Jacob Lynagh

GamerGate: We will no longer be guided by fear

Anita Sarkeesian will be discussing GamerGate at “All About Women” this weekend and before you see her, Jacob Lynagh would like to present his perspective on the issue.


It is clear to most that in the midst of fervent argument, facts become twisted, and it is hard to get a handle on what is actually going on.

This was the problem with GamerGate and why I refused to follow the controversy at the time.

Now that the smoke has finally cleared, it’s time to revisit the issue, see exactly what happened and how it evolved.

In the beginning, GamerGate became the war-cry of iconoclasts, legitimately concerned with the lack of regulation and ethics, and the degree of corruption in gaming journalism. They spoke of things like paid positive reviews, but someone had a problem with that.

Gaming media showed their guilt in the immediate and defensive way they covered the issue. To take the spotlight off ethics and corruption, we were all told GamerGate was about misogynists and few of us questioned that. The debate was successfully re-framed, and in response, credulous feminists organised an inexorable force to instigate a war against the movement. It was then that people realised just how much money they could make from it.

Anti-Gamergate advocate, independent game developer and well-known sensible thinker Brianna Wu made a name for herself by provoking GamerGate supporters online, and consequently being the recipient of some awful anonymous messages. To help her deal with being “a direct and sustained target of internet harassment”, she had secured an annual salary of $158,000, paid monthly by her supporters through the Patreon crowd-funding service at the time of writing – which has now dropped to a modest $40,000.

While advertising her Patreon, she secretly contacted Patreon staff in an attempt to get the crowd-funding accounts of GamerGate advocates pulled. She receives this funding not on the back of her development ability, but because she saw the profit that would come from exploiting idealogues.

She was recently featured on ABC’s Nightline, in which she describes her struggle as “terrorism against women”.

I didn’t know that Wu was a victim of terrorism…she’s like gaming’s answer to Malala Yousafzai, only about $100k better off…and never in any real danger.

Anita Sarkeesian, GamerGate critic, feminist and professional victim, was scheduled to give a talk at Utah State University in October, but the school received threats of violence and she pulled out. (Sarkeesian is speaking this weekend as part of the “All About Women” festival @ the Sydney Opera House.) You may have read about this as it was given more coverage in mainstream press at time than many other huge issues.

Feelings of vindication swept through the anti-GamerGate community. “See, we were right!” they shouted from the rooftops like a bigoted version of Network, “All men are evil and GamerGate is misogynist”.

Many people, myself included, took this as it came, but upon closer inspection not only do you find that the threat was not credible, there was no evidence to suggest it had anything to do with gamers, let alone GamerGate.

There was no talk at the time of the International Conference on Men’s Issues that, just a few months earlier, had to change venue due to the multitude of threats against speakers and venue staff by feminists. This conference, which thankfully went ahead without anyone being murdered, addressed some very pressing issues for men, such as homelessness, suicide rates and unfair sentencing.

It’s practically Orwellian.

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

Before the threat against Utah State University, the anti-GamerGate community consisted of entitled feminists, jocks and upper-class whities, belittling and teasing nerds (see: neckbeard, pissbaby, shitlord, basement-dweller) – they were not really taking it seriously.

Sarkeesian, who is well known for her sense of humour, stopped joking as soon as the threat went public and things got serious. The building bile in the anti-GamerGate assault reached critical mass, and things started to get out of hand. GamerGate was torn apart, labeled a hate group and conveniently lambasted in all of the media it was questioning. It became a dirty word as people felt uncomfortable being a part of the consumer revolt and support dwindled.

Motivated by GamerGate, Sam Biddle, at the time the editor of Gawker’s Valleywag, Tweeted…


In response, GamerGate supporters raised over $16,000 for an anti-bullying charity.

When prominent GamerGate supporters had their personal information spread on the internet, many received threats. One man, @Kingofpol, had a knife sent to him in the mail, with a note attached telling him to kill himself.

In response, GamerGate raised over $6000 for a suicide prevention charity.

