Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - @StephenTotilo, @BenKuchera and @CThursten Want to Talk

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 6, 2015 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

40:05

@StephenTotilo, @BenKuchera and @CThursten Want to Talk

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So I thought I'd talk about a few things of late that I have found incongruous.
	Before we do that, it's probably best to refresh our memories.
	Kotaku on the 28th of August 2014 posted their Death of an Identity Gamers Are Over article, where they naturally fell into lockstep with the more powerful megaphones that were telling them what to do.
	In fact, if you go back and look at it now, it really does seem rather odd just the way that Luke Plunkett approached this article.
	It's like he didn't really know what he was doing or why he was doing it.
	It puts him in a rather awkward position, to be honest.
	His readership is attacking his ideological betters.
	My my, what an uncomfortable position to be put in.
	His very article includes an apology for the people making the gamers are dead arguments.
	Note, they're not talking about everyone who plays games or self-identifies as a gamer.
	Are they not, Luke?
	Because they do seem to be very insistent on talking about people who self-identify as gamers, but we will get to that in a minute.
	Because I would like to know why it is being used in these cases as a shorthand, a catch-all term for the type of reactionary holdouts that feel so threatened by gaming's widening horizons.
	What kind of fucking doublethink is that, Luke?
	Instead of criticising gamers for being pissed off that they're being told that they are dead, why don't you criticise the people who are clearly using the term gamer incorrectly?
	So it's either that you're too stupid to understand what's actually going on or you're too much of a coward to stand up and have the courage of your convictions.
	I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you're too stupid to understand it.
	But either way, Luke, what I would like you to do to try and figure this out for yourself is say, okay, what reactionary holdouts am I talking about?
	I can only assume that you're talking about the sort of people who don't want women in video games.
	I've yet to meet one, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that they exist.
	So if you could just give us a name, just one person who is a reactionary holdout who doesn't want women in gaming, that would be wonderful.
	But anyway, so it's not anyone who self-identifies as a gamer.
	Which again was really odd given that in the same article you personally wrote, the first by Dan Golding, a diegramber incidentally, is called The End of Gamers.
	Seems rather specific.
	And the second by Leia Alexander is called Gamers Don't Have to Be Your Audience, Gamers Are Over, which is probably why they're so mad.
	That's so weird and spiteful.
	It's no wonder you feel inclined to say, look guys, just don't really listen to them.
	They're not talking about you, I promise.
	Please don't hate me.
	I mean, I think you were being a bit brief there, Dan, so let's quickly refresh our memory from Leia Alexander's own article.
	Gamer isn't just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use.
	Gamers are over, that's why they're so mad.
	Weird, she kind of sounds like she's enjoying that, doesn't she?
	These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet arguers, they're not my audience and they don't have to be yours.
	There's no side to be on, there's no debate to be had.
	There's what's past and there's what's now.
	There is the role you choose to play in what's ahead.
	That is some creepy shit from Leigh Alexander there.
	Okay, Luke, I'm sure that that wasn't deliberately designed to be inflammatory.
	I'm sure that it was inflammatory because Le Alexander is also a complete fucking moron who is absolutely unable to see the wood for the trees and why saying that gamers are obtuse shitslingers and they're just mad because they're over is an issue.
	Let's have a look at this end of gamers article though.
	Let's see exactly what Dan Golding has to say for himself.
	I mean he starts with an enormous paragraph talking about Zoe Quinn.
	I don't know whether it's an obsession with male feminists or not, but they just can't stop talking about women.
	Not for five fucking seconds.
	I mean, listen to this.
	A woman who makes games who has so much piled on to her that I don't want to perpetuate things by naming her.
	I love that she has become she who shall not be named here.
	Was the target of a harassment campaign that attacked her personal life and friendships.
	As if that's a totally fucking innocent thing when you're a developer who is being promoted by a journalist for the mutual benefit.
	And apparently this is a dismayingly common occurrence among those who happen to be women, or not straight white men, or happen to make the sort of game that in any way challenges the status quo.
	I mean this was something more than a routine misogyny.
	To which I agree.
	I mean this doesn't really seem to be connected to hatred of women at all.
	It really seems to be connected to journalistic corruption.
	It's weird that Dan himself can even see this.
	I mean he says it's important to note that this hate campaign took the guise of a crusade against corruption and bias in the games industry with particular emphasis on the relationships between independent game developers and the press.
	So let's go through this one at a time shall we?
