Anonymous said: what do you think about zoe quinn
I don’t know much about her! Can people tell me more in the notes section?
So, Zoe is an indie game developer. Her most well know project is Depression Quest.
Now there are people out there who believe Zoe is part of a vast conspiracy to destroy gaming. She and her “social justice” friends are accused of using sex, money, and influence to change video games as we know it and ruining things.
Some of those people, for the past few weeks, have done the following: send death threats, hacking Twitter and Facebook and Skype accounts, bomb threats, spreading of personal information including photos. They created a hashtag and attempted to create a movement to hide behind. They have attempted to “investigate”, harass, and humiliate any person or group who have associated or shown support for Zoe.
1. I am friends with someone who has been targeted by this group. My bias is clear. I have watched what has happened to my friend and it saddens and enrages me.
2. Some people within this hashtag/movement are not contributing to harassment. They want more transparency within video game reporters, critics, and journalists. They might not even know that people from 4chan started this as a smokescreen for their harassment of almost exclusively women.
You can have discussions about Anita’s points. But understand that she’s making critique. A lot of it is subjective. A lot of it relies on specific definitions that she gives. For example, it’s popular to attack her use of Hitman as an example of Women as Background Decoration. However, the only way it’s not a valid example is if you’re not actually using her definition. Essentially, you’re throwing out her thesis and applying a different thesis to her examples. That’s not fair, and it’s not academically sound.
But have these discussions! Just focus on the art, the trends, and the culture. Don’t focus on the person. Because if your goal is debunking her, you’ve already lost. Right now, people are throwing so much shit at her, hoping it sticks. Seriously. A journalist literally investigated whether or not she actually made a police report when people were threatening her life, and another prominent blogger demanded police report numbers from her. Neither of these people are entitled to that information. They’re trying so hard to catch her up in a lie, that they’re losing sight of what they’re doing, and how silly and unethical it looks. Why does Anita have to be discredited, if her points are not valid? If her arguments are wrong, discuss them. David Hill, on gamergate and femfreq