When a handful of feminists in media misrepresented GamerGate as sexist, GamerGate supporters helped raise over $70,000 for The Fine Young Capitalists, a feminist group geared toward bringing women into the gaming industry.

This altruistic attempt to help women in the industry they loved, was not covered by the feminist writers who were misrepresenting them.

I guess they were too busy trying to #BanBossy.

Most of the anonymous GamerGate Twitter identities had their personal information spread online. @shoe0nhead had private photos of her body exposed by people of the same ideology who criticise celebrity nude photo leaks. Men and women in the GamerGate community were repeatedly threatened. There were (mainly empty) threats from both sides, but those from the anti-GamerGate camp were much more pressing, as they took things out of the virtual and into the physical realm.

Milo Yiannopoulos, GamerGate supporter and writer for Breitbart.com, was sent a dirty syringe in the post.

First they came for the corrupt gaming media, and I said nothing, because I didn’t want to accidentally prick myself on the influx of tainted syringes the would be sent to my door.

You see, nothing positive came from the anti-GamerGate bullies…it was simply a whirlpool of vile negativity.

However, from GamerGate came dozens of cases of charity work, and fund-raising of tens of thousands of dollars. They still fight to have their genuine concerns of corruption in journalism recognized.

The anti-GamerGate guys are also still fighting; a key issue they are backing is the attempt to up the number of women in gaming, which is, unfortunately, an industry that they are largely uninterested in.

It just goes to show that you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it stop talking about quotas.

Isn’t it telling that all of Gawker’s top writers mobilised so swiftly, and so defensively, against an anti-corruption movement? Within days, all gaming media had jumped to adamantly diminish the ethical concerns.

In the words of GamerGate advocate @shoe0nhead: “What sounds more believable: 10,000+ men and women being misogynist terrorists, or the media lying about the media being corrupt?”

These so-called human rights advocates, not just in the media but the feminists who were swept up in the battle, were acrimonious and malevolent in their assault. They swung from anti-bullying one day, to pro-bullying the next. They claimed to detest bigotry, yet championed it to an international audience.

I lean to the left on most issues, but this kind of irresponsible behaviour coming from my side of politics makes me uncomfortable and reminds me of the introduction to an old song by folksinger Phil Ochs:

“There are varying shades of political opinion, one of the shadiest of these is the liberals. An outspoken group on many subjects, ten degrees to the left of centre in good times, ten degrees to the right of centre if it affects them personally. Here, then, is a lesson in safe logic.”

The safe logic of the anti-GamerGate movement, left wing media, feminists and almost all bigots allows them to delve so deeply into hypocrisy to protect their own self-centric ideologies.

We writers do not come from a lineage of cowards. We should never refuse to write about, or to defend temporarily, unfashionable movements. It is time to recognise the flaws in aggressive and antiquated ideologies that espouse right wing despotism.

We will no longer be guided by fear, hatred and bigotry into subjugation and silence.

Jacob Lynagh

Jacob Lynagh is an Adelaide-based freelance journalist who closely follows the political and social issues of the Pacific region and Middle East, as well as the rise and fall of nationalist and anti-fascist movements. He is a Grateful Dead fan, writes about classic Rock whenever possible and wishes the sixties never ended.

Related posts


  1. Lucadaw said:

    Good job theres no proof of any member of gamergate ever sending a deaththreat then…..and plenty of proof that a lot of antigamergates made up the threats they received

  2. That One Whose Had Enough said:

    Except I don’t see any proof of these things happening.

    Where people were threatened on the Gamergate side(which shouldn’t have happened), so were those who spoke up against it. Its interesting how Jacob forgot to mention when Felicia Day spoke out against it in her blog that her private information was not only revealed but she was DDoS’d for that opinion. Feminist power or just an innocent person who just didn’t like their views?

    There are reports of those -other- then the main ones mentioned who were harassed and sent death threats for speaking out against the movement. Are they part of Gamergate or are they just conveniently doing it for their own purposes?

    What this article conveys, it overlooks other facts. Here’s another fact: This whole thing is stupid.

