#Gamergate

(This is sort of a loose Part II to my last post.)

For those of you who don't know what Gamergate is, (a) you're lucky, and (b) let me give you a quick primer.  For those of you who do, you should probably read this too, so that you know where I'm coming from, just in case you happen to be on a different side...

#Gamergate is about a guy getting dumped.

Ultimately, it's that simple, and I think that summary neatly captures both the fundamentals of it, as well as the (generally) banal pettiness of it all.  (More on that "generally" in a bit.)

But I suppose you might need a little more information for this discussion to be practical, so I'll set aside my customary brevity (snort) and give you this:

A guy dating a female game developer got dumped.  Rather than acting like the adult 24-year-old that he was and simply going out and getting drunk or seeing some strippers or something (I don't know, what do dumped 24-year-olds do?), he decided to trash her life as much as possible, and wound up posting a huge blog rant that included allegations that she had slept with game reviewers to get good reviews for her game.

This blog post set off a movement amongst gamers, as well as the usual sort who capitalize on such movements.  (Much to my disappointment, it appears that the #gamergate tag was actually started by Adam Baldwin of Firefly/Chuck/ID4 fame.)  Supposedly, this movement is about ethics in game journalism.

The problem with that spin is that (a) it's been disproven that the woman had actually been sleeping people with reviews (I'm sure you're all shocked by that development), and (b) most of the activity under the Gamergate hashtag is not actually about ethics in game journalism.

What it's actually about is:

- Harassing female game developers, at least two of whom have been driven from their homes by death threats;

- Harassing anyone who suggests that sexist/racist/homophobic/etc. content in video games isn't, y'know, great (but especially the women who do this, like Anita Sarkeesian);

- Harassing sponsors of any game journalism websites that disagree with #gamergate into pulling their advertising;

- And, as a distant fourth, some actual discussion about ethics in game journalism, although they're generally wrong about what constitutes ethics, and also are going after the small developers, rather than the actual journalists or the big-name game developers (EA, Activision, Rockstar, etc.), which casts some doubt on how much they really care about it.

In other words, it really comes down to a core of supposed "hardcore gamers" who feel that feminism, amongst other things, is ruining their games and corrupting game journalism.  They even have a name for their opponents: "Social Justice Warriors", or SJWs. The SJWs are somehow going to take away everything that's "fun" and make them all... sensitive or something.  I don't know.  But apparently "fun" is the freedom to be racist/sexist/homophobic/etc, and the SJWs are going to make them realize how hurtful that is, or some buzzkill like that.

Let's do a little thought experiment.  Imagine, if you would, that video games existed 200 years ago.  Is it much of a stretch to imagine that some game developer/publisher might come up with a game like "Plantation Tycoon" in the vein of, say, Roller Coaster Tycoon, but running a slave plantation?  Might be a little controversial, sure, since slavery wasn't universally accepted, but it certainly wouldn't be against all societal mores.

But if someone were to try to make such a game now, how long do you think they'd last under the inevitable onslaught of, like, everybody?  And why is that?  Because society has changed, and that sort of thing is no longer acceptable at all.

Similarly, racism, sexism, homophobia, and the like, are also becoming less acceptable in society.  And maybe that ruins some people's fun, but I don't really think that's a sort of fun we ought to be supporting.

As you can probably tell, I don't think much of the #gannondorf "movement", so instead let's turn to the people involved in it.

First of all, let's acknowledge right up front that there's a core of just really-not-nice people.  Entrenched misogynists, far-right-wing reactionaries resistant to ever having to change their ways, Men's Rights Activists (blech), etc.  You will not find a more wretched hive of scum and villiany.

These are the people who threaten and harass the anti-#arglebargle women and other SJWs, or who, say, wish for people who film all the catcalls they get just walking through NYC to get raped.  There's not much to say about them, and not much to do about them, either, unfortunately (at least until they do something to get themselves arrested or whatever).

However, there are plenty of others that aren't beyond reasonable hope of redemption.  Some truly believe it's actually about ethics in game journalism, and are well-meaningly No True Scotsman-ing away all of the misogyny and harassment.

And others are, I think, simply being swept along in the tides of gaming culture.

As I'm sure most of you have some experience with (heck, the comments on news articles could stand in as a reasonable approximation here), many online gaming communities tend to be rather... "Good old boys club"-like. It's a bit odd to be describing it that way, given the differences in the people you'll find in either place, but the air of casual misogyny, homophobia and general misanthropy is similar.

However, it doesn't have to be that way. I've heard (anecdotally) several stories about people calling participants on the crap they're spouting without even really thinking about, and the environment actually improving. It's quite similar, in a multitude of ways, to the idea of standing up to bullies.

And this is where I tie things back to last week's post. I mentioned how fortunate I was to have had plenty of positive exposure and examples to keep me from heading down this path. I don't think many of the people in these gaming communities, or in (the tamer side, generally, of) #gamergate, were so fortunate.

And without such positive examples, they've fallen, basically by default, under the sway of the prevailing gamer culture, or even of the hardcore really-not-nice people.

I say this not to justify anything they may have done; you'd like to think that everyone would have the basic moral compass to know that certain things are just wrong.

But there's a difference between justifying and understanding, and I can understand how some of these folks got where they did (especially the younger ones, who simply don't have the life experience, even as teens, to necessarily know better). And understanding can help us try to reach them. (I'm trying to avoid too many patronizing salvational metaphors here.)

The tragedy of #gamerridiculousness, to me (aside from the people terrorized, obviously), is how polarizing it's been. I get the sense that many well-meaning gamers on the pro side are feeling so attacked that they may wind up more entrenched in the stereotypical gamer culture, and thus less reachable. And I also think that those gamer stereotypes have been reinforced on the anti side and in the general public, making them less understanding and willing to reach out.

When games were seemingly becoming more mainstream and with a more diverse audience, this is a huge step backwards. And all because a guy got dumped and threw a temper tantrum. Talk about entitlement.