Since my brief jaunt to the Gamergate frontlines a couple of weeks ago, I've kept a close eye on events through my special telescope.
I probably shouldn't - even from a seemingly safe distance it still somehow seems to stoke my ire. And yet it continues to fascinate me, like a rotting fox on a windscreen.
It has been quite the busy couple of weeks in the ongoing culture war, but I'll do my best to try and summarise the main event.
You may be aware of a Kickstarter for something called Social Autopsy. It was designed to be a database of harassers - exposing the real identities of trolls and cyberbullies. It was unique in that it united both Gamergaters and anti-Gamergaters alike in condemning it.
And then it all kicked off, and the most unlikely thing imaginable happened: Candace Owens, the founder of Social Autopsy, became the new face of pro-Gamergate.
I probably shouldn't - even from a seemingly safe distance it still somehow seems to stoke my ire. And yet it continues to fascinate me, like a rotting fox on a windscreen.
It has been quite the busy couple of weeks in the ongoing culture war, but I'll do my best to try and summarise the main event.
You may be aware of a Kickstarter for something called Social Autopsy. It was designed to be a database of harassers - exposing the real identities of trolls and cyberbullies. It was unique in that it united both Gamergaters and anti-Gamergaters alike in condemning it.
And then it all kicked off, and the most unlikely thing imaginable happened: Candace Owens, the founder of Social Autopsy, became the new face of pro-Gamergate.
HOW DID IT BEGIN?
It began when Owens was contacted by Zoe Quinn - the self-styled "ground zero of Gamergate" - who asked the Social Autopsy founder to rethink her