    Hashtag movements are stupid, too. If anyone from Gamergate really, really wanted to push for these movements for real — they’d clean house. Get rid of the people making the death threats and become an actual movement. Maybe even a name change. If journalistic integrity is going to happen, something more needs to be done.

    Except they don’t want to… so, honestly, Gamergate is nothing more then just a hashtag movement screaming things and doing nothing. Its a hashtag that needs to die in order for any good to really happen. I want to see people do something already! Not this fear-mongering and Styrofoam wearing “ITS A CONSPIRACY” hat!

    And to those who attack the Pro-Gamergaters? They are assholes and should be reported, all the same. It doesn’t matter who you are. That shit doesn’t fly. You should be allowed to speak your opinion without a label or being shot down and threatened for it. It doesn’t matter either side.

    There’s nothing wrong with being a feminist. There’s nothing wrong with standing in things you believe in, whether they are right or wrong. In standing up to this to stop the hating, you deliberately write feminists as a horrible thing. A monster.

    So if there’s also anything else I learnt on this article, its this:

    Its misinformation, hypocritical, no facts except statements and doesn’t even link or show these good things that pro-Gamergates have done. This isn’t an article, its a blog.

    And I encourage you to not read this hate-encouraging article and go look it up yourselves. Find the people who DID do good and pat them on the back. Any haters? Be it Pro-Gamergate or Anti-Gamergate, shut them down. Say it isn’t cool. Stop the hatin’.

    Because this guy isn’t helping you. But you guys can help yourselves by stopping the hate train and let it be known that death threats, no matter what side your on, is not okay.

    Can we go back to the days when we debated these things and worked out compromises? Please?

    I’ll never agree with Gamergate… but I will debate on all the issues with you without a single threat uttered and bring you respect so long as you respect me in turn.

  3. A Real Libertarian said:

    Two days before “Gamers Are Dead” and one of Milo’s friends was teasing him over hiding his hobby.

  4. Jen10 said:

    Very mature. After I responded to one of your comments insulting me, you respond by going through my profile and leaving this on the majority of the posts I have made. And I am troll in this equation?

    Like I care what you or anyone else thinks of me

  5. yetanotherpseudonym said:

    This person is a man and an MRA troll,. Just be aware.

  6. hurin said:

    It is common knowledge that Milo didn’t like Gamers prior to getting involved with GamerGate. He says he has changed, and that’s enough for me.

  7. A Real Libertarian said:

    I don’t know if Milo from Breitbart is being honest about becoming a Gamer, and I don’t really care either.

    Well there was this from August 26:


  8. Grey said:

    It’s odd to me to and only makes sense in the realm of American politics, which is why I prefer the crazy compass I described where I label them as leaning more “authoritarian” as a way of pointing out their similarities to many conservatives over here as well as what exactly makes them different.

  9. Dm Gray said:

    I don’t disagree, I just find it refreshing when folks can *admit* it’s very much an American-centric political compass 😛

    For instance: I’m a socialist.
    In America, that’s basically Satan.
    Socialists have long accepted free market solutions to many problems. The public and private sectors working in partnership. A balancing act, as neither the state nor the free market are tools that will work on EVERY problem.
    The idea that ivory tower liberals in the US are “extreme leftists” is just odd to me, seems they sacrificed their values on the later of identity politics, which has no affilation.
    I don’t mark a significant difference between SJW and neonazi’s
    Both are more concerned with the colour of somebody’s skin than the content of their character.

  10. Grey said:

    Ehhh, not really no.

    Libertarian as a political position that upholds liberty as its absolute priority. The word is used by political parties and groups who, at least at some point, claimed to hold that position.

    Being libertarian is not in any way ‘conservative” in itself. That is just idiotic. Conservatives in America might call themselves libertarian because they’re worried about specific “liberties”, and it would be true around certain topic (gun control for example), but they’re not libertarian unless they were like that on all topics (example, they wouldn’t give a crap for gay marriage because it’s ‘their right’ no matter what the church might say about it), and often you will find some conservative libertarians who are more definitively libertarian.

