3 ms·
One of the most annoying places to be right now is to have sympathies with both sides of these issues and to try to discuss things rationally and evenly. Simpl
by angersock 12y ago
One of the most annoying places to be right now is to have sympathies with both sides of these issues and to try to discuss things rationally and evenly.
Simple example:
I've got two good friends, one of them on one side of the GamerGate nonsense, and one on the other. I have to be very careful chatting with them, because while they each separately are very articulate and reasoned in their arguments, I cannot even pretend to identify with any of the other side without risking very strongly being labeled and shut out of further discussion.
You'd think you could get these people to agree to sit down and calmly hear each other out, maybe critique each other's positions, and perhaps agree to disagree--but no.
No, instead one side will immediately feel like they are being judged and condescended to and set up for mocking, and the other will feel that they are probably tempting a campaign of harassment and stalking and abuse. Neither can talk openly and freely because they assume that the other person, once flagged as the opposition, will be doing everything disingenuously. One cannot have reasoned discussions in such an environment.
And if you do agree with the people who are either side of GamerGate? You're either siding with people who use threats and really sloppy language ("SJW" as a catchall for any goddamn thing that even is remotely related, good or bad), or siding with people who bully and pander and conduct successful mass-media campaigns belittling their opponents. Like, nobody deserves to win this.
~
The thing that's most annoying to me, though, is that one side you can kind of reason with, because you slowly wittle away the crazy into an admission that "Well, yeah, we should treat them with some class, I guess. Death threats aren't actually okay."
The other side, though, has made central to its position a sort of victimhood, and that is a position very hard to navigate somebody out of. And so, even if you try and work on things, they'll acknowledge a small portion of why the other side has its issues, and then immediately revert to "But, think of the fear and the suffering and blah blah blah".
And it's annoying, because if you try to stand on that side and argue back with the jerks making deaththreats and doxxing and doing nasty shit, you look over your shoulder to see your allies and they're automartyring and being downright mean and just clearly not acting in any sort of productive way.
And if you're on the other side and trying to support the nerds who are getting picked on and made fun of and made out to be manchildren and whatnot? Your allies are busy calling in bomb threats and making the most puerile gestures and getting so damned emotional in their trolling they losing sight of the big picture--and playing right into the hands of their opponents.
It's just so goddamn frustrating.
The exact same thing plays out in politics: one side will make fun of and harass the other side, and that side will continually play the abused and purge anybody who doesn't fall in with them.
And between the two of them, there's simply no place for anybody who doesn't want to look like a buffoon or an opportunistic victim.
- deciplex 12y agoMy reaction to Gamergate was to continue playing video games and to continue not reading 'Games Journalism' because I already knew it was payola garbage. As for your friends my suggestion would be to discuss other shared interests. It's possible - even common - for both 'sides' of an issue to be way off the mark.
- vacri 12y agoMy opinion on the matter is that if someone can say the phrase "ethics in video game journalism" with a straight face, it's time to abandon the conversation...
- xlm1717 12y agoThis is the most rational reaction.
- angersock 12y agoSo, first off, there are some very interesting bits of "Games Journalism" or even just mild-mannered industry publications (Gamasutra et al) who are still quite worth reading even despite the GamerGate nonsense. Second and more importantly, it's now in some third or later phase where frankly things have extended quite beyond just games. Both friends spend a lot of time online reading blogs, reading essays, and basically being literate on digital culture. That being the case, avoiding the ripples and crazy of that whole fiasco is hard. There's a fascinating de facto trial of the limits of free speech in the age of mass point-to-point communication, and if you just stick your head in the sand because of GG you're going to be missing a lot.
- mkr-hn 12y ago> One of the most annoying places to be right now is to have sympathies with both sides of these issues and to try to discuss things rationally and evenly. I was once labeled an "MRA" for suggesting sexual assault (or worse) and IPV statistics might be more balanced between different genders if the data collection efforts weren't skewed so far toward a single gender. I used to be a lot more idealistic, but ideologues broke me of that faulty thinking.