|
Byolante posted:Everybody involved in this poo poo instantly deleted their twitter because they all know they conspired to destroy somebody and ended up killing him. I don't recall any 'gamers' deliberately driving people to suicide. lol this guy
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 07:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:21 |
|
|
Tell you what, Byolante: if this was a conspiracy, you're accusing Zoe Quinn and at least one other person (her conspirators) of murder. Do you have any evidence? If not, how is what you're doing any different than what you believe she did to Holowka?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
Byolante posted:You are legitimising vigilante justice? If somebody lies and ruins you then its your fault and the legal system's fault? Are you so far down the rabbit hole you can't identify that in the process of trying to protect the victim you are blaming vicitims and legitimising abuse. What's your evidence that Zoe Quinn and whoever you believe her conspirators are deliberately drove Holowka to suicide? I'm curious because, like you, I believe we should be careful about accusing people of heinous things in public. I think you and I can both agree that we hope nothing bad happens to Zoe Quinn or any other victim.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 08:21
|
|
|
Byolante posted:Zoe Quinn is a bit part player in a seriously sick and toxic community built on destroying people for likes. That sounds pretty serious. You should take it to the police if you have evidence that someone conspired to kill Alec Holowka and ruin his career and stop irresponsibly throwing it around online. I know neither of us wants vigilantes to take things into their own hands.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 08:33
|
|
|
Byolante posted:innocent people So you're calling the accusers liars. Can you quantify that with evidence? Like you, I'm deeply concerned with proving accusations.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 08:49
|
|
|
Good Soldier Svejk posted:As someone pointed out though, this mindset is usually extremely limited to suspicious pet issues (look at Alan Dershowitz's body of work for example) Which is what I was trying to do with my replies to him. "Cancel culture" and harassment mobs who dedicate themselves to semi-anonymously ruining people are an apolitical problem. Any united bloc of people on social media is susceptible to behaving that way. People take justice into their own hands when they 1) don't trust institutions and 2) are allowed to without personal consequences, which the social remove provided by the Internet enables. Regardless of how you feel about this cultural condition - and I think there's room for debate, including a dialogue about how "new" or novel it actually is - the idea that it's some singularly leftist or feminine or whatever phenomenon is crank poo poo for people with blinders on.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:I think you're viewing the problem from an unusual angle. Oh, I'm not saying I disagree with you. Even if you believe Holowka was "driven" to suicide by the social response to the public accusations, Zoe Quinn isn't responsible for that or a conspirator or whatever the gently caress Byolante was trying to say, and the "mob" I'm referring to are people acting on the accuser's behalf - often without regard for what the accuser might actually want, expect, or consider fair - in the pursuit of justice, or just something to do. I have no idea if it's happening with this specific case or not and I was speaking more generally, but if it is, it's the people pressuring Holowka's industry contacts and former colleagues and friends to issue a statement or asking them if they knew or whatever an hour after the accusations hit. Just like anybody who's been harassing Zoe Quinn for years over GG bullshit isn't some famous person you've heard of, even a right-wing journalist or whatever, it's a bunch of anonymous busybodies and creeps. ipaid10buxforthis posted:You only have to pretend conspiracy isn't a real thing if you're looking to gain from it. Maybe you can offer what Byolante for "some reason" refused to offer me: a motive for why a group of people would conspire to destroy Alec Holowka's career.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
Squeezy Farm posted:I have good news: outside of a few thousand freaks on Twitter the rest of the world probably still thinks you're the classic dork virgin type of gamer. imo part of the problem with all this poo poo is that we may be slowly coming around to the realization that making "dork virgin gamer" a master status and having an entire industry normalize that by aggressively catering to it in exchange for funneling them every dollar you have - in lieu of spending that money on stuff like family, travel, healthy food, additional hobbies that engage you other ways, and even poo poo like therapy and medication - probably isn't the best thing for those individuals or society people don't choose that status in a vacuum, it's a response to the simple comfort and joy games provide relatively cheaply in a society where people are increasingly both dissatisfied and broke, but it's still real bad for people
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2019 09:12
|
|
|
Woozy posted:If you can't spot what actually is rational about the backlash against women in the hobby you're either uselessly deluded Unfortunately for you, I also believe the people who disagree with me are uselessly deluded. Checkmate, bitch
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i think this comic does sorta touch on a thing i have noticed at times. some of the sex monsters end up being those white guys who pretend to be good allies and go super overboard with it to cover their own gross behavior. This isn't a novel observation at all, both because that is a strategy willfully-malicious predators use to snare people, but also because it's just true of any group of people. Some feminists are rapists. Some queers are thieves. Some autistic people are murderers. Why? Because they're people, and no one identity variable is capable of fully explaining poo poo like violent crime. It doesn't mean those things even necessarily have a single thing to do with each other. You're not wrong, I just don't know why this observation is anything special or useful. It's like saying there's assholes on every side of a debate without specifying percentages or what you mean by "assholes". Of course there are, there's assholes everywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
RazzleDazzleHour posted:women were major propagators of the stigma people face from playing tabletop Got a source on that? Unless you just mean "some of the propagators of stigma people faced from playing tabletop were women" and your idea of a source is linking an article about Patricia Pulling or one other specific woman from 40 years ago. Which is a little bit like saying "some serial harassers are women", a statement that is both technically correct while also being essentially meaningless and already taken for granted by everyone involved in the conversation who isn't lobotomized. RazzleDazzleHour posted:How much of a citation do you want? Personal experience? Experience of people I've spoken to? Articles? How many articles? oh you already addressed this. If we're doing personal anecdotes, I've been playing, running, and designing tabletop games for over 20 years and I think you're full of poo poo, so I guess those cancel each other out, and we can move on to something either of us can prove Baku fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Sep 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