	Let's talk about corruption and bias in the industry first.
	For this we need look no further than the editor of Gama Sutra, Leia Alexander.
	Let's ask Leia Alexander what she thinks of bias.
	In addition to regularly writing and speaking about feminism, I reject as much as possible conventional models for video games writing.
	Whether I'm doing interviews, criticism, anything, no pretense of being unbiased.
	Well shit.
	That's kind of on the nose, isn't it?
	No pretense of being unbiased.
	Just, I'm sorry, Dan Golding.
	I just can't see why gamers are so concerned with bias and corruption in the industry.
	I mean, it's not like the editor of Gama Sutra isn't saying it to our fucking faces.
	But okay, you know what?
	Let's talk about the relationships between the independent game developers and the press.
	I mean, what about Nathan Grayson and Zoe Quinn?
	It's not like Nathan Grayson is right here promoting Zoe Quinn's fucking game.
	Oh wait, he is on January the 8th, 2014.
	A good eight months before Gamergate blew up.
	He doesn't just mention it either.
	He says, anyway, standouts are powerful Twine darling depression quest.
	Really powerful Twine darling.
	I mean that is pretty glowing review.
	But I'm not too surprised.
	He was trying to shagger.
	But you know, I know that you guys are really, really sensitive when it comes to women.
	You can't bear to see women criticized in any way.
	So let's talk about Nathan Grayson's promotion of his mates instead.
	For example, Grayson writing about something called Sound Self.
	This is Grayson's buddy, Robin Arnott, who Grayson talks about like he's the second coming of fucking Jesus.
	And of course, never discloses that they are personal friends.
	And the thing is, he keeps talking about Robin Arnott in article after fucking article.
	There is seriously article after article of Nathan Grayson turning to Robin Arnott and saying, hey Robin, can I just get your opinion on this subject for some fucking reason?
	Because I'm too lazy to leave my own apartment, presumably.
	Robin puts down the joint and then says something like, if I were in the console business right now, or as an indie, E3 is incredibly good for press.
	Or I played the original Sims a lot, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	For fuck's sake, Grayson, no one cares what Robin Arnott has to say.
	You lazy, talentless hack.
	But this is the state of video games journalism, though.
	This is what we're talking about.
	It's dipshits promoting their buddies because, frankly, it's easier and they feel good about themselves when they do it.
	At least five times, Grayson has promoted Arnott's bloody sound self thing.
	Five fucking times.
	With the descriptors becoming increasingly more flattering.
	Robert Arnott, creator of excellent VR meditation game.
	Robin R. Nott, sound self-creator.
	Robin R. Not, creator of one of the most soothing non-violent games I've ever played, you fucking hipster.
	Robin R. Not, a sound self and anthropon sound self maestro, Robin R. Not.
	I mean, fucking hell, Grayson.
	If I buy you some weed, will you talk about my game in such glowing terms?
	I can give you some fucking quotes if you like.
	How about, according to Necromancer developer Sargon of a CAD, Grayson is a cunt and Kotaku's a fucking joke, which is about all anyone expects from a company owned by Gorka.
	So getting back to Dan Golding's End of Gamers post, which I am actually going to be exploring in more detail in the next installment of why gamers had to die, this is kind of an addendum because these people just piss me off so fucking much, frankly.
	We can see that we do in fact have corruption and bias in the industry, with a particular emphasis on relationships between independent game developers and the press, which are fucking inappropriate.
	Don't we, Dan Golding, you pillock.
	But I won't go into why these people declared gamers over in this video.
	Just the subsequent fallout from it.
	But what amuses me most about this is the absolute spinelessness of Kotaku.
	Toeing the party line and yet desperately trying to assure their readers who are currently under attack that they are not in fact under attack.
	Our 2014 Gamers of the Year, you.
	That doesn't make any fucking sense, Stephen.
	I don't know whether you've forgotten Kotaku's own coverage, but gamers as an identity are over.
	So why you would be saying 2014 Gamers of the Year, that would be like saying 2014's Zoroastrian of the Year, 2014's Huguenot of the Year.
	You have supported the attack on the identity of gamers.
	Stephen.
	Are you doing this in fact because the gamer identity has not simply evaporated into thin air and you are looking remarkably low and servile?
	You have, just like all of these other journalists, utterly overplayed your hand and assumed that you actually had more power than you actually reasonably did.
	But I am indeed looking forward to hearing what Kotaku think of Gamergate and journalistic ethics.
