This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Gamergate but actually from NeverKnowsBest is maybe the best original, primary source based research I've seen concerning Gamergate. It's also a six-hour long youtube video. I'm going to make the argument that - for the average person who is at all interested in this sort of thing - it's well worth your time to watch it.
If you're like me, before watching you may think you already know most of what was important about the event, incessantly relitigated as it has been over the years. On top of that, it's a highly adversarial information environment, and because of link rot, it's not getting any easier to make sense of what happened. I was very-online enough then to be there from the beginning, after all!
These were all very reasonable thoughts, but they're wrong.
Things I didn't know before watching:
The link to the sources is down, unfortunately, but a great deal are shown during the video.
I looked around for some reactions to it, and I don't think it has traveled very far yet. Or, perhaps everyone's just burned out on the subject. I actually feel bad for the person who refuses to watch it because NeverKnowsBest was "misgendering" Quinn. It's all out there, now in a long but accessible format. The event does deserve clarity and reflection, if only because of the demonstrable failures of the wider mainstream media, something that should concern all Americans.
If you still don't want to watch it, well, I suppose I can still give a pithy take-away for what it's worth: Gamergate spiraled not because someone was harassed on the internet, because that happens all the time, but was rather a paper-thin smokescreen deployed by powerful people to escape accountability; and because the national media failed to perform the most basic aspects of their job, they got away with it, allowing these obviously bad actors to continue to harm and exploit others for their own gain.
I've seen about an hour and a half of the beginning and about 30 minutes of the end. It seems ok. A handful of observations:
I read NKB's take to be more on the nature of the criticism. Hepler is a writer so probably doesn't need to play videogames to do her job (seems her thing was more TTRPG's). Calling her "Hamburger Helper", though I laughed when I first heard it, isn't helpful. The reddit post about Pagliarulo was actually unhinged and completely hyperbolic, but people bought it anyways because most probably didn't watch the video.
Zoe getting caught lying about her mother dying multiple times has got to be a stark wakeup call to people still somehow on the militant anti-GG side. Sadly, it comes rather late in the video, and I'm not sure how many will see it. They're already trotting out bogus reasons to dismiss it and not watch it in the spaces that lean anti-GG but still have enough context to care.
I hope the video didn't disappoint you too much because there wasn't enough new information! That's why I listed some revelations for me, because I wasn't sure how much other people around here would find it redundant.
He didn't really touch on the possible McIntosh ghost-writing, but I agree it's interesting. I think an important core argument of the video is that Zoe was an abuser who got away with it because of bad norms people pushed in an influential left-wing in-group. Zoe really came across as an Anita knock-off, only elevated because she found herself proclaimed a kind of group mascot, a symbol for their cause, and thus unquestionable. However, he also notes that many on her side were probably just deceived, which I think is fair, though people should take this as a lesson to do their due-diligence before joining a cause.
In the end, I think the stakes were pretty small and I'm not sure either side can really say they won. I'm not really sure how influential Gamergate has been in the wider culture. For example, I think Trump's two elections were overdetermined, and thus didn't need Gamergate to happen. I think it's more interesting as a study of human dynamics and as an example of what goes wrong when you try to push any system that does not allow criticism (it gets weaponized by bad actors).
Can the pro-GG side say they won? Some outlets are more conscious of disclosures, but now everyone thinks pro-GG people were just a bunch of CHUDs, and I would guess that in most professional circles, it would be more of a liability to be seen as pro-GG compared to anti-GG. Some anti-GG people at the top were able to grift and profit, but I remember that one quote from someone who said something like "joining the anti-GG movement was the worst decision I ever made." This makes me wonder if anyone but those at the top of the anti-GG pyramid really benefited. Certainly the ones who fell prey to Quinn's likely abuse didn't. Also, as far as history goes, NKB and others have the receipts. I wouldn't be surprised if the historical position on this issue changed once time has depoliticized things.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link