Support NeoGAF

[Aaron D.]

Whoops. Wrong thread.

 

[Intheflorsh]

I don't know much about this controversy, but the idea of V needing to actually create a woman who agrees with them is pretty funny.

 

[kvothe]

But shes basically putting a band aid on an infected wound. The wound needs to be targeted. Society's view on women is what needs to be fixed. From media and social norms. Videogames are nothing more than a derivative of the bigger problems that are stemming from the world around us. WIth or without videogames, you will still have women being put into corners and viewed nothing more than cattle to produce children.

I don't really want to talk too much more about Sarkeesian, since that's not what this thread is about, so I'll just finish with this:

She's not putting a "band-aid" on anything, because she's not setting forth to solve this issue with a single video series. All she is trying to do is begin a conversation. A conversation not just about video games but about, as you said, society's views on women. And it's not a problem that will just go away without addressing it.

 

[Banana Aeon]

You'd be surprised how far people are willing to go just out of spite or to divert negative attention away from themselves or to be able to try to be on some moral high road without really believing in the cause. Not saying everyone or anyone from /v/ is doing it because of such selfish, stupid reasons, but it wouldn't be all that unheard of. To be able to use the whole "but I've donated for the cause" weapon, as if that allows them to be dirtbags in the future. It's kind of like the equivalent of "but I have gay/black friends" crap that some shitheads use after sprouting hateful crap about them.

/v/ does not care about public reception, because 4chan as a whole is considered taboo.

Honestly, after seeing how toxic the environment is around these issues, I would say the /v/ has the most pure motives in this case. It's almost shameful on how embarrassed this entire issue made me feel about my hobby. There is a discussion to be had, but we need to grow up before we get back to it.

 

[Coffee Dog]

Donating to charity out of compassion and spite have the same end result.

Anyone who criticizes donating to charity isn't thinking this through, I think.

 

[scoobidoo112]

Money is being raised for charity?

Good!

 

[Mononoke]

Edit: this thread is about the character made on /v/ don't want to derail the thread.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Since any allusion to GAF being a hivemind gets stern looks, I see no reason why the same luxury cannot be afforded to /v/ and 4chan.

 

[Sanke__]

I understand people arguing that donating to the cause is a good thing and its kinda pointless to argue otherwise

But the article is about this character that was created out of it and that aspect is absolutely fucking insane.


This:

I don't know much about this controversy, but the idea of V needing to actually create a woman who agrees with them is pretty funny.

 

[Comrade Stalin]

All this confusion about /v/'s actions over the past week or so just makes me think about how right moot (4chan owner) was 11 years ago. People care about who says something far more than they care about what is said.

Hitting the nail on the head here.

 

[ActuallyHulk]

Since any allusion to GAF being a hivemind gets stern looks, I see no reason why the same luxury cannot be afforded to /v/ and 4chan.

I agree. In fact just the term SJW has varying definitions just on /v/. For some it means feminists and anyone who has those ideals. For others its those who preach the moral high ground but act hypocritical. An example would be Sessler's chemical weapons tweet or any journalist who champions the high ground but has no problem with completely degrading their fanbase, readers, and every consumer in their industry (GAMERS SHOULD ALL DIE). Because that's so constructive to the debate they're trying to bring, right? Think console warrior fanboys versus console/video game fans. Hence the term warrior in both console warrior and social justice warrior. Extremists versus moderates.

Also to just be honest, /v/ is probably the most "worksafe" board with the most gay people and women besides /lgbt/. I mean go make a thread about Link or Big Boss and see what happens. Just make sure you're alone.

 

[SliceSabre]

And the difference would be...?

I think this might be a good example of the difference:

Equality person 4chan might be okay with:
"There could be more female protagonists in video games." (Clearly likes said video game, appears knowledge about video games.)

SJW 4chan seems to dislike:
"You shouldn't refer to cross-dressers as 'traps' in video games!" (Person has never played said game and never would have.)

I think part of it too comes from how knowledgable they preceive that person to be as well.

 

[OverBlood 3]

I thought /v/ made lots of nice gestures, like sending birthday cards and the like? They make yet another nice gesture and they're arseholes for it.

 

[petethepanda]

It's stunning that so many see this character as something positive. The one bright spot in this whole mess is that the assholes are pointing an increasingly bright spotlight on themselves.

 

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

Look at all this Art.

 

[GreenLiquid]

I think it should be pointed out that by condemning the site for its donation on the basis of its motivation or past behavior, we're basically falling into the trap /pol/ set when they organized this.