	I can't imagine they're going to want to talk about the ethics so much given that Nathan Grayson was a writer for Kotaku when this was going on.
	Totillo goes out of his way, I think, to sound like a bumbling old man who has no idea what's going on around him.
	The elephant in the room is Gamergate, of course, and what an unwieldy elephant it's been.
	Try as I have to understand its many parts and sides.
	Stephen, you moron.
	Your journalists were fucking around and promoting their friends and lovers, Stephen.
	In a culture already grappling with years of harassment against outspoken women and threats against developers, it became a new source of frustration thanks in part to the willful misinterpretations and cackling callousness that emerged from so many of the movement's more cynical actors and opportunists around them.
	Yes, it is the misinterpretations of the more cynical actors, Stephen.
	It's not the willful misinterpretation or complete bewilderment from the fucking gaming press who are desperately trying to deflect and defuse any allegations against them.
	Stephen Totillo, you are a fucking disgrace, hiding the malfeasance of Kotaku and Kotako's journalists, quote-unquote, behind the skirt tails of Anit Sarkeesian Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu.
	You coward.
	Did I say coward?
	I mean you pussy, Steven.
	It's no secret that members of Gamergate targeted this poor site, calling for the firing of writers and the defunding of our company.
	Yes, Stephen, you are the ones who have been operating with a lack of ethical standards.
	It is your writers that have been in the wrong.
	It is you right now that is currently trying to pass this off as some bewildering non-event that he just can't understand because you are either such a phenomenal moron or such a phenomenal coward you refused to sack up and deal with this.
	But I do like the way that you say all while propagating the fiction that we are somehow anti-gamer.
	You are anti-gamer, you blubbering half-wit.
	Kotaku took part in the Death of Gamers articles just as much as anyone else.
	Although I agree, you did have a particularly servile way of doing it.
	You are literally just standing in the middle apologising to everyone.
	We're so sorry, we're so sorry, we're so sorry, we're so fucking sorry.
	Yes, Stephen, you are fucking sorry.
	Kotaku is fucking sorry.
	Nobody's debating that.
	It's this kind of spinelessness that really gets my goat.
	I mean, listen to this.
	But at the year's end, after a season of negativity, what we have, I think, is an opportunity to celebrate what gamers have been and can be at their best.
	It's a subtler influence, but an important one defining the scene.
	Call it a dodge, which it is, but I call it optimism.
	The gamer glass is far more than half full.
	Go to PAX or walk by GameStop and you'll see it yourself, as I have.
	Gamers of all types, eager to share their insights and enthusiasm for games.
	Go online or to a fighting game tournament and you'll find camaraderie.
	Head to a school where games are taught and you'll see a new generation that speaks the language that we love.
	I have a question for you, Stephen.
	You fucking coward.
	Why are you telling us this?
	Why are you saying this to us?
	The gamers?
	Why are you not saying it to, for example, Le Alexander, the biased megaphone with an agenda who's part of a movement?
	Why not her?
	She was the one saying that we were obtuse shitslingers, wailing hyper-consumers and childish internet arguers.
	There's no debate to be had here, Stephen.
	Why aren't you telling her this?
	But this is the problem, really, isn't it, Stephen?
	Because what you want is for people to lower their voices and look at the ground.
	So here's to those people.
	Here's to you.
	Here's to the men and women, boys and girls who have played an online shooter to have fun and never felt the need to spout a slur.
	Here's to the people who have read a game review and never had the reflex to harass the review's author.
	Harass the review's author.
	Stephen, that's that's no, that's it, isn't it?
	That's that's what it is.
	It's harassment when people are calling you to account for the bullshit that you say.
	It's harassment.
	Nor the developer of the game, nor their fellow gamers who liked or hated it.
	You don't make the headlines, but you make gaming more wonderful by being a fucking sheep and letting Le Alexander piss all over your face.
	Here's to all the gamers who help gaming improve, who treat each male and female gamer and game creators with dignity, who disagree without trying to ruin each other.
	Really, Stephen?
	Is that really where you're going to go with this?
	You're going to go, oh, well, just because my journalists are being unethical doesn't mean you should try and ruin me.
	No, Stephen, that is exactly what it fucking means.
	It means they need to be held to account, you coward.
	Fucking hell, man.
	You're a fucking disgrace.
	You are literally here defending your unethical practices saying, well, don't try to ruin us.
	It's not just because we're being unethical, advising you how to spend your fucking money.
	You're fucking pathetic, man.