TwoDayLife posted:My experience coincidences with RazzleDazzleHour's, so do I cancel you out now, or what? Is that how it works? Yes
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
Incoherence posted:This has been said over and over in this thread, but I do not believe for a moment that we are currently in a world where a single accusation against a semi-public figure is irrevocably going to ruin their career forever. (And the Holowka story is none of these things.) So it's not worthwhile to talk about whether "#MeToo has gone too far", because it hasn't. I'd put money on Jeremy Soule getting work in gaming again, as an obvious example. I mean, Donald Trump and Bill Clinton both won the office of President of the United States after being publicly accused of sexual misconduct. Peoples' lives can be ruined by accusations, but people treat that sort of thing as if it's axiomatic when it doesn't actually happen most of the time. Part of it is hyperbole about what constitutes a "ruined life"; if Brett Kavanaugh hadn't been confirmed, they would've said it ruined his career, but in practice all it would've meant is settling for his current position as a DC Circuit court judge, and the paltry salary of $220k.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:This one went sideways and he died. I predict she will return to twitter one day to tell us all how hurtful his death was for her to process and there will be some sort of monetary vehicle attached. Even if you're right, it rules how dedicated you are to a set of hypotheticals while talking around, downplaying, or denying the safest bet of all: that Alec Holowka was a rapist, a thing even his friends, colleagues, and family believe
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Gantolandon posted:They told you already. When you meet enough narcissists, you eventually learn to be hypervigilant to their behavioral patterns and fixate on them. I have the same feeling around some people claiming to be victims of abuse, because I learned the hard way that this is how narcs get you. Surely you're aware that hypervigilance toward people claiming to have been abused, because you think that's how "narcs get you", is also a sign of some sort of hosed up brain condition, right? It's funny bc I read your examples upthread, and as I did earlier, it would be really trivial for me to counter with an example from my own life of a woman I knew who was part of an anarchist collective, was abused by a guy with a lot of clout in it bc he's a somewhat well-known writer, accused him, and was drummed out of the group basically because everyone thought she was an attention-seeking narcissist. I guess it's possible she is/was, and she fooled me too. It's also possible that you're some kind of Stormfront sockpuppet pretending to have been a left-wing activist and making up fake examples to win an argument online. Is it likely? Nah. But if we went with Occam's razor the "believe women" people would be right, so who's to say?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Academia prob needs a reform of the tenure system, and uh, good luck with that That's happening, it's just gonna manifest as "like three people at every school have tenure and all other teaching and research is done by people making minimum wage"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
Endorph posted:if you've ever seen how college campuses handle this stuff, even second-hand, none of this is a surprise or hard to believe tbh. just illustrates how hosed the conventional narrative is on this. Yep, which is baffling, given that the conventional narrative has arisen in a culture where two accused assailants - Bill Clinton and Donald Trump - have both gone on to be elected President. Could there possibly be a stronger indictment of the "ruined lives" argument? Nobody gives a poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
It probably also helps that the videogame industry's main customers are young adults. I suspect they're much more conscientious about this topic than elderly people in the US, given their relative politics.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
The thing about pedophilia is that psychiatrists are mostly convinced it's orientational. While it's hosed up to hold that against someone, it also means it's virtually impossible to "change" through talk therapy and medication; if that's true, you can't "cure" pedophilia any more than you can "cure" homosexuality. And if that's true, pedophiles are going to spend their entire lives being threats to the children around them. Asking anyone to restrain themselves from sexual activity their entire life is an enormous ask - plenty of people who voluntarily take those oaths, like those in religious orders, violate them, and they could walk away from the oath any time they want - while a pedophile's version of "normal" sexual activity is rape. Does your sympathy for their real condition outweigh your sympathy for their potential victims? Because if we accept the above as true - it's orientational, and sexuality is an extremely powerful driver of human behavior - it is inevitable that some of them are going to molest children. You can't produce a society that allows pedophiles to live freely without accepting that some amount of child rape is worth that trade-off, if those premises are correct. Sadism is pointless and dehumanizing to both parties, but I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" answer to the underlying question of how many rights and freedoms someone whose fundamental sexual orientation is a form of rape should have, only a matter of which values you're willing to compromise to protect other values.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:21 |
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I've always felt as if "sex pest" is kind of a weak term for what these men end up doing, like you go to take out the trash and out pops a little Harlan Ellison humping your leg. I think it's actually an appropriate term for people who are weird little creeps without actually being rapists or serial abusers or whatever, and that having that granularity between "regular, healthy guy" and "dangerous predator" is actually important. One of the reasons sex offender registries are bad is that they create a binary offender/nonoffender status, but "sex offender" is a category that can range from "made lewd jokes at work" or "got drunk and peed in a park" all the way to "molested a bunch of little kids". The people in the former category should probably not make a habit of that behavior, but it's extremely obviously different from the latter. That said, there's definitely people who use "sex pest" to describe the latter, and in that case I agree with you. Baku fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Sep 24, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 15:47
|
|