    Just for the sake of what I’m about to say, forget all you know about the terms I’m using and pretend the definitions I give are the more ‘real’ ones. Even if I’m wrong, you’d still understand what I’m describing and it paints a much clearer political map of America.

    Really when you get down to these kinds of terms they only describe a direction, not a fixed point. They describe absolutes, and it’s never a good idea to pursue any one absolute on its own. Too far right and everyone is to your left, and vice versa. Libertarian is a direction, the absolute it refers to is liberty and personal freedom. The opposite of it would of course be authoritarianism. Conservative, with all political sides and history thrown aside, refers to holding on and conserving something, liberalism opposes it by mostly being about change and progress. I’m using these all loosely, and in their more rooted meanings, if you disagree with how I’m defining them all it’s mostly just the fault of people claiming to be on the side of these things and that doing so is always an oversimplification.

    If I say I’m a liberal libertarian, I mean that I want change and progress, but for more liberty rather than less. Someone who is liberal and authoritarian would not care about personal liberty but also seeks progress, though the ideals they progress towards would be different. Example: both would want gay marriage to be allowed and accepted everywhere, but the former is not a fan of free speech and would want rules against homophobic slurs while the later would object, despite both of them approving of gay marriage completely. Both want progress and change, but they to what end they don’t agree.

    A conservative authoritarian is a more familiar caricature, often tied to a more religious background and set of morals. They would sensor free speech as much as they would restrict marriage. They want to conserve the previous ideas of marriage, and its ties to religion. A (real) conservative libertarian will say they can marry whoever the hell they want, as long as they don’t take away any of his current rights. He’s more worried about the rights being taken away (usually by the liberal authoritarian) such as his guns, his land, his freedom of practicing his religion, or his freedom of speech. They may often stand together agianst liberalism, but you wouldn’t want to confuse them, because the republican party in America seems to be shifting, slowly, with a rift between these two ‘directions’ among the conservatives widening. It has been for the last 10 years at least.

    Very recently we’re seeing the signs of the same rift forming among the liberals in America. The more Authoritarian are going ‘too far’ according to the more libertarian or even moderates of the left, and they are opposing each other on principals they both assumed the other was in agreement on back when they were protesting against the conservatives.

    The easiest way to view the political spectrum in American right now, in the topics people are the most interested in, is as a map, x and y axis. Left and right would be liberal and conservative (I know that’s wrong as left and liberal are very different, but just play along for the visual analogy) and up and down would be authoritarian and libertarian.

    So while, on the left, we’d look over and see a lot of conservatives calling themselves libertarian. We saw that from this side of the fence. On their side it was a lot of people stating to others on their side of the fence “We don’t agree on this actually. We’re not them, but we’re not with you either”. We foolishly tie libertarian as a definition of only a part of conservativism, confusing it with the parties using it as a banner for years as well. Well libertarian liberals are a thing, and it might be more apt to describe them as such, rather than only allowing that word to refer to conservativism, because the only people who would think like that are the ones who think authoritarian and liberal should go hand in hand.

  11. Dm Gray said:

    Child molesting is really bad. I know several victims, and I don’t downplay how bad their experiences were.

    That doesn’t mean that there isn’t scaremongering about paedophilia.

    Get it?
    If not, you might wanna remove the stick from your arse and ARGUE WITH THE COMMENTS PEOPLE MAKE, not the ridiculous strawman you build in your head.

    What the US did post WW2 was scare mongering.
    The word fucking *liberal* is dirty in the US. That’s how retarded the propaganda is.
    Considering other actions of the US government, I wouldn’t suggest they are much better than many soviet regimes.
    McCarthy’s witch hunts for “reds” and the divisive bullshit of US politics should not be excused because “USSR was really bad guis!”

