I went to Daniel Vavra's Twitter account and started going downwards. It seems that he has been quite calm and non-political since September 2017. But when you go below that, there's some bad shit to be found.
In this, he is defending James Damore, the guy who made a memo saying that women are less capable than men for some reason. Why would you make such a memo? What's the point of it other than antagonizing any female coworkers? This behavior must be acceptable in Warhorse Studios.
What is the issue with defending James Damore? I disagreed with his flawed logic, but I will still defend his right to create the document and the his wrongful termination. Google is known for its toxic work environment for anyone who shares conservative views/values or doesn't agree with specific ideals/values such as diversity quotes. Just look at the complaint that compiles a good variety of evidence to this:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V0iwJ7pMRvH_he76i7l7vOyFxDQUQkqg/view
As an aside, I read the memo over again just now to ensure what I was remembering was correct: no where does it say that women are less capable than men. He suggested through flawed logic that there
might be innate biological differences that exist
on average that cause women to not choose to work in careers dedicated to computer science/programming/coding. However, this is a discussion for another thread at another time. If you would like to create said thread, then please be my guest.
This is where his Nazi problem comes in. He is participating in the #CNNBlackmail alt-right propaganda hashtag. That tweet has numerous problems: first of all, the guy is not 15 years old, that is a lie made up by /pol/ to make the CNN accusations more legit. But the worst part here is where he's brushing off the guy's act by saying "by making fun of them". That guy made a "meme" image listing CNN journalists and pointing out which one of them is Jewish. Chances are that he has identified the Jews incorrectly, but the obvious implication there is that being Jewish is bad. That is far beyond "making fun of them" and more "being a fucking Nazi".
The tweet at hand which was posted on July 5th, 2017. The date much of the controversy was still going on and not everyone had the full story. Hell, even major news outlets didn't have the full story on that date as can be evidenced by CNN going back and apologizing for getting it wrong. I don't see how this is an issue on Vavre's part. From this tweet, it can be seen that he is defending what he thought was a child making crappy jokes on the internet from a major news corporation who had threatened to release their info. You are just reaching with the nazi promoting angle.
Here he's mocking progressive movements by going over the top and pretending that liberals hate a nude statue for some reason. Even though it's the conservatives causing nudity to be such a taboo in America. Good going.
Again, not sure exactly what the issue is here. It is clearly meant as a joke taking a jab at overly sensitive folk. Hell, there is plenty of evidence of that mindset here in old threads and over in ResetEra, Waypoint, and Polygon (to name a few sites). You are taking a joke far too seriously.
The "media" criticized PewDiePie for saying "what a fucking nigger" on a stream. The obvious takeaway from that is.... that white men are under attack? What kind of ridiculous logic is this?
I am unfamiliar with this controversy, but this is rather disconcerting at first glance. Still nothing to scream that he is a hateful, neo-nazi supporting, misogynist. There is quite a bit I am sure can be gleamed from media sources of the release of those tweets. It could be that he sees PewDiePie's issue as an honest mistake and the character demonization by media as a bit much. It could be that he is referring to certain groups that lay blame or try to insinuate that white males are the root of the issue. Again, I am unfamiliar with this controversy (and PewDiePie as a whole) so I could be off - but that is just the first possibility that springs to mind.
Great post.
I was inspired to try looking through his Twitter too, but honestly I'm seeing so many stupid right-wing myths (climate change is fake, most gun violence in the US is from gangs, Breitbart garbage about 27,000 Islamic terrorist attacks, lots of anti-migrant stuff, and so on) and the usual GamerGate whining (
random example, and
here's some self-righteous victim complex nonsense) that it's pretty hard going. Respect to those who can put up with it to look further, but just from all the man's constant bitching about gaming journalists I can understand why a site like Giant Bomb might not care about his games.
I mean look at this stupid shit. At best (?) the guy's completely living in his own world, or he's entirely disingenuous, and that means I have to question everything else he says. Why would gaming journalists want to show any respect for somebody saying idiotic, completely false things like this about the critics of GamerGate (you know, that movement founded solely to harass a woman)?
For your "evidence", I see a joke about Polygon reviews during the height of GamerGate, choosing a particular brand for their political stance, and a valid viewpoint about what he has seen. The second one is the one that makes me chuckle. How is that kind of stance
any different than what folk like you make when someone promotes/sides with gamer gate? Looking at your post history, you are an ardently against GamerGate and have shown preferential treatment to particular groups that are also against it. So, I ask again: how is that any different than what Vavre has done?
Now, despite having an entire thread dedicated to this discussion that clears up misconceptions such as yours, I am going to assume you just haven't read it. Otherwise you are intentionally arguing in bad faith with that final sentence.