	You literally, you're fucking pathetic.
	Seriously, I mean, at least Ben Kachera, monumental ass goblin that he is, at least he has the courage of his own fucking conviction, Stephen.
	Yes, Ben Kachera hates gaming.
	Yes, he hates ethics.
	Yes, he hates objectivity.
	Yes, he is pro-bias.
	Yes, he is going to advise you how to spend your money.
	And no, fuck you for demanding anything from him.
	He is a man who at least stands by his principles, as warped and depraved as those principles are.
	Ben Kiichera's principles are to libelously defame people as much as possible.
	He strikes me as the sort of man who actually stays up awake at night, desperately afraid that someone might accurately represent Gamergate.
	So aside from going on about how much of a victim he is, like he's the only person who's been harassed on the internet.
	Like there aren't third-party trolls who are having a wonderful time attacking both sides of Gamergate.
	He starts by saying Gamergate began as an attempt to shame and harass a female developer.
	That's weird, Ben.
	That's really weird because it's really not.
	In fact, Zoe Quinn isn't actually in the wrong here, at least not in a journalistic capacity, because Zoe Quinn is not a journalist.
	And he says that the guise is always ethics, but the weapons are always terror.
	Oh, Ben, you melodramatic woman.
	You can't actually prove that anyone supporting Gamergate has done any of this.
	Which is why you haven't tried.
	And we know that third-party trolls have been attacking both sides of the aisle, Ben, but you are a martyr.
	So, yes, it's all about you, Ben.
	If only someone would protect you and look out for you, so you didn't have to use a woman as a shield.
	He goes on to say that the threat is clear.
	We can get to you, we can hurt you, we don't stop.
	Here's a challenge to you, then, Ben.
	Name the person doing it.
	Name any person doing it.
	Name a person who has personally threatened you.
	Name one.
	While you're busy, struggling to find anyone, anyone at all, who's actually sent you a threat, will cover your statement on the educational video series Folding Ideas, created by perhaps the best quote-unquote explainer about what Gamergate is and how it operates.
	Now, I'm personally not interested in watching any videos made by a man who disseminates sexual pictures of children, so we'll make this short and sweet.
	Gabriel Gates' base assumptions create a worldview that enables and justifies harassment and terrorism.
	Yeah, Dan Olson's an idiot.
	So, Ben says that Gamergate's lasting legacy will likely be the fact that they've made harassment of women in the video game industry impossible to ignore.
	It's more that you guys simply won't stop talking about women.
	You are such pussies that whenever someone calls you out on your bullshit, you say, Yeah, but what about women?
	It's like you guys haven't left home or something.
	Like, you haven't learned how to stand on your own two feet and be accountable for your own actions.
	But it really is the willful lies and misrepresentation about Kachera's article that gets me the most.
	Being a complete coward is, of course, a character flaw that Ben Kachera has, but it's not malicious.
	However, when he says there may have been threats of school shootings if cultural critic Anita Keason were to speak, we know that he is in fact leaving out half of the story.
	In fact, this indeed seems to be a deliberate lie by omission.
	I mean, there may have been threats, mightn't there, Ben?
	I mean, they may have been completely uncredible, and it might have been that the police said that this is in fact such a complete non-issue, we're not taking it any further.
	But don't let that get in the way of a good propaganda piece, Ben.
	You have got a point you're trying to make, which is that you hate the truth, and you are a propagandist who wants to give one side of the story at the expense of the other, and fuck everyone who gets in your way.
	After all, you are the editor of a progressive games website, and that does appear to be what progressives do.
	But I mean, he did go on to say that individuals in the industry Gamergate had hoped to silence were in fact given an enormous soapbox on which to talk about their experiences.
	Although that platform came with a personal and professional cost that is far too high.
	Oh, does it, Ben?
	Let's see what bullshit you've got for us here.
	Game developer Brianna Wu flees home after death threats.
	Ah, yes, the threats that came from an account called Death to Brianna and didn't use the Gamergate hashtag.
	Good thing she was online to get these threats though, because I mean she was there literally seven minutes after these threats had been sent.
	I mean, that's barely enough time to log out from one account and log in with another and then take screenshots.
	But poor Brianna though, I mean being forced out of her lovely home.
	Except it really doesn't look like she was.
	In fact, she kept doing interviews from her home fucking office.
	So for someone who was chased out of their home by death threats from Gamergate, this is really failing to add up, isn't it, Ben?
	There's no proof that this comes from Gamergate.
