The following is an analysis to an anti Gamergate cartoon that was propagated by a Facebook group that I had given my support until today. The name of the group will not be given because I have no intention of giving them so much as a single word of promotion.
Where do I begin? Perhaps I should start by giving some context to the cartoon. This cartoon was shared by a certain Facebook group that had gotten to the bad habit of spreading anti Gamergate propaganda, straying from their original purpose (critique of Capitalism). The cartoon is a not entirely unsubtle condemnation of how Gamergate seemingly distances itself from the harassment propagated by internet trolls towards women in gaming.
Now, I'd like to make something clear here: there are, sadly, some undesirables that ARE using Gamergate as a shield for their toxicity. I can't, at the moment, back that up with facts because, well, I just don't have any proof of that, besides the notion of it being common knowledge that the Internet can be a haven for the worst of humanity. This is also true of ALL movements on the Internet: the Tea Party, Occupy, feminism, bronies, every fandom in existence, etc. Every movement, every collection of people will have, inevitably, a collection of assholes that give the bigger collective a bad name.
Had the cartoon omitted the last panel, it would have been a scathing, yet sobering reminder that not everyone using the hash tag is acting as ethically as they should be. And in all honesty, this is a message that NEEDS to be spread towards all Gamergaters: act ethically, hold yourself up to a higher standard than our opposition. Don't tolerate doxxing, don't put up with harassment, character assassination, lies. Spread only truth, use facts, provide evidence for all your arguments. THIS is a message that bears repeating!
But that last panel, that final panel kills it for me. With that last panel, the cartoon goes on to imply that Gamergate, while superficially condemning harassment of women in gaming not only tolerates it, but benefits from it as well. And the question that needs to be asked is thus: do we?
I'd love to say "No!" But a number of uncomfortable questions arise in me: Are we doing enough to police ourselves? Are we doing enough to ensure our movement is one of passion moderated with reasonable thinking and rational rhetoric?
But then, I take a second look at the cartoon. I admit the reason I am led to believe this cartoon is anti Gamergate is because the Facebook group that used it posted it after a string of anti Gamergate publications. So, maybe I can be forgiven for assuming it to be anti Gamergate. But then I showed it to a friend, and she gave me a different interpretation: she saw it as a metaphor for how aggressive Mainstream gaming can be when it comes to selling you their games. In her own words, "It's a lot like how Gamestop offers you a copy of Call of Duty even if you've just bought the latest Resident Evil and Silent Hill games." What she saw was an allegory to the aggressive gaming industry. That got me to thinking: maybe this cartoon isn't, by necessity, anti Gamergate, but rather, can be applied as such.
And then it hit me: it can also be Pro Gamergate! How? Simple, all I need to ask is a simple question: is the anti Gamergate side guilty of harassment as well? And, well...
Edit February 11, 2016: This comic was written and drawn by Kris Straub.
Where do I begin? Perhaps I should start by giving some context to the cartoon. This cartoon was shared by a certain Facebook group that had gotten to the bad habit of spreading anti Gamergate propaganda, straying from their original purpose (critique of Capitalism). The cartoon is a not entirely unsubtle condemnation of how Gamergate seemingly distances itself from the harassment propagated by internet trolls towards women in gaming.
Now, I'd like to make something clear here: there are, sadly, some undesirables that ARE using Gamergate as a shield for their toxicity. I can't, at the moment, back that up with facts because, well, I just don't have any proof of that, besides the notion of it being common knowledge that the Internet can be a haven for the worst of humanity. This is also true of ALL movements on the Internet: the Tea Party, Occupy, feminism, bronies, every fandom in existence, etc. Every movement, every collection of people will have, inevitably, a collection of assholes that give the bigger collective a bad name.
Had the cartoon omitted the last panel, it would have been a scathing, yet sobering reminder that not everyone using the hash tag is acting as ethically as they should be. And in all honesty, this is a message that NEEDS to be spread towards all Gamergaters: act ethically, hold yourself up to a higher standard than our opposition. Don't tolerate doxxing, don't put up with harassment, character assassination, lies. Spread only truth, use facts, provide evidence for all your arguments. THIS is a message that bears repeating!
But that last panel, that final panel kills it for me. With that last panel, the cartoon goes on to imply that Gamergate, while superficially condemning harassment of women in gaming not only tolerates it, but benefits from it as well. And the question that needs to be asked is thus: do we?
I'd love to say "No!" But a number of uncomfortable questions arise in me: Are we doing enough to police ourselves? Are we doing enough to ensure our movement is one of passion moderated with reasonable thinking and rational rhetoric?
But then, I take a second look at the cartoon. I admit the reason I am led to believe this cartoon is anti Gamergate is because the Facebook group that used it posted it after a string of anti Gamergate publications. So, maybe I can be forgiven for assuming it to be anti Gamergate. But then I showed it to a friend, and she gave me a different interpretation: she saw it as a metaphor for how aggressive Mainstream gaming can be when it comes to selling you their games. In her own words, "It's a lot like how Gamestop offers you a copy of Call of Duty even if you've just bought the latest Resident Evil and Silent Hill games." What she saw was an allegory to the aggressive gaming industry. That got me to thinking: maybe this cartoon isn't, by necessity, anti Gamergate, but rather, can be applied as such.
And then it hit me: it can also be Pro Gamergate! How? Simple, all I need to ask is a simple question: is the anti Gamergate side guilty of harassment as well? And, well...
I have a whole folder of those, and it keeps growing day by day. What I pasted here is but a tenth of what I've got, I am saddened to say. The same question I've asked about Gamergate, I ask about the anti Gamergate movement: who's policing them?
It seems no one is, and really, why would anyone police them, hold them accountable for their actions? Right now, even the mainstream media paints Gamergate as little more than a backlash against women in gaming. The voices of millions of gamers world wide are being silenced because the media opted to give a microphone to the crazies. And why?
Because propaganda is no good if there is so much as a shred of evidence that it's wrong. That's why they need to silence us: if we prove we really are angry at the lack of integrity and ethics in gaming, then the whole narrative that sites like Kotaku, Joystiq, Gamasutra, and so forth, crumbles. If people find out the truth, they'll start asking uncomfortable questions, such as: "how many of your reviews were honest and how many were just repaid favors? How many cocks did you suck to get that 5/5 for your game? How much were you paid to write that defense for Call of Duty? What did you do with all that money you were given for that Youtube series of videos, and why is it taking you so long to finish them? How much did that game developer pay you to give their game that glowing review? Why are you writing about misoginy in gaming when last week you made a five minute video celebrating boobies in gaming?"
And when someone were to point out the harassment brought out by anti Gamergaters, that group will say "they don't represent us, we condemn harassment of all kinds." And like the man in the cartoon, they will continue to tolerate those harassers. Like the man in the cartoon, these people will just blurt out a token condemnation, a disassociation motivated by convenience, and then proceed to do naught else but play professional victim in front of cameras, writing down their "woe is me" letters and editorials in the hopes that the uninformed will buy their pity party and join them in silencing those that could otherwise ruin their careers by simply demanding the truth. And in that way, what on the surface appears to be a polite request is, in fact, an armed robbery.
To borrow a catch phrase from a blog I also once supported: A Good Cartoon.
No comments:
Post a Comment