    Well, Hitler was bad, so I guess anybody calling people Nazi’s is TOTALLY justified, right?
    Cuz that’s your retarded logic

  12. Alex Stevens said:

    Thank you very much for posting this. I’m so tired of corrupt media trying to save its ass by yelling “GAMERS HATE WOMEN” this has to be one of the best pieces out there today.

  13. RRrider said:

    I am pretty conservative, not on the social or religious wing. I mean actual conservative, aka Libertarian. I appreciate your article, sadly this is not the fist time the left has done this, demonized and marginalized a movement they disagree with, and I have been called my fair share of racist, bigot, islamaphobe, misogynist… you name it. If the far far left isn’t attacking me, It feels like a trap lol. I appreciate your voice as a liberal calling the leftist progressive bigots out on their shit… I don’t see that much and it is refreshing.

  14. Mistah J. said:

    Wow, thanks for doing this, really. Considering how much you know aboot the situation, I suppose I don’t have to tell you to stay safe, but still stay safe.

  15. Martijn Müller said:

    I don’t really consider it a division, as much as simply knowing where people generally stand. For instance, if you know people on the left ‘generally’ would like government to get things done, and people on the right ‘generally’ would like government to keep out of things, you know from which angle to approach each other in order to find a solution. It only becomes a problem when left or right becomes synonyms for ‘evil’, ‘hippies’, ‘money grubbing slave drivers’ or ‘leeches too lazy to work’.

  16. TheCybercoco said:

    For a moment I thought I read that it was a “horseshit theory”. My mistake. Still it has nothing to do with what I’m arguing.

    Creating a “left” and a “right” is meant to cause division. When people
    are pitted against each other like that, they begin to see the other
    side more as a label to dismiss and overlook ideas. People are easier to
    control and manipulate when they are divided and the animosity between
    them muddles their vision to ideas. It is what is called Hegelian
    Dialectic. Society as a whole would progress more if it dropped this

  17. TheCybercoco said:

    Your strawman argument is what’s horseshit.

    Creating a “left” and a “right” is meant to cause division. When people are pitted against each other like that, they begin to see the other side more as a label to dismiss and overlook ideas. People are easier to control and manipulate when they are divided and the animosity between them muddles their vision to ideas. It is what is called Hegelian Dialectic. Society as a whole would progress more if it dropped this mentality.

  18. Martijn Müller said:

    That’s pretty much the horseshoe theory. The extremes are similar, but in a totally different way. You can not say extremist left is the same as extremist right, eventhough they share very similar tactics.

  19. Megamatics said:

    This is a brave piece to put out there, so many Journalists who try to look at the issue objectively get attacked by AntiGG. I hope you will remain safe from the chaos.

  20. Eshto said:

    It should be pointed out that not only did Gawker’s Sam Biddle openly advocate “bullying” during Bullying Awareness Month, but he did it specifically on Spirit Day, which is a day set aside to highlight the bullying of LGBT youth.

    These are the people who will scream about how they support “minorities”. It’s completely absurd. GamerGate’s detractors just can’t get more backwards and hypocritical.

  21. Jen10 said:

    I feel like we’re at that point where people are slowly but surely realising what GamerGaters have known for a while now…that Anti-GamerGaters are actually full of shit.

  22. Lucian Vâlsan said:

    >Radicalized left driving new voters out into the arms of conservative right.

    Great! It’s time for the Left to be thrown into the dustbin of history anyway.
    Especially Ms. Clinton who thinks “women are the primary victims of war”. Such individuals should be held as far away from power as possible. There’s been enough misandrists in power already.

  23. Lucian Vâlsan said:

    >decades of anti soviet scare mongering

    Scare mongering?
    Mate, I lived in the USSR. What you call ”scare mongering” was actually 10 times less worse than what was the reality in the USSR.

    Go check your history, you mindless leftist.

  24. bazzar said:

    It predates the official hashtag naming, but 4chan’s contribution to it was after the flashpoint which ignited this consumer revolt.

  25. ArcKazuki said:

    Thank you, truly! You are not hindered by the fear mongerers of anti-gamergate, feminists and Social Justice Warriors. You reported the facts, and left it at that. I, and all of those who demand objective reporting, respect you and thank you for it.