	There's no proof there are any actual death threats, and she didn't leave her fucking home.
	But what was that personal and professional cost again?
	Oh yes, that personal cost of being given $13,000 a month.
	$156,000 a year.
	And getting to go on TV to talk about her experiences and her game.
	Oh my goodness.
	The personal and professional cost indeed.
	Where can I sign up to be a professional fucking victim, Ben?
	I'm not saying that there are incentives to do this, but there are incentives to do this.
	Kachera goes on to say that Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales has become an outspoken critic of the Gamergate movement.
	After members of the group complained that, without any respected sources willing to say that Gamergate is anything other than a hate group, they couldn't get their Wikipedia page updated to be more fair.
	Wales had little patience for the tactics Gamergates used to fight back.
	Is that not the most Orwellian thing you've ever heard?
	I mean, Ben, you fucking idiot, who dictates what a respectable source is?
	You?
	Because you're not a respectable source on anything.
	So far, you have lied and misrepresented constantly.
	So when Jimmy Wales says, it's a long hit list of editors, much nastiness, exactly the kind of viciousness that Gamergate is famous for, you have to wonder, Jimmy, when did you become a complete moron?
	I'm really curious.
	I mean, that is a genuine question.
	I know you might be like, oh, I'm so offended.
	But seriously, Jimmy, right?
	When a group of consumers say, hey, look, we are having a problem with the media.
	They have become incredibly biased by their own admission.
	They've become insanely incestuous between a little clique of developers and the press that wants to cover them because they're buddies and they're trying to advise us to spend our money on their bullshit.
	When people complain about journalistic impropriety, Jimmy, you then go and ask the journalists what the people complaining about them are like.
	And when they come running to you saying, oh, they're such awful, awful people, just awful, so awful.
	We're so afraid.
	Look at this poor woman.
	Look at her crying.
	We're so afraid.
	And Jimmy also, Jesus Christ, these people are just famous for this kind of viciousness.
	Jimmy, think about what you've just said there and what you are doing.
	You are siding with people who are openly biased and you are letting them write your Wikipedia article.
	And should we take a look at that article and see just exactly what they've done to it?
	The Gamergate controversy centering on a debate about sexism in video game culture.
	That is just magnificent.
	The very first line is a complete and total fucking lie.
	If perhaps you had written the Gamergate controversy is about corrupt and unethical journalists who are hiding behind women because they're afraid of being held accountable for their ethical violations, then Matt, that would be more accurate.
	And I love this as well.
	Many supporters of the Gamergate movement say they're concerned about ethical issues in video game journalism.
	But media commentary has primarily focused on the attacks by Gamergate supporters.
	Prove one.
	Prove an attack.
	And then ask yourself, why am I listening to the media commentary on what Gamergate is?
	Because they are the people being attacked by Gamergate for being corrupt.
	Why are these people allowed to write the Wikipedia article, Jimmy?
	For fuck's sake, man!
	You are knowingly and willfully propagating lies.
	And the thing is, I love the way that this is written.
	The controversy began after indie game developer Zoe Quinn's ex-boyfriend alleged that Quinn had a romantic relationship with Nathan Grayson, a journalist for the news site Kotaku.
	She did, and he promoted her game in various other points.
	In fact, I believe he's even listed in the fucking credits for the game.
	I mean, holy shit, right here, right here, we have an example of journalistic impropriety.
	Are we going to go on and talk about this, though?
	Are we fucked?
	They're going to hide behind their smokeshield women as usual.
	Zoe, why are you putting up with this bullshit?
	Why are you letting them hide behind you when they are facing allegations of journalistic impropriety?
	You aren't Nathan Grayson, you aren't a journalist, you haven't done anything wrong from the perspective of Gamergate.
	And of course, we go on to the one-sided, oh, it's only women on the anti-Gamergate side that have been doxed and harassed.
	And I don't even need to go into it.
	You know, I personally have been doxxed and harassed.
	Some reason it's not in that Wikipedia article though.
	Can't think why.
	Anyway, getting back to Kachera's bullshit, he's like, Gamergate's latest attempt to raise money for charity.
	Oh, monstrous.
	I'll tell you what, Ben, it is a weird kind of hate group that attempts to raise money for charity.
	That's all I'm saying.
	But it turned into another debacle, apparently.
	And why was that?
	We'll go into why that is, but let's hear what you think it is.
	It somehow included porn, threats, and attacks on the charity itself.
