruption or DMCA abuse. This means that only 2.123357% of #gamergate tweets mention the alleged corruption or DMCA abuse. It also means that the LWs are mentioned more than 4 times as frequently as the alleged corruption and DMCA abuse.
* at the time this research was done
8 Likes
That’s the name of my new band…
1 Like
I’ve finally researched the frequency with which the various permutations of “LW” are mention as well as the terms “feminazi” and “quinnspiracy.” Also Zoe Quinn’s legal name is allegedly Chelsea Van Valkenburg and she has allegedly gone by the pseudonym Locke Valentine so I have researched those as well.
I’ve also researched a couple more gater issues (the Sagal-Pinsof controversy, which focuses on political correctness, rather than corruption, in games journalism and the Karam/Megaman controversy which has nothing to do with journalism) as well as the topic of this thread.
Felicia Day
#gamergate felicia: 3,111
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 felicia: 69
Net: 3042
Day is now mentioned in 3042 tweets, 63% (1918) of which came in just one day. Day has receive twice as many mentions as the Shadow of Mordor corruption (1515 tweets), 101 times as many as the allegations of corruption in Australian games journalism (30 tweets), more than 10 times as many as the allegations involving Patricia Hernandez and Anna Anthropy (287 tweets), 20% more than the IGF/Indiecade allegations (2518 tweets), 6 times as many as DMCA abuse (474 tweets), 70% as many as the gamejournopros mailing list allegations (4291 tweets), and 77% as many as the Sagal-Pinsof controversy (3948).
The LWs
#gamergate lw: 1625
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lw: 1
[subtract anti-gamergate tweets]
Net: 1624
#gamergate lws: 474
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lws: 0
Net: 474
#gamergate literallywho: 218
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 literallywho: 0
Net: 218
#gamergate literallywu: 26
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 literallywu: 0
Net: 26
#gamergate lwu: 1014
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lwu: 1
Net: 1013
#gamergate lw1: 157
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lw1: 27
Net: 130
#gamergate lw2: 397
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lw2: 27
Net: 370
#gamergate lw3: 104
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 lw3: 27
Net: 77
#gamergate feminazi: 107
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 feminazi: 2
Net: 105
#gamergate feminazis: 266
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 feminazis: 19
Net: 247
#gamergate quinnspiracy: 202
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 quinnspiracy: 0
Net: 202
#gamergate valkenburg: 8
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 valkenburg: 0
Net: 8
#gamergate chelsea -stark: 6
[minimize references to Chelsea Stark]
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 chelsea -stark: 0
Net: 6
#gamergate chelsea valkenburg: 6
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 chelsea valkenburg: 0
[to avoid double counting subtract tweets that include both names]
Net: 6
Total: 8
#gamergate locke: 20
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 locke: 0
Net: 20
The LWs (excluding Alexander) now stand at 35,263. Quinn (LW1) is now at 5934, Alexander (supposedly LW2) at 8197, Sarkeesian (LW3) at 14,613, and Wu (LWu) at 12,085.
