Crocochow wrote:So I think in a sense we agree, minority status shouldn't grant you special privilege.
No, I was saying an *individual* is not right or wrong because of their minority status. (Or being female. Females being a majority. You do know that right?)
But that's a league away from saying minority status shouldn't grant special privileges. I mean, I like that I get special privileges to have legislation that promotes building ramps and putting elevators in stores, so I don't have to cope with stairs everywhere. You realise that there's a reason why we have to make special effort to represent the under-repesented in video games? Because they're under-represented.
Why is this significant? Because a lot of anti-GG rhetoric is centered around minority status,and that's a fallacy they're unwilling to address. Every voice should be weighed the same, but appeals to argumentation are dismissed on the fact that some people 'talk white' or are trying to 'mansplain', and because they don't have super special snowflake status #3212, their arguments are thrown out.
No. What was being said was that the complaints amounted to "But why are we wasting time on games and news articles that aren't Targeted To Me!", when almost all games and games related media are targeted for precisely the people complaining. "Mansplaining" is shorthand for "Someone who clearly has benefitted from male privileges trying to explain why they don't really have privilege from being male", that's what the phrase means, it isn't a blanket label to all men. These terms are applied to people who have privilege in society, but insist on claiming that they're in the same position as everyone else.
And again, we go back to everyone isn't being treated equally in society, and ignoring that is part of the problem.
And some of the un-equal treatment is there as correction or aid for people who are disadvantaged from the start. Tie that up with someone who simply dismisses criticism by using "You just say that because I'm not a minority", and it causes a huge amount of conflict.
On the subject of identifying the sources and looking for conspiracies: Perhaps a lot of people using the tag didn't want to be identified through their real accounts so they made alts? I'm actually acknowledging the opposite regarding the guy who made the notyourshield tag. I'm saying that even though he's black he can be dick. And that's significant because even though you're a disabled genderneutral bisexual, you can still be wrong on issues regarding gender. Your minority status doesn't grant your opinion more or less weight. Just to be the poor devil's advocate, I'm a demisexual trans croc.
A) Yes I might be wrong. But I try not to be, and I present arguments for why I think I'm right.
B) Genderfluid is very very much not the same as Genderneutral. So I do appear to know more about issues regarding gender than you do.
See, that's the point. You turn 'You might not be right just because you're a minority' into an implication of 'I am right'. That is not an argument, it's an insinuation. The person who brought up the minority status of the person making an argument here, is you. That's a problem.
What behavior are we talking about here? It seems like you're trying to conflate GamerGate with negative stereotypes despite the fact that them movement doesn't condone one particular ideology or accept harassment.
If it doesn't condone any particular ideology, what the hell is the point of it? If it's supporting everything, then it's supporting nothing, and just an excuse for people to get angry.
And again, I have to stress that saying you don't accept harrassment rings false when the whole movement started out and mainly continues as personally targeted towards Zoe Quinn
. Go re-read the above thread, see how it all keeps circling back in on Zoe Quinn with accusations and references to sexual misconduct. The movement was founded on the idea of mass swarming around Zoe Quinn to berate her. That's harassment.
GamerGate does not accept harassment, except for the harassment the entire movement is based on. And they have to keep doing it because they have to sustain the idea that there was some legitimate Zoe Quinn related conspiracy to justify their behaviour.
I'm not 'conflating' GamerGate with personal harassment, GamerGate came into the world as a personal harassment campaign towards Zoe Quinn.
Nobody is trying to defeat feminism or instill racism here. You are conflating a consumer revolt focused around ethics in video game journalism with a social issue that's tangentially related around cult personalities involved in video games. If you want, I can throw a tu quoque and say that bad things have been done by people claiming to be on both sides. Does this discredit NotYourShield and validates harassment and doxxing that happened to pro-GGers? I don't think so.
The "tangental relationship" to individual personalities is hardly tangental. The organising IRC channel and forum on 4chan were named after references to supposed sexual behaviour of Zoe Quinn. That's not a "tangental relationship". GamerGate started as a way to harass Zoe Quinn, then harass those who supported her, and the whole rest of it has been about trying to legitimise that harassment.