Thin skins.

/Thin skins.

[T]he elimination of criticism is in fact is what #Gamergate has been about all along — or at least the elimination of criticism aimed in their direction. Indeed, that’s what most #Gamergaters mean when they talk about fighting “corruption in game journalism” — shutting down those writers and publications that have dared to critique the prejudices of a backward portion of the gaming universe that is hostile to any challenges to the status quo ante — particularly from women with opinions different from theirs. That’s what drove the outrage over the “death of gamer” articles last Fall. And that’s what has driven “critics” of Anita Sarkeesian from the start.

–David Futrelle gets to the bottom of things.

This is in response to comments by Vox Day, who said in an interview that, what Gamergate is fundamentally about is the right of people to design, develop and play games that they want to design, develop and play without being criticized for it.

No, Day isn’t any sort of spokesperson for Gators as a whole, so this is certainly just his opinion on ethics in games journalism.

But Futrelle’s point is that Day is acting a little bit like the boy who points out the emperor’s naked, by giving voice to something everyone can see but doesn’t want to admit. I never thought I’d agree with Vox Day, of all people, but… yes. Yes, I think he’s absolutely correct in this instance and “you criticized a thing I like and it gave me the sads! HDU!” is exactly what GamerGate is all about.

Exactly that, with death threats. Because ethics.

2016-05-14T10:30:34+00:0027th April, 2015|Tags: culture, gaming|