The Sagal-Pinsof Controversy
#gamergate destructoid: 2097
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 destructoid: 2
Net: 2095
#gamergate sagal: 116
#gamergate #stopgamergate sagal: 0
Net: 116
#gamergate chloe: 175
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 cloe: 0
Net: 175
#gamergate chloe sagal: 59
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 chloe sagal: 0
Net: 59
Total: 232
#gamergate pinsof: 300
#gamergate #stopgamergate pinsof: 0
Net: 300
#gamergate allistair: 51
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 allistair: 0
Net: 51
#gamergate allistair pinsof: 44
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 allistair pinsof: 0
Net: 44
Total: 307
#gamergate gonzalez: 7
#gamergate #stopgamergate gonzalez: 0
Net: 7
#gamergate yanier: 81
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 yanier: 0
Net: 81
#gamergate niero: 91
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 niero: 0
Net: 91
#gamergate yanier gonzalez: 1
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 yanier gonzalez: 0
Net: 1
#gamergate yanier niero gonzalez: 1
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 yanier niero gonzalez: 0
Net: 1
Total: 177
#gamergate dahlen: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate dahlen: 0
Net: 0
#gamergate chris -kluwe -medium.com -cauldron: 335
[minimize mentions of Chris Kluwe]
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 chris -kluwe -medium.com -cauldron: 0
Net: 335
#gamergate chris dahlen: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 chris dahlen: 0
Net: 0
Total: 335
#gamergate deesing: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate deesing: 0
Net: 0
#gamergate jonathan -mcintosh: 246
[minimize mentions of Jonathan McIntosh]
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 jonathan -mcintosh: 0
Net: 246
#gamergate jonathan deesing: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 jonathan deesing: 0
Net: 0
Total: 246
#gamergate riendeau: 7
#gamergate #stopgamergate riendeau: 0
Net: 7
#gamergate danielle: 59
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 danielle: 0
Net: 59
#gamergate danielle riendeau: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 danielle riendeau: 0
Net: 0
Total: 66
#gamergate green -purple -rape: 457
[minimize the mentions of “green + purple equals rape”]
#gamergate #stopgamergate green -purple -rape: 3
Net: 454
#gamergate holly: 300
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 holly: 0
Net: 300
#gamergate holly green: 229
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 holly green: 0
Net: 229
Total: 525
If I simply add these together (and don’t try to eliminate double counting) the total is 3948. Quinn, the least-mentioned LW, is mentioned 50% more frequently than the Sagal-Pinsof controversy.
The Karam/Megaman Controversy
#gamergate karam: 41
#gamergate #stopgamergate karam: 0
Net: 41
#gamergate dina: 517
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 dina: 0
Net: 517
#gamergate dina karam: 39
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 dina karam: 0
Net: 39
#gamergate dina abou karam: 0
#gamergate #stopgamergate2014 dina abou karam: 0
Net: 0
Total: 519
#gamergate megaman: 51
#gamergate #stopgamergate megaman: 0
Net: 51
Edit: added number of DMCA abuse tweets.
Edit #2: removed “in one day” from the Felicia Day section (that was incorrect).
6 Likes
There are others doing similar research: https://twitter.com/jordansissel/status/525075490357268480/photo/1
It’s nice to have some independent verification of some of this.
1 Like
It doesn’t really matter if more talk takes place elsewhere unless:
- Twitter is such a tiny proportion of the talk that it’s too small to be statistically significant. For example, when a pharmaceutical company tests a new drug to treat schizophrenia they only test it on a very small number of people who actually suffer from the disease. They don’t need to test it on the bulk of schizophrenics.
- and/or Twitter traffic represents a non-representative subset of #gamergate talk.
Do you have anything to back up the assertion that 1,736,213 tweets represent an insignificant portion of gamergate talk? Or that the subset of gaters on twitter are not representative of gamergate as a whole. Anecdotal evidence doesn’t count, by the way, only hard numbers. Topsy.com data is objective, unlike human perception. Objective > subjective. And I’m not saying “me = objective, you = subjective.” I’m saying “topsy.com = objective, you and I = subjective” and “topsy.com > you and I.”
Mike Rugnetta opines (whole episode is good, as usual, but this cuts to the gg comment)
That was mentioned as the very first comment in this thread.
To add to this, I think a huge point is how even if a person honestly thinks they are fighting the good fight for increased ethics and feels bad about the fact that others are making threats, that person is riding on the coattails of the threats. Felicia Day kept relatively silent about this out of fear, others are doing the same. If a person is supporting GG, they are buoyed up by the fact that some of those who would disagree with them won’t do so out of fear.
Once you realize that people are deciding not to argue with you because they are afraid, it’s time to stop arguing. Non-sociopaths probably get that.
But after reading Kathy Sierra’s piece about being bullied into silence, it makes me wonder how much of this comes from genuine sociopaths - people who know which lies to tell to mobilize an army of angry people who won’t look too deeply into the facts.