Personally, I don't think it's right to go all Aristotle on them here. Are they doing this for their own perceived gain or amusement? Well, maybe not everyone, but on the whole, clearly. Is it a good thing to do? Yes, it seems like a worthy cause and the character they ended up creating is basically reasonable and wholesome. Responding to this by condemning /v/ as a whole for things that have come out of there in the past seems to me an attempt to resolve the dissonance of "but they're the enemy, they can't do this!" It's all very tribal behavior, and /v/ is composed of many users who individually have their own opinions and reasons for donating and getting involved in the creation of the Vivian character. It would be better for the representation of women in games to give this act approval and support, showing that this kind of thing is appreciated regardless of who you are, then to meet it with scorn, come off as hypocritical, and add fuel to a fire that is causing a lot of people on the 'Net to do harmful things.

EDIT:

Hmm. We had a thread over on the OT yesterday or the day before, about whether or not altruism really exists. Like, if someone gives to a good cause, but their motivation is to get warm fuzzies, is it really altruism? I didn't respond in the thread since I didn't have time to really put my thoughts together coherently, but my take on the question is basically that in these cases, your motivations are trumped by your actions.

If 4chan members are donating to a good cause because they're angry or spiteful or trolling or whatever else, well, so what? Whether or not it's a good cause is independent of their motivations for donating. And there are far, far worse things to do with spite and anger than donating your money to a good cause (see: Sarkeesian getting death threats). Sure, you could make an argument that if these donations are coming from a place of spite that it's maybe not as praiseworthy as if it came from a place of genuinely wanting to make things better... but that just isn't enough to flip it around into something that should be derided.

Ok, so then there's the question of whether this is, in fact, a good cause. I may be wrong, but this appears to have been chosen on the basis that Zoe Quinn opposed it or didn't like it, which doesn't seem like a solid metric for finding good causes. Also it's an IndieGoGo, which I personally consider a red flag as far as something being a good cause. Probably better on the whole to find an appropriate charity and donate. On the other hand, if the project successfully does what it claims it's going to do, it's not like it's a bad thing.

tl;dr Donating to a good cause out of spite is still donating to a good cause. There are probably more effective places to send your donations, but oh well.

This pretty much says it better than I could, although I don't really agree that there would be more appropriate charity to donate to in this case. The issue at hand is representation of women in games, and the project /v/ chose to support and create a character for is about as close as you can get to an initiative to improve the representation of women both *in* games as characters and in the industry. And apparently the winning game's profits will be donated to a colon cancer charity if you'd consider that more worthy a cause.

 

[Gardex]

And the difference would be...?

The word "SJW" has become more of a term for "overly zealous person that actually wants control, not equality" or "overreacts and hates something fairly innocent never intended to be offensive". Some SJWs(especially in the deep corners of tumblr) have gotten to the point that you're oppressing them for being white and/or male and just exist

Not saying that applies to everyone who considers themself a SJW, but it explains why some say "SJW" something negative

 

[TheSeks]

I think this might be a good example of the difference:

Equality person 4chan might be okay with:
"There could be more female protagonists in video games." (Clearly likes said video game, appears knowledge about video games.)

SJW 4chan seems to dislike:
"You shouldn't refer to cross-dressers as 'traps' in video games!" (Person has never played said game and never would have.)

I think part of it too comes from how knowledgable they preceive that person to be as well.

That's definitely part of it. I think a lot of the flack 4chan and /v/ get is people simply not getting the "lingo" that 4chan has had since it's inception in 2003-2004-ish or so.

 

[Castcoder]

Pinning everyone over at /v/ is like saying everyone on NeoGAF is part of a hive mind. If someone from NeoGAF found out a hidden fact fo the industry, we'd all be marked by the industry as "terrorists" too. There are too many people with many different opinions that go on the internet and more importantly 4Chan. Someone who's associated with /v/ and maybe said some things to feminist groups has managed to poison the whole well, yet the actions of the industry on the real topic at hand has manged to wash away the real problem by spinning this campaign into an anti-female debate. This is similar hate NeoGAF has had in the past about other topics, and the industry is going to brush it off because it's 4Chan and not their friends. Just like how it's NeoGAF, and not their friends.

The silence and dismissal of the real issues at hand that /v/ is trying to get across just shows how defensive the industry is becoming because we finally got a glance at what's behind the curtains. The battle has been misled into a gender issue when it originally wasn't, and this is now what we see: a distraction from the real issue at hand. It's only becoming a gender issue because the press wants it to be a gender issue. Why developers are so close to journalists is the issue. It wasn't about gender. The spins from feminists and the press made it into a gender debate. I can't believe what I read from journalists about this.