	Ben, I think you'll find that A, there's nothing wrong with porn, you fucking Puritan.
	And B, there were no threats and attacks on the charity itself, were they?
	And if they were, were they real?
	Were they credible?
	Were they just bullshit on the internet?
	Let's find out.
	So Able Gamers are in fact a sex positive organization.
	And in response to Mercedes Carrera, a porn star who said, hey, I'll do a charity porn stream for Able Gamers and the money will go to your charity.
	They said, great.
	That's wonderful, Ben.
	So I don't know why you're going on about being porn.
	I guess you thought that that was somehow seedy or something and that would be something that just another little straw on the camel's back of getting people to hate Gamergate.
	But anyway, Able Gamers found out that this was for Gamergate.
	And then they were like, oh my goodness, this has to stop.
	We can't possibly accept money from a consumer revolt demanding ethics from their press.
	I'm guessing it's because Able Gamers are remarkably social justice.
	And the article you've linked to, Ben, is riddled with bullshit.
	Whether it's missing sources, examples of people from Gamergate denouncing threats and harassment, or the author of this article utterly misrepresenting what's happened at the time.
	Let's have a look at the wall of fucking outrage, shall we?
	There'd better be some harsh abuse on there, or I'm calling bullshit.
	Zero respect for anyone who expects everyone to walk on eggshells just in case it offends someone.
	Okay, that seems fairly reasonable.
	I'm sad to hear that you're denying support and donations for disabled gamers based on lies and misrepresentations.
	How sickening.
	That is pretty sickening.
	Holy shit, you refuse donations for your charity then bitch about ableism from a cripple, a sincere fuck you.
	You know what, I think that's probably a fair statement to make.
	If I was crippled and I watched the charity put their ideology before their mission statement, I would be pretty fucking concerned about it too.
	And how cowardly for you to put politics before the people you're trying to help.
	Gamergate was on your side.
	Shame on you for fucking over the disabled people in the name of your petty ideologies.
	More like ableist gamers.
	No barriers to fun, except if the money that would have helped comes from politically unacceptable unpeople, right?
	Are you seriously not giving money to the people who need it because the donators don't agree with you?
	Are you fucking evil?
	Perhaps you should grow some balls.
	There should be no barriers to fun they forgot unless you are a Gamergate supporting scum.
	Classy charity.
	Seriously, Ben, can you not see why people are complaining about you personally and the bullshit you're spreading?
	At what point do you say, look, maybe I've lied enough and I need to start telling the truth?
	But I mean, he does say every so often someone tries to convince me that Gamergate really is about ethics.
	And why don't I just talk to them?
	The movement's problem is hard to solve.
	They have no leader and no actual goals, and the industry and press' primary means of interaction with the group is the daily threats and harassment that must be cleared out of email inboxes and Twitter feeds.
	Well, aside from the fact you're always in the blockbot, so I don't believe you.
	Because that was a blatant lie.
	That's still not true.
	You didn't even try, Ben.
	Because holy shit, you would have had shit dug up on you, because let's face it, you're pro-corruption.
	This is what the media are saying.
	We are so anti-an ethical campaign that we must be pro-fuck corruption.
	It's not like you're even remaining neutral on the issue, Ben.
	At least the people at Kotaku were just complete servile cowards who are just like, oh, please, Master, stop beating us.
	You are willfully and aggressively pro-corruption.
	And then he goes on to attempt to slander Gamergate with Dan Olsen's attempt at spreading child pornography, which is why we didn't watch any of Dan Olsen's video beyond the first palpable misstep.
	You would think that there would be a level of propaganda that they wouldn't stoop to.
	You would think they would have some class, that they would be like, okay, so, I mean, we could say that they're paedophiles, but let's be fair, that's getting pretty foul and mucky, even for us.
	But no.
	No, no, no.
	They will literally just, I mean, Dan Olson, to write his pedophile propaganda, he must have literally downloaded the paedophile pictures onto his own hard drive to then upload to his own server.
	But at no point in his trafficking of child porn did Dan Olson think, you know what, maybe I should just report this to the authorities.
	I mean, at no point did he do this.
	I mean, that would be the first thing any normal person would have done.
	But no, instead, Ben Katera is going to try and use it as slander against Gamergate.
	But just, you are just a monster, Ben, aren't you?
	And that is without us even getting to the statement.
	Members of the group have recently written rape fancies about one of its targets and briefly sold them on Amazon.
	Hang on, Ben.
	I think that's another one of your lies.