    Quite disappointed that Anita will be here in my home city. But I suppose she has every right to present her view. Even if its a load of crap and she’s just doing it for more donations. I just hope the people going aren’t foolish enough to fall for it.

  26. Alex said:

    Well then they are all DEAD! DEAD I TELL YOU!

  27. Devin Fabricius said:

    Thank you, I have whitelisted thebigsmoke on my adblock now and I think I’ll have a look around. Also, yea its pretty much correct that GamerGate has caused me to assume a news organization hates me rather than assume they’ve given the hashtag even a look. Good luck in the future, and I hope the anti-gamers don’t come for you. Vicious bunch they are.

  28. hurin said:

    They simply can’t understand, that the reason people were hating on Zoe Quinn, had nothing to do with her being a woman, and everything to do with her being a horrible human being.

    How the f… can you organize harassment of the users of WizardChan to create buzz for your ‘game’. Those people are suicidal for crying out loud.

  29. CyberEagle said:

    But if that is spite, than what exactly is giving the enemy of your “enemy” money?

  30. hurin said:

    I don’t know if Milo from Breitbart is being honest about becoming a Gamer, and I don’t really care either.

    But he has been really brilliant for supporting GamerGate. You got thousands of Gamers deeply disillusioned with mainstream media (they distrusted Games media long before GamerGate), and many of they are now reading BreitBart thanks to him.

    Gamers becoming conservative is a self-fulfilling prophesy.

  31. CyberEagle said:

    Thank you.
    But if I’m not strongly mistaken, the TFYC charity actually precedes #GamerGate itself and owes its success strongly to those eeeeevil 4chan-Users from its Video Game board.
    Of course, most of the ones donating there seem to have become GG-posters later, but the timeline is still a bit wrong there.

  32. masterninja said:

    As someone who supported gamergate from the start I applaud you!
    People willing to look beyond the media’s attempt at diversion is exactly what is needed!

  33. Troushers said:

    Look at the recent monstering of Vivek Wadhwa by many of the same elements opposing GamerGate – they have a few tactics, and use them over and over again.

  34. Bill Paxton said:

    Wow, he even mentioned the Men’s Rights conference.

  35. John Cobalt said:

    Not rape, sexual harassment which was dismissed with prejudice. Brad Wardell is a model citizen, he should be an inspiration to other business leaders on the diversity within his company. I applaud Mr. Wardell for all his work within the games industry as well as his stance on equality.

    And… He is rightwing, who would have fucking known? Radicalized left driving new voters out into the arms of conservative right. This may not effect 2016 elections or maybe it will but 2020 will go terrible wrong if the radicalized leftwing opponents don’t find a way to settle GamerGate.

    Feminism is considered one of the big movers if not the biggest on the internet, GamerGate is running on the 7th month now: take a look on the numbers -> http://topsy.com/analytics?q1=%23GamerGate&q2=%23Feminism&via=Topsy for the last 30 days:

    #GamerGate: 643.000 tweets.
    #Feminism: 61.000 tweets

    “Holy fucking shit how the fuck do I end this?” is what Mrs. Clinton should be thinking right now. Fuck the email scandals, fuck everything else, she needs to end this.

  36. TheCybercoco said:

    The article had my shared opinion up until the end. Here’s an idea: let everyone drop the “left/right” paradigm entirely. The paradigm is mostly total BS anyway.

  37. AmazingL4rry said:

    Thank you, if you want to know more look into UBM Tech. It’s an international marketing and event organizing corporation, the truly dirty little hemorrhoid at the core of gaming journalism’s corruption seems to stem from this company’s efforts at creating a sort of cabal that acts as a gateway into the gaming industry. Gawker was a hitchhiker and Vox was a patsy.

  38. Gamergater #7230 said:

    Thank you. We need more people in your position to talk about what is REALLY going on regarding this subject.

