6 ms·

I'm sorry, but this is a false equivalence. On one side you have people literally threatening people with violence to the point of being forced to leave their h

I'm sorry, but this is a false equivalence. On one side you have people literally threatening people with violence to the point of being forced to leave their homes, cancel speaking appearances, etc. On the other side, you have people pointing out this unfortunate fact.

iamdave 12y ago
I ask this earnestly, but did I give some indication that the threats being delivered don't deserve scrutiny or should otherwise be waved aside as negligible? I guess I'm not entirely getting where you're coming from; my point was that there's a worthwhile discussion that needs to be had regarding sexism in gaming, but much of it has been muddled by participants from both camps. The death threats here, just happen to be example of muddling of side "A". Name calling, death-threats, "doxxing", there's mud being flung here, calling it a "false equivalence" when I've implicated both parties of not moving the ball forward seems rather obtuse.
- ben0x539 12y ago
  Yeah, you did give that indication, you're constantly framing abuse and harassment of women as a "battle" between two equally positioned sides, incidentally sides where one would be arbitrarily placed in by accident of birth.
  - iamdave 12y ago
    If the problem is my choice of the term 'battle', I was borrowing a phrase from game theory: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Battle_of_the_sexes_(game_theory) http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Battle_of_the_sexes_(game_theory) which I genuinely believe the subject matter has many contextual parallels to. Obviously I do not intend to speak as if the social conversation about sexism in gaming, tech and other industries is an actually even battle where both sides have equal rhetorical or empirical firepower to "win" or "lose". And if indeed the problem is that I called it a 'battle', then I'll conditionally accept correction on that (even if I think it ignores the larger point I was attempting to make). I think now is a good time for me to step aside from this before we go off the rails.
    - ben0x539 12y ago
      My problem with the particular phrase 'battle of the sexes' is that invites a reduction in this context that gamergate holds a reasonable male position and Sarkeesian merely holds an equally reasonable female position, and that men can't be blamed for holding the gamergate position and that only women should reasonably hold Sarkeesian's position. I admit I'm ignorant of the game theory allusion you're making. More generally I fear I don't understand the larger point you're trying to make if you weren't trying to do the "two sides, both have some good points and some bad points, let's ask the peope receiving death threats to sit down with their abusers and find a compromise" truth-is-in-the-middle thing.
      - iamdave 12y ago
        let's ask the peope receiving death threats to sit down with their abusers and find a compromise" truth-is-in-the-middle thing. Except I never said that. I never insinuated that, if you think that's the case, then it appears you're trying to force your interpretations into my statements, and that's not cool. Instead, what I've asserted repeatedly is this: 1) Sexism in gaming, tech and other industries needs to be addressed. Absolutely and positively. 2) Many who carry the banner of "Feminist" and many who carry the banner "Gamer" have taken unfortunate and problematic stances, as well as have made unfortunate and problematic statements to get "their" side more validity to the point where taking a side either way carries many severe consequences in the interest of moving a conversation forward. 3) Instead of simply jumping to one side because of how the other side reacts, I personally have decided to abstain from participating further until I see an opportunity where I personally feel comfortable participating and not be accused of being sexist/misogynist/whateverist or otherwise chided for not expressing myself in absolute support. Is that a little less ambiguous?
        ben0x539 12y ago
        I still think 2) is one hell of a false equivalency, ymmv.
        iamdave 12y ago
sb057 12y ago
>On the other side, you have people pointing out this unfortunate fact. https://i.imgur.com/eUjdl5K.jpg https://i.imgur.com/eUjdl5K.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzQqokICUAEyhWy.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzQqokICUAEyhWy.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzFBQrMIEAA487S.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzFBQrMIEAA487S.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bzko-VhIgAAX9WK.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bzko-VhIgAAX9WK.png https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/464779743175655425 https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/464779743175655425 https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522156760623484928 https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522156760623484928 It's ridiculous to say that that side is only "pointing out this unfortunate fact," especially after so many Gamergate supporters have denounced the doxxings and threats. https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2jabgg/can_we_agree_to_a_blanket_condemnation_of_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2jabgg/can_...
Houshalter 12y ago
"Your opinion is wrong because someone associated with your opinion did something bad." Death threats have, unfortunately, always been very common among controversial figures. Obama gets 30 a day, about 40,000 in total.