	I know, why don't we check the evidence?
	What do we have here?
	And ask me anything on Reddit from the person who wrote the Gamergate erotica.
	They're not a Gamergate supporter and they don't even know anything about the movement.
	Let's get the too long didn't read.
	I have nothing to do with Gamergate, but heard a story involving some game developer sleeping with five guys in a burger joint.
	Anti-Gamergate thought it was a rape story and blamed you guys.
	Sorry for that and thanks for being cool.
	I hope you win over those censorship-loving Nazis.
	That is what someone who doesn't know anything about Gamergate thinks of you, Ben.
	You are a censorship-loving Nazi.
	She goes on to say that no GameGate supporters were even mentioned.
	The tale involved five guys fooling around in a burger joint with a female designer.
	It wasn't a Gamergate thing.
	I actually chose the title because I'd heard about the five guys thing and wanted to write a group sex story themed around that idea.
	Gamergate was a pun that conveniently worked for a title.
	And lastly, and you're going to hate this bit the most, Ben, the book was written by a woman for women.
	I repeat, the author is a woman.
	God, the cognitive dissonance that must be going on in your head.
	What is going on?
	A woman is criticizing women.
	Whose skirt tails do I hide behind?
	But don't worry, Ben.
	She does go on to say that this incident taught her how crazy social justice warriors like you are.
	There's a Nero and someone else's erotic story, and no one freaked out, and these folks legitimately got my book pulled from the shelves because they thought it would hurt their feelings.
	So that's one more lie to add to the pile, Ben.
	So we come finally to PC Gamer, a magazine that I used to read in my youth and has obviously been taken over by social justice warriors.
	Chris Thursdon, if only we could talk to the Gators.
	A sentiment that is just as empty as everything else given that you are using the blockbot, Chris.
	That it has taken a North Korean cyber terrorist attack on a Seth Rogen comedy for Gamergate to become the second weirdest incitation of American celebrity into public affairs in 2014 is a testament to what a weird year it has been.
	I'm sure that's the case, Chris.
	But let's focus on the issues, shall we?
	If you are reading this and if you identify with Gamergate, then well hi.
	I hope you keep reading because you're the person that I want to talk to about all of this.
	Okay, great, I'm listening, Chris.
	I hope that none of the ire I might direct at the movement applies to you personally.
	I doubt it applies to anyone in the movement personally, Chris.
	But given that all your site has done is misrepresent or outright lie about the purpose and motivations of Gamergate, I look forward to discovering exactly what your opinions are.
	That you haven't harassed anybody.
	That you've not condoned harassment saved by your association with that hashtag.
	Association with Gamergate is not condoning harassment, Chris.
	I imagine that you have concerns and questions about your hobby and of the institutions that cover your hobby and a bunch of other doubts tied up in political and social issues that can feel intimidating, even oppressive, when you're first introduced to them.
	I did wonder when anyone was going to start talking about social justice.
	I'm a straight white guy.
	Well, there's your problem, Chris.
	I can see why you hate yourself.
	And I play a lot of video games, so I get that.
	I'd prefer not to get it, actually.
	I wish the kickback against feminist criticisms of games came from a point of view that was totally alien to me.
	Who cares?
	We're not talking about feminist criticism of games, because the feminists in question are just annoying haridons.
	They are not journalists, they are not covering their friends' games.
	Feminism shouldn't even be an issue here, except all of you people are actually feminists and are defending feminism, aren't you?
	It's so fucking weird how all of this is actually fundamentally about feminism, and how you've created a little clique where it's okay to be corrupt if you are in fact a social justice warrior and you kiss the right feminist ass.
	He goes on to say that I wish it didn't resonate, even slightly, with the silly romantic ideal of the young man's crusade.
	I'd like to put everybody who has sent death threats to women in one box and put myself in another totally unrelated box.
	I-Chris, find one death threat that includes Gamergate.
	Find one!
	Just fucking find one and send me the link.
	I'm serious, find one.
	Find one.
	I'd like to put everyone in a totally unrelated box and look at everyone in my box and know that I'm in the right box for righteous people.
	Well, why don't you join Gamergate then?
	But I can't.
	Because I really like Le Misrablas and I have coveted role of the guy on the barricade with the big red flag.
	Because I cared about Firefly.
	Because I'm a straight white guy that plays a lot of video games.
	And as such, the experience and prejudices and privileges that come with that identity are going to be part of my life whether I like it or not.
	What are you fucking waffling about?
