Support NeoGAF

[Kazerei]

Nah, not scare quotes. I was looking for a word to describe the retelling of how things unfolded(as per the Kotaku report) and it happened to the one term that approached what I was trying to convey the most, the caveat being that I cannot bring myself to use facts wholeheartedly and honestly to qualify secondary source reporting( not a qualitative assessment). To be succint, it had more to do with my inability to find an accurate term to describe the events more than questioning it. I don't believe in a version of a story unless it is presented from the point of view of all parties present.


My stance on this remains unfettered. It is not a case of sexism specifically. It is a matter of human decency. This was not a case of sexism as to how I understand it, which would be a form of discrimination based on sex. It was something less specific. You have to be careful with hot topics and not jump in too quickly.

Are you talking about this Game Jam or something else? Because a question like “Two of the other teams have women on them. Do you think they’re at a disadvantage?” is exactly discrimination based on sex.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Nah, not scare quotes. I was looking for a word to describe the retelling of how things unfolded(as per the Kotaku report) and it happened to the one term that approached what I was trying to convey the most, the caveat being that I cannot bring myself to use facts wholeheartedly and honestly to qualify secondary source reporting( not a qualitative assessment). To be succint, it had more to do with my inability to find an accurate term to describe the events more than questioning it. I don't believe in a version of a story unless it is presented from the point of view of all parties present.


My stance on this remains unfettered. It is not a case of sexism specifically. It is a matter of human decency. This was not a case of sexism as to how I understand it, which would be a form of discrimination based on sex. It was something less specific. You have to be careful with hot topics and not jump in too quickly.

Thanks for the clarification on the quotes.

But I think this is clearly a case of discrimination based on gender. The questions that broke the camel's back where absolutely colored by gender bias and we even have the example of a male developer being asked to remove his nail polish.

 

[LightofRohan]

I think it's fair to say no one expected the Jam to go down the way it did or even be the way it did, so it's possible none of the YouTubers were informed about who the sponsors were or any specifics they had to do other than just play the games.

AngryJoe could have known... that's what Geoff Keighly said about the Mt. Dew/Dorritos event. Yet people still hated him for not just walking away when he got there.

Yet Angryjoe seemed to not protest against being there. It's easier to yell at others when they screw up, but harder to actually stand up to your "beliefs".

 

[Barryman]

Nah, not scare quotes. I was looking for a word to describe the retelling of how things unfolded(as per the Kotaku report) and it happened to the one term that approached what I was trying to convey the most, the caveat being that I cannot bring myself to use facts wholeheartedly and honestly to qualify secondary source reporting( not a qualitative assessment). To be succint, it had more to do with my inability to find an accurate term to describe the events more than questioning it. I don't believe in a version of a story unless it is presented from the point of view of all parties present.


My stance on this remains unfettered. It is not a case of sexism specifically. It is a matter of human decency. This was not a case of sexism as to how I understand it, which would be a form of discrimination based on sex. It was something less specific. You have to be careful with hot topics and not jump in too quickly.

All-male teams were asked if teams with women were at a disadvantage.

Good rule of thumb: if you replace "woman" with "black person" and the resulting phrase is racist, then the original phrase was sexist.

Of course this was sexist.

 

[HarryKS]

Are you talking about this Game Jam or something else? Because a question like “Two of the other teams have women on them. Do you think they’re at a disadvantage?” is exactly discrimination based on sex.

The Game Jam and the aftermath. The reaction and how things panned out in the media.
In that case, it is not a form of discrimination. An act of poor judgement and lack of decency , but not a case where the women present were treated differently in terms of access to resources. The line of questioning was suspect but it did not impact the actual proceedings insofar that refusal to comply with answering in such and such way did not result in penalizing someone based on sex. Although you might think that trying to pipe in about having a (dis)advantage because one team has a 'pretty' girl on it might come off as an example of sexism, I will maintain that it cannot be treated as such since it toes the line of the usual boorish attitude one might put forth to get a rise and provoke people in any situation. What I mean by that is the bald guy, whose name I can't remember, did not set out to demean women; it just so happened that he used it as ammo to get a rise out of the people present. When you're going through a script, you don't think at such a granular level. Perceived gender bias is symptomatic and therefore not the cause of the fiasco. Although that I am aware of the light irony that what shall follow will indicate, I could easily conceive a scenario wherein the absence of women during the Game Jam, the bald guy would have looked for other means or topics to provoke the participants, such as perhaps someone's lack of style, appearance/physique or other delicate subjects. This is why I object to describing this as an example of sexism. Doing so is a disservice and serves to paint an inaccurate picture of the events.