Yes, /v/ makes a lot of mistakes, but this document right here really shows the dedication that /v/ has to get transparency from writers and devs/pubs. I can't say I'm against what /v/ believes and will have to respectfully disagree with anyone who thinks it's a gender issue. And they're NOT getting clicks, ad revenue, or being paid under the table by someone. Imagine that!

I'm tried of being silenced over this debate, and you ALL should feel violated for being fed distractions and lies for YEARS.

Spoiler

I'll probably be banned for this post. And for that, I'm sorry ahead of time that I'm not happy that developers, regardless of their gender, are getting press by doing favors for the journalists. I'm sorry I think journalistic integrity should come out of the industry. Just silence me and keep walking over us all. Who cares about honesty and doing your job right when you've got money, sex, alcohol, parties by just lying? Sorry that the real world and the people you lied to have brains and a backbone, and don't want to take it anymore.

 

[Khezu]

Gail Simone (a very popular comic writer) retweeted the stream to get support. One of her friends told her to be careful because Anita and Zoe don't support that project so she deleted the tweet. I never saw a statement by Anita but yeah, that's about it. They're going by what her friend said.

Hahaha really?

Oh man, that's pretty fucking silly.

 

[stump sock]

They might be dicks but I gotta hand it to them, this is some next level shit.

credit where it's due, that's legitimately funny.

 

[Marsyas]

The article comes off as really dishonest. The author must realize that the world is more complex than her silly "us vs.them" rhetoric.

Yeah, the VICE writer acts like there's no legitimate reason for /v/ picking this particular charity/cause.

Here's the tweets that have been linked in past threads.

That’s some nefarious trolling right there.

Since any allusion to GAF being a hivemind gets stern looks, I see no reason why the same luxury cannot be afforded to /v/ and 4chan.

This is a good idea.

 

[Catdaddy]

I can't understand a god damn thing in this article. The random bold links aren't helping.

I concur with comment, poorly written. I shouldn't have to reread an article just to try and find the point.

 

[Corronchilejano]

Say what you will about 4chan.

But they make the internet interesting.

 

[charlequin]

It's actually possible to critique the behavior of a community without boiling it down all the way to sweeping generalization. "4chan" isn't a singular entity like "GAF" isn't a singular entity. Rather, there's a subcommunity of individuals on 4chan who are misogynist assholes, along with some other people who aren't; this funding is coming from a mix of people who are well-meaning and people who are purposely supporting this indiegogo as a spiteful whitewashing campaign. But anyone who isn't actually trying to defend internet misogyny should really not be using their money to give the worst people on 4chan cover. Donating money as part of an effort to provide money "from 4chan" does mean that the people who donated are signing off on the intent, both positive and negative, of that collective donation.

I wonder how many more twists this could take. Maybe Vivian gets co-opted by real feminists ("real" in this case meaning those with motives other than spite)?

Already happening.

 

[SOLDIER]

Let me see if I can try to make sense of this nonsense.

So, /v/ accuses Quinn of using feminism as a means of attention, and thus decides to make their own "real" feminist movement, and then creates a fictional character that caters to the litmus test of an ideal female character while also....mocking the feminist movement at the same time so they....can stick it to the...man?

What is even going on anymore!?

 

[charlequin]

What is even going on anymore!?

People have too much time to spend on the internet.

 

[Basketball]

oh the art

 

[Kai Dracon]

4chan has always presented a frustrating environment when it comes to "hivemind" thinking, due to greater anonymity. If someone claims to represent 4chan's collective view on a topic, it's tough to immediately get a read. You don't know what anonymous army is, or is not, actually behind someone's back.

Thanks to this, one day /v can look great when a bunch of people appear out of the Internet ether and create art to send to game developers. The next day, it can seem like a pit of misogyny if everyone starts making death threats to a female celebrity. Hard to tell if it's the same users, sub group, or demographic when there's so much anonymous posting.

While you can't assume the chans are a so-called hivemind, I think their nature does lead to greater frustration boiling over at chan antics.

 

[AlimNassor]

/v/ doesn't actively do anything to harm women, do they? They're just angry loners that hate everything and themselves most of all. Remember: /v/ hates video games. /v/ looks for any excuse to hate something. Them doing something good is insane, they'd probably think this was a scam.

/co/ is fine.

/a/ is is /a/ super elitist and hostile

/b/ is a horrifying cesspool of stupid.

let's not even talk about /pol/

 

[Jamix012]

And the difference would be...?