8 Likes
That’s a bit hard to say, im still doing a lot of compiling of the matter, i’ve heard about all of it when it first started, thinks leading up to it, which there is a lot of. i personally think that there is problem with the way game journalists go about their job, them talking bad about a community (both intentionally or unintentionally). As for the harassment of the three women who has made it public, there actually isn’t anything linking it to gamergate, outside of their despite for them (that’s what i have found out, for now).
in short, i believe that gamergate has some real concerns about game journalists, but has taken the blame for various people trying to stear (my english isn’t the best) up the fight, and watch it as it burns.
We are here discussing a blog post that Felica Day made saying she hadn’t said anything about gamergate because she was scared to do. Almost immediately she became the target of insults and had personal information about her made public in retribution for this blog post. She’s not exactly the first. If you can’t draw a conclusion from the fact that whenever a woman says something negative about gamergate she comes under attack, that speaks to a lack of reasonability on your part, not to a lack of evidence.
Everyone here who is arguing with you agrees with this point. There is no battle to be won. What they don’t agree with is that people continue to associate themselves with a movement that originated with and is heavily involved the harassment of women. Everyone who associates themselves with gamergate is simultaneously: 1) benefiting from the silence of those who are too afraid to speak up because of the violent undercurrent; and 2) providing a veneer of respectability to the violent undercurrent. If having no one listen to you about games journalism is more important than that, then how can we not think you essentially agree with with the misogynist subgroup is doing?
11 Likes
@anon50609448, @anon61221983, I have very little doubt that the instigators of this are, at the very least, borderline sociopaths. Look at how it was set up by a small group as a false flag operation from the very start. I haven’t yet analysed the chat logs to isolate the real instigators within that group, but I’m pretty sure that the pattern I’d find would be one or two manipulators who like to… poke people, and know whom to poke, to achieve the kinds of “lulz” they enjoy. I’ve known people like these in the past: they use others to set things in motion, and remain in the shadows.
So… you get a whole bunch of authoritarian followers off on a “crusade” for their group (and make no mistake, outsider group or not, these are authoritarian followers, which is why reason and supporting data have been of scant use in slowing them down), with a slew of would-be authoritarian leaders (who tend towards sociopathy themselves) vying for spots at the forefront, and the instigators occasionally stirring the pot from the shadows. For the instigators, the fact that a clusterfuck results is a feature, not a bug: they like to consider themselves as clever.
4 Likes
that was a long, i’m completly new to this so sorry if i don’t come across a 100% clear or haven’t completly answered your question.
What i’d like to do, is not to make a conclusion other or myself, i would like to somewhat make a timeline of the whole thing.
I have not been able to talk to the “bigger pro-gamergate” people, yet they do talk about their side, alot. And unfortunate i haven’t been able to get a hold of the more involved anti side either, probably because i’m not part of a news site, and would therefore waste their time.
But as much as it may seem that i’m speaking their side, i try to stay neutral will at the same time hear what both sides has to say, no matter what they have been accused of. because i like to know why people do what they do, and if i could somehow get in contact with the singular harassers, i would want to listen to them to.
Sorry, that wasn’t a criticism of anything you’d said. I was off on a tangent, specifically about the word “empathy”. It seems to have a technical meaning, as in diagnosing autistic spectrum disorders, that’s somewhat at odds with its more usual meaning.
Just remember when you are listening to people who are against gamergate that there are people who are against it who are too afraid to say what they think. Apparently until a couple of days ago Felicia Day was among them. That’s makes it pretty hard to hear both sides.
4 Likes
well at the same time, there has been people in the industry, who’s afraid to speak out for the concerns that gamergate has put out, for fear of either losing their job or getting smeared by gaming sites. These people i can’t take into account, exactly because they don’t speak out, out of fear. the only people i can talk to is the ones that talk actively about it, because those are the ones that do research and gives links toward the facts that are being put out.
but i understand fully what you mean by it, and isn’t disagreeing with you.
actually can i ask where you first heard of gamergate, and where you first heard that they where misogynistic?