  39. WTF Magazine said:

    nice article
    This is a nice fuckin article dude

  40. Vinzenz Stemberg said:

    The safe logic of the anti-GamerGate movement, left wing media, feminists and almost all bigots allows them to delve so deeply into hypocrisy to protect their own self-centric ideologies.

    I think you missed a word in the middle here.

  41. Darragh Nugent said:

    Absolutely fantastic article. Gamergate has been unfairly demonised in the media. The mainstream media has no idea what they are talking about and take their ques from the anti-GamerGaters so we can guess what way their coverage will be slanted resulting in (sometimes laughable) abominations such as the svu episode. This was obviously slanted too but atleast it was fair, it had it’s facts right, it actually acknowledges the arguments of GamerGate and the journalistic misconduct. The way the media has spun this and how the left had embraced this demonisation of GG has made me feel uncomfortable in labeling myself as a liberal. It kind of just seems like an echo-chamber. I’m rambling, the point is that this article was well-written, well-researched and refreshing. The aGGros could learn something from you. There are valid arguments that can be made against GG but since those do not register on sn emotional level and aren’t really convincing, it is more convienient to ignore facts and call everyone a misogynist.

  42. Vinzenz Stemberg said:

    Actually RE the charity bit, one of the most ridiculous ‘defenses’ I’ve seen the antis pull was trying to claim their bribery of panhandling wikipedia editor/disgraced admin Ryulong counts as ‘charity.’



    Meanwhile they say GG Charity donations don’t count, because they’re ‘being done out of spite’

  43. Ben (Broken) said:

    My gratitude for the honesty. It is appreciated,sir!

  44. Fenrir007 said:

    I had some pretty heated arguments with pro-GG people, but never once did we “stop talking” to each other afterwards, nor have I ever blocked them or was blocked by them in return.

  45. A-bob-omb said:

    Inb4 you are accused of being right-wing, simply because you don’t follow the hivemind.

  46. Tudor Simu said:

    I wouldn’t really call them stupid. They’re not. Stupidity is a matter of intelligence. That’s well within their capacity. If anything they lack wisdom to discern things. Being intelligent means learning what you’re taught. Being wise is actually interpreting things and asking questions towards the grand picture.

  47. bans said:

    great stuff. prolly biased as fuck, but fuck it im a rampant Gator.

  48. JuicyHopFrog said:

    It’s nice, scratch that, amazing to see a journalist actually dig into the story and get the facts, sort through the fog. The last months have been bizarre to say the least. One sided hit pieces with no fact checking or investigation. Too many journalists have been bullied into towing the narrative, false at that. So yeah, thanks.

  49. Fenrir007 said:

    Support didn’t dwindle – the fact is we didn’t need high hashtag use to prove our numbers, strengh and resolve anymore after we endured for 7 months and raised over $ 100k for charity (which, in itself, also ended up proving GamerGate HAS buying power in the gaming industry. If we can raise that much money for something that isn’t even gaming, how much do you imagine the extremely passionate people in GG spend in games proper every month?). Even the media stopped branding us as “300 neckbeards with sockpuppets in mom’s basement” because it is an unsustainable narrative. So, over time, people started using the hashtag more as a means of communication and dissemination of information than a show of numbers. Even so, it still remains highly tweeted to this day.

  50. Dm Gray said:

    Good post, except the use of “classical… libertarian”

    Libertarian is pretty much a brand spanking new concept to allow conservative/right leaning Americans to embrace classical liberalism, because the word is a dirty word 😛

    It’s a product of divisive politics resulting from decades of anti soviet scare mongering and a politically weak and spineless left.

    That said, I do at least credit those that define libertarian as “anti authoritarian” even if I think it’s more of a cop out than they’d care to admit :3

    As you say, time will tell on the gamergate issue.
    My fervent hope is that the truth will out and self serving, self righteous douchebags are unmasked.

  51. generalking007 said:

    thank you, good sir, for being fair and even handed, and for not smearing the movement like most do, but instead giving it a chance and looking at the evidence. so, in other words, thanks for being ethical

  52. Red Sun said:

    Rad-Feminists don’t believe any truth that contradicts their version of reality. They might have long words and well constructed sentences but behind that dwells a really stupid human being.