iamdave 12y ago

I ask this earnestly, but did I give some indication that the threats being delivered don't deserve scrutiny or should otherwise be waved aside as negligible? I guess I'm not entirely getting where you're coming from; my point was that there's a worthwhile discussion that needs to be had regarding sexism in gaming, but much of it has been muddled by participants from both camps. The death threats here, just happen to be example of muddling of side "A". Name calling, death-threats, "doxxing", there's mud being flung here, calling it a "false equivalence" when I've implicated both parties of not moving the ball forward seems rather obtuse.

ben0x539 12y ago
Yeah, you did give that indication, you're constantly framing abuse and harassment of women as a "battle" between two equally positioned sides, incidentally sides where one would be arbitrarily placed in by accident of birth.
- iamdave 12y ago
  If the problem is my choice of the term 'battle', I was borrowing a phrase from game theory: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Battle_of_the_sexes_(game_theory) http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Battle_of_the_sexes_(game_theory) which I genuinely believe the subject matter has many contextual parallels to. Obviously I do not intend to speak as if the social conversation about sexism in gaming, tech and other industries is an actually even battle where both sides have equal rhetorical or empirical firepower to "win" or "lose". And if indeed the problem is that I called it a 'battle', then I'll conditionally accept correction on that (even if I think it ignores the larger point I was attempting to make). I think now is a good time for me to step aside from this before we go off the rails.
  - ben0x539 12y ago
    My problem with the particular phrase 'battle of the sexes' is that invites a reduction in this context that gamergate holds a reasonable male position and Sarkeesian merely holds an equally reasonable female position, and that men can't be blamed for holding the gamergate position and that only women should reasonably hold Sarkeesian's position. I admit I'm ignorant of the game theory allusion you're making. More generally I fear I don't understand the larger point you're trying to make if you weren't trying to do the "two sides, both have some good points and some bad points, let's ask the peope receiving death threats to sit down with their abusers and find a compromise" truth-is-in-the-middle thing.
    - iamdave 12y ago
      let's ask the peope receiving death threats to sit down with their abusers and find a compromise" truth-is-in-the-middle thing. Except I never said that. I never insinuated that, if you think that's the case, then it appears you're trying to force your interpretations into my statements, and that's not cool. Instead, what I've asserted repeatedly is this: 1) Sexism in gaming, tech and other industries needs to be addressed. Absolutely and positively. 2) Many who carry the banner of "Feminist" and many who carry the banner "Gamer" have taken unfortunate and problematic stances, as well as have made unfortunate and problematic statements to get "their" side more validity to the point where taking a side either way carries many severe consequences in the interest of moving a conversation forward. 3) Instead of simply jumping to one side because of how the other side reacts, I personally have decided to abstain from participating further until I see an opportunity where I personally feel comfortable participating and not be accused of being sexist/misogynist/whateverist or otherwise chided for not expressing myself in absolute support. Is that a little less ambiguous?
      - ben0x539 12y ago
        I still think 2) is one hell of a false equivalency, ymmv.
        iamdave 12y ago

sb057 12y ago

>On the other side, you have people pointing out this unfortunate fact. https://i.imgur.com/eUjdl5K.jpg https://i.imgur.com/eUjdl5K.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzQqokICUAEyhWy.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzQqokICUAEyhWy.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzFBQrMIEAA487S.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzFBQrMIEAA487S.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bzko-VhIgAAX9WK.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bzko-VhIgAAX9WK.png https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/464779743175655425 https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/464779743175655425 https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522156760623484928 https://twitter.com/Boogie2988/status/522156760623484928 It's ridiculous to say that that side is only "pointing out this unfortunate fact," especially after so many Gamergate supporters have denounced the doxxings and threats. https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2jabgg/can_we_agree_to_a_blanket_condemnation_of_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2jabgg/can_...

Houshalter 12y ago

"Your opinion is wrong because someone associated with your opinion did something bad." Death threats have, unfortunately, always been very common among controversial figures. Obama gets 30 a day, about 40,000 in total.