I put them in quotes for obvious reasons. "Equality" would be, as most people are, open to more women in powerful, well written positions in games. "SJW Equality" would equate to said women in games going around intentionally sexualising and/or demeaning men as some sort of way to "get back" at games that do that to women.

 

[BennyBlanco]

/v/ doesn't actively do anything to harm women, do they? They're just angry loners that hate everything and themselves most of all. Remember: /v/ hates video games. /v/ looks for any excuse to hate something. Them doing something good is insane, they'd probably think this was a scam.

/co/ is fine.

/a/ is is /a/ super elitist and hostile

/b/ is a horrifying cesspool of stupid.

let's not even talk about /pol/

I like how comfortable you are just hand waving a board with thousands and thousands of posters as all being of the same mindset.

 

[GreenLiquid]

It's actually possible to critique the behavior of a community without boiling it down all the way to sweeping generalization. "4chan" isn't a singular entity like "GAF" isn't a singular entity. Rather, there's a subcommunity of individuals on 4chan who are misogynist assholes, along with some other people who aren't; this funding is coming from a mix of people who are well-meaning and people who are purposely supporting this indiegogo as a spiteful whitewashing campaign. But anyone who isn't actually trying to defend internet misogyny should really not be using their money to give the worst people on 4chan cover. Donating money as part of an effort to provide money "from 4chan" does mean that the people who donated are signing off on the intent, both positive and negative, of that collective donation.



Already happening.

Just as it's not a good idea to reduce entire communities to generalizations, though, I don't think it's fair to say that everyone who is donating under the 4chan banner is trying to give certain people "cover." If GAF had a similar fundraising drive, I suspect there would be plenty of people who might choose to give, whether out of agreement with the cause or excitement or plain old peer pressure, that wouldn't necessarily be thinking of or condoning GAF's general stance on, say, women in games, by doing so. That said, I don't deny that there's a lot of harassment and spitefulness coming out of /v/ as a result of the controversy, but I think it would be better overall to cheer on the positive in the midst of the negative rather than try to cast aspersions onto those associated with the bad by way of the group's past actions.

Let me see if I can try to make sense of this nonsense.

So, /v/ accuses Quinn of using feminism as a means of attention, and thus decides to make their own "real" feminist movement, and then creates a fictional character that caters to the litmus test of an ideal female character while also....mocking the feminist movement at the same time so they....can stick it to the...man?

What is even going on anymore!?

Basically, the misogynistic side of 4chan holds as one of its principles that feminists, who they lump under the "social justice warrior" label, are hypocrites who pretend to care about women's issues so that they look good. So some folks on /pol/ organized a donation drive toward a decidedly pro-feminist cause under 4chan's name, reasoning that the so-called SJWs would lash out at 4chan and basically expose themselves as hypocrites by seemingly not caring about the cause and instead going after 4chan, which the misogynistic types could then just claim shows that they actually care about their own image or their own hatred of 4chan more than the cause they claim to champion. It seems, though, that /v/ took on the project much more enthusiastically than intended so the original political lens that the drive was supposed to be viewed through basically got distorted and now I don't think anyone knows what exactly is going on, so I'm not sure that plan was all that successful.

 

[Principate]

I still find it hilarious that individual opinions one persons post is used as an opinion of a entire board. People are talking about a completely anonymous message board. Of fucking course your going get random people, douchebags and general crazies. It goes with the territory.

If hive mind is frowned upon on gaf it makes even less sense on 4chan with ridiculously less accountability and moderation. It's profoundly silly. Anyone can post there with little to no registration.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

It's actually possible to critique the behavior of a community without boiling it down all the way to sweeping generalization. "4chan" isn't a singular entity like "GAF" isn't a singular entity. Rather, there's a subcommunity of individuals on 4chan who are misogynist assholes, along with some other people who aren't; this funding is coming from a mix of people who are well-meaning and people who are purposely supporting this indiegogo as a spiteful whitewashing campaign. But anyone who isn't actually trying to defend internet misogyny should really not be using their money to give the worst people on 4chan cover. Donating money as part of an effort to provide money "from 4chan" does mean that the people who donated are signing off on the intent, both positive and negative, of that collective donation.

I think that in the end, the well-meaning people supporting this, are doing the right thing, because even if it may result on a cover for the most misogynistic core of the site, is still a positive thing, so they give a voice to those that aren't radical assholes, rather than keep being silenced by the actions of this poisonous subcommunity. And after all the result is something positive.

The fact that Vivian is making some of those hardcore misogynistic kinda upset, support this, because is evolving into something they didn't expected.

 

[MasterOfPastures]

Sometimes, I'm glad I live in these modern times.