Thanks for the clarification on the quotes.

But I think this is clearly a case of discrimination based on gender. The questions that broke the camel's back where absolutely colored by gender bias and we even have the example of a male developer being asked to remove his nail polish.

Either I do not remember this episode or I did not read about it. I'll refer to the point above to say that I think it is one of those cases where you can't see the forest for the trees because of the zeitgeist of the 'gaming community' (this one is a scare quote, because community seems to clash with the constant bickering and lack of cohesion although a dash of self-deprecation never hurts). For an industry and community that is so young and slowly becoming self-aware, it is normal that such phenoma would occur. It just so happens that we all, partly due to the nature of the beast sometimes grab onto hot topics such as sexism within the industry, something that is seen as very potent and grabs headlines and focus too much of our attention on it without looking at the big picture. In this case, I think it was a pernicious attempt at manipulating and portraying events in an inaccurate manner under the guise of a documentary/reality show.

 

[Patryn]

AngryJoe could have known... that's what Geoff Keighly said about the Mt. Dew/Dorritos event. Yet people still hated him for not just walking away when he got there.

Yet Angryjoe seemed to not protest against being there. It's easier to yell at others when they screw up, but harder to actually stand up to your "beliefs".

His employer was behind the whole thing. It's entirely possible that he felt obligated to do it because of Maker. That applies to all the YouTube people.

 

[Yeezus]

I could go for a Mountain Dew

 

[APF]

In that case, it is not a form of discrimination.

You're trying way too hard. Treating women differently, or suggesting that one must be of lesser value because of their gender, is by definition discrimination. That's literally what the word means. Just because someone used a sexist line of questioning in order to provoke emotional responses in people does mean they're suddenly immune to people calling them out on that sexism. Whether the intent was to "provoke" vs "demean" is immaterial to what was the means and the result.

 

[HarryKS]

You're trying way too hard. Treating women differently, or suggesting that one must be of lesser value because of their gender, is by definition discrimination. That's literally what the word means. Just because someone used a sexist line of questioning in order to provoke emotional responses in people does mean they're suddenly immune to people calling them out on that sexism. Whether the intent was to "provoke" vs "demean" is immaterial to what was the means and the result.

Nah man, you're reading too much into it. I am not referring to the social implication, rather an actual case of discrimination(prejudice/unlawful) which would be, for example, not giving a job to a woman because she is a woman.
Also think you're getting the wrong idea here. I am not trying to protect him(bald guy), instead I am trying to say that it is reductive to talk and focus almost exclusively on sexism when the problems here affected individuals regardless of their genetic makeup. That would be a lack of human decency. Is it not better to look for a solution to the big problem rather than narrow it down to one single aspect that is part of that problem?

As an aside, when the bald guy asks whether the group with the pretty girl could be at a disadvantage, why would you assume it is a dig at her lack of ability rather than a comment on the nature of males who become despondent when they see a pretty thing?

 

[BlastProcessing]

Nah man, you're reading too much into it. I am not referring to the social implication, rather an actual case of discrimination(prejudice/unlawful) which would be, for example, not giving a job to a woman because she is a woman.
Also think you're getting the wrong idea here. I am not trying to protect him(bald guy), instead I am trying to say that it is reductive to talk and focus almost exclusively on sexism when the problems here affected individuals regardless of their genetic makeup. That would be a lack of human decency. Is it not better to look for a solution to the big problem rather than narrow it down to one single aspect that is part of that problem?

I am not sure why you are expending so much energy trying to split this hair. We have first hand accounts of the people who were there and they all identified the statements as sexist.

Trying to specifically identify an action as sexist is not reductive. Trying to put it under the much more general banner of a lack of human decency is extremely reductive and not particularly helpful.

As an aside, when the bald guy asks whether the group with the pretty girl could be at a disadvantage, why would you assume it is a dig at her lack of ability rather than a comment on the nature of males who become despondent when they see a pretty thing?

That is also sexist. A comment on the nature of males generally is.

 

[HarryKS]

Well, I guess we see things differently.

 

[EmptySpace]

just saw this and read on what had transpired. damn.

waste of everyone's time.