  53. Hayley said:

    Thank you for this. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

  54. Malcolm H. Johnston said:

    It has been disheartening to see the number of people willing to believe that gamergate is a horde of hateful teenage white boys and parrot the “toxic masculinity” and “misogyny” lines that are being thrown about by the lazy mainstream media. The proof of the diversity of gamergate is available to anyone who would take more than a cursory glance as is the legitimacy of the issues about the corruption in the gaming industry and press.

  55. DeusEx said:

    I’d say it is incorrect to claim that support ever ‘dwindled’. The hashtag still generates at the very least 20k per day and has surpassed many millions of tweets and thousands of hours with video content of discussion and lecturing since its inception. To think that it has ever died or dwindled is merely wishful thinking to those opposed or those wishing it would just go away. It’s all about how you roll with the punches. Anonymous internet culture does not follow the same rules as mainstream or contemporary standards. http://i.imgur.com/0iC2kZ3.jpg

  56. Daniel Hemingway said:

    Writer waits for the “smoke to clear.”.. on a site called The Big Smoke. I like this writer. 🙂

    In all seriousness, this is a great article. Jacob, you have ensured that I will put The Big Smoke on my adblock whitelist. Good job.

  57. Grey said:

    I’ve had my doubts about the movement keeping focus at times, but I always remember the charts a statistics guy (neutral on the topic himself) made showing the ways in which both sides communicate. The anti-GG have a hierarchy, and their few chosen players think for the legion of followers, who retweet and attack or defend when their masters beckon them. Few of them speak, few of them think, there is little conversation between them. It’s very authoritarian. Then you look at the Pro-GG side, it’s a vast web. They all talk to each other, they all have ideas, they all share the ideas, they have conversations, they argue, they disagree, but they allow that and will not think less of or shun each other for it (most of the time). They are, by a more classical definition, libertarian, as opposed to authoritarian. They are individuals with agency. They’re real thinking individuals, facing others who don’t care about the issues really, they care about their status in their group, and act in order to improve that status or are just gullible idiots hanging on someone’s every whim.

    I got the feeling early on that the anti lot are their own worst enemies and they can’t sustain their group with the way they do things. The only way they could win out is early, and groups like that often do win short battles by bullying their chosen victims into submission. I guess gamers don’t like losing, and are perfectly find with grinding for months on end. GG has already ‘won’ I’m feeling, it’s just a matter of time. Their opposition’s power is superficial, and already it’s fading along with the reputations of a lot of their major players. They overplayed their hand a lot lately that’s for sure.

  58. ArsCortica said:

    Thank you for this article! It is very refreshing to see a journalist doing …well, actual journalism (including proper research) as opposed to just parroting press releases and the questionable claims of those whom you have so fittingly labelled as “professional victims”.

    One thing I would like to add though: While you have correctly described that Ms Wu makes quite a bit of money for being the target of (alleged) abuse, the situation recently has changed quite drastically. Long story short, Ms Wu did the unthinkable and actually went for a coffee with Brad Wardell, a veteran game developer (who was falsely accused of rape by the gaming websites Kotaku and Polygon, but that’s another story).

    For the audacity to actually talk with someone from the opposing camp, Ms Wu received an immense amount of verbal abuse from the same people who had previously defended her. Coupled with this, the number of donators to her patreon also dwindled dramatically. It is an interesting insight into the psyche of many of the people opposing GamerGate.

  59. GeekVariety Customs said:

    I applaud you for taking a close look and finally being open to investigate things a little deeper. If only more people would follow suit.

  60. Livnthedream said:

    I like the cut of your jib. 🙂

  61. Josh Waydock said:

    I totally agree with this. I started following it from the beginning but soon stopped when it started being misconstrued. I’ve had many a debate about where it originated with feminists from my university who fail to believe that the situation did not start from misogyny at all.

Comments are closed.

Share via