	Do you have the privilege to be attacked by the gaming media?
	Oh no, that's right, because you have already been conquered by social justice.
	You are already subservient to it.
	You are self-censoring because you have been born in the wrong body with the wrong skin colour to the wrong gender.
	You poor sap.
	It's likely that I have more in common with you, the Gamergate.
	Stop you there, Chris.
	We're just gamers.
	Gamergate is just a hashtag.
	That's all it is.
	It's a hashtag where we can collectively voice our displeasure with the unethical practices of our gaming media.
	The anti-gamers in the gaming media.
	Those people who don't like fun and who don't like gamers and who think gamers are over.
	Did you miss that, Chris?
	You can just call us what we are.
	The gamers.
	And so you've got more in common with us, the gamers, than you do with those people whose work Gamergate was created to oppose.
	Why are you with them then, Chris?
	Why are you with them?
	For fuck's sake, man.
	Is it because you're afraid that your career will be over if you do not prostrate yourself before the corrupt megaphones?
	He says that there is, I think, a valuable discussion to have that is grounded in the ways that we are similar.
	In how we have arrived at different perspectives via the same road.
	You're reading PC Gamer.
	I grew up reading PC Gamer.
	That's not a broad Venn diagram.
	And it doesn't provide a lot of conflict, or at least it shouldn't.
	I agree.
	If you would show some fucking spine, then it wouldn't.
	Yet you, the gamer, and me, the journalist, can't have that conversation anymore.
	We're on two sides of a war invented by people whose understanding of historical narrative comes from video games, movies, and anime.
	What does that mean, Chris?
	We're on the side of a war because you guys have all closed ranks around the corrupt and biased people who are currently influencing gaming journalism more than anyone else.
	Why have you done it?
	Oh, I know why.
	Because you believe that Anita Sarkisian has challenging but necessary things to say about the industry we can't talk.
	Well, we can talk if you want, but when we show that Anita Sarkeesian has been largely misrepresenting, cherry-picking, or outright lying about her points, you won't want to hear it.
	Not that this is Gamergate related.
	Anita, after all, isn't a journalist and she doesn't produce anything of note and nobody really cares about her, but you guys won't stop talking about her.
	In fact, just like now, you've brought her up when no one needs to bring her up.
	She's nothing to do with the conversation.
	But we're having it anyway, aren't we?
	That's the thing.
	Hiding behind those skirt tails.
	Because I believe it is important to defend the rights of the victim before the aggressor.
	We can't talk.
	What are you talking about?
	The victims in this case are the gamers, the victims of academic feminists backed by the fucking media.
	Why are you allowing them to do this?
	But all becomes clear.
	I'm a social justice warrior.
	You're a gamer.
	Let's have a big pointless fight.
	Your side started it, Chris.
	If you could have just held your side to some ethical standards, this would not be a problem.
	None of this would have been a problem.
	But for some reason, you are pathologically incapable of being ethical.
	He goes on to say that there's no need to go on about anything else.
	I don't agree with some of the things you believe.
	It's no more complicated than that.
	That's fine, Chris.
	You don't believe that journalists should be ethical.
	You don't believe that journalists have an ethical responsibility to their fucking audience.
	That they are advising on how to spend their money.
	You don't believe that.
	That's fine.
	But everyone else does.
	That is what Gamergate even exists for.
	He goes on to say that grand causes are attractive, but in this context, all they amount to is a feeling.
	A force that drives you further and further away from whatever kernel of personal truth that brought you into this thing in the first place.
	Nonsense.
	And I want to believe that truth exists.
	It's impossible to have an argument in good faith when you deny the other person has the rights to the feeling that spurs their participation.
	Chris, fuck your feelings.
	Fuck your feelings about what causes either side to participate.
	There are blatant and categorical ethical violations from the gaming media that you are currently defending on the basis of fucking feelings.
	I don't care about your feelings like you don't care about my feelings.
	So let's stop talking about each other's feelings and let's talk about actual, real world violations of ethical principles.
	I have shown plenty in this video, Chris.
	So when you say, let's take this whole thing apart and start over, if you have questions about gaming journalism's relationship to the industry, email me.
	Done.
	Let's talk.
	You are literally the only person who has offered an avenue for the press who are completely complicit in all of these ethical scandals to talk to the people who are trying to hold them to account.
	You are the bravest of them.
	Well done.
	I'm genuinely impressed.
	When you want to talk, I'll be waiting, Chris.

▲