 

[Scizzy]

But anyone who isn't actually trying to defend internet misogyny should really not be using their money to give the worst people on 4chan cover. Donating money as part of an effort to provide money "from 4chan" does mean that the people who donated are signing off on the intent, both positive and negative, of that collective donation.

Agreed, and anyone accepting that money in the name of supporting women in the industry is doing anything but.

 

[Kyuur]

Shit makes my head hurt.

I like the art.

 

[mkenyon]

This is the most deliciously complex thing to happen on the internet in awhile.

 

[JordanN]

How come GAF don't got a mascot? Come on guys, lets make our own.

Here's an idea: Nia Gaffia.

 

[Derphoof]

Yeah,

I do think FYC should have probably not included her in their product. But I also understand they probably need the money. Soo.. I mean, is it wrong to troll trollers by taking their money and playing along to push your agenda?

Inceptiondog.gif

Well, the kickstarter said that at $2000, you'd get to design a character for the game. Denying them that after raising such a large sum of money would be a pretty terrible move.

That's an incredibly biased article. People were calling the writer out in the comments and look at how they're all deleted now. It's really spiteful to twist 4chan donating money to a good cause into something bad.

Pretty much.

This is probably how the author views /v/:

 

[Griss]

Say what you want about the drama, I just love that design.

Why can't we have more female designs like that? Why can't we let 4chan design more characters, in the interests of diversity and feminism? I think Ubisoft should sign them up, they've admitted needing extra man-hours they don't have to put females in games.

EDIT: Also, just read that the charity they chose was Colon Cancer Alliance. I'm sorry but /v/ is capable of some seriously funny shit sometimes.

 

[Shinta]

Yeah, the VICE writer acts like there's no legitimate reason for /v/ picking this particular charity/cause.

Here's the tweets that have been linked in past threads.

Wow. I somehow missed this whole thing. That's crazy.

 

[inkls]

If its a donation to charity why even get mad at the person who made the donation. Its not like those who receive donations own anything to 4chan. Do political opponents call each other out when they make donations on the basis that the other supports a bad system and say that the donations shouldn't be accepted?

 

[Kinsei]

It'd be nice if they were able to take the money without including the character in the game.

I think this might be a good example of the difference:

Equality person 4chan might be okay with:
"There could be more female protagonists in video games." (Clearly likes said video game, appears knowledge about video games.)

SJW 4chan seems to dislike:
"You shouldn't refer to cross-dressers as 'traps' in video games!" (Person has never played said game and never would have.)

I think part of it too comes from how knowledgable they preceive that person to be as well.

You do realize that that's not painting 4chan in a positive light, right? Calling someone a "trap" is horribly transphobic.

 

[LordJim]

This is probably how the author views /v/:

It is a popular opinion about 4chan as a whole. That is like, 20 mil unique posters per month.

 

[Miletius]

/v/ is anarchy and as such all the positive and negative that happens there is nothing more than collective sentiment. In this case they happened to rally behind an decent idea, even though some intentions of some members could be less than genuine. So good on the community for that.

I find stories like this interesting but I always also feel though that the only people /v/ and 4chan in general are really trolling are themselves. That's probably how the collective they likes it though.

 

[Weltall Zero]

As usual, every party involved paints their own version of the story and people are quick to jump fully on board one or the other according to their preconceptions. Even reading all of the material here (including Quinn's accusations towards FYC), I can't really say what out of all of this is true and what isn't (4chan's posts regarding the matter leave little doubt, however, as to what their intentions are and how much they care about feminism, though). Also that character design is playing to the stereotype that female gamers (sorry, "true" female gamers) are perpetually grumpy.

I have nothing against the dark cesspool of villainy that 4chan is and loves to be, but it will be a good day when people stop taking 4chan seriously and especially stop giving them coverage.

I like how comfortable you are just hand waving a board with thousands of thousands of posters as all being of the same mindset.

Wouldn't "thousands of thousands" be "millions"? Sorry, I found that phrase funny.

 

[dapperbandit]

Been following this on and off for a few days on /v/

The whole thing is amazing to me. I really like the character they've made. The whole thing is a bit of a confused mess of mixed intentions though.

Considering how much money and awareness /pol/ raised for Darren Wilson, this is one of 4chan's better group projects.

 

[Comrade Stalin]

It is a popular opinion about 4chan as a whole. That is like, 20 mil unique posters per month.
http://i.imgur.com/xTjrTs7.jpg[IMG][/QUOTE]
This, by far, is the most appropriate banner ad to represent the site.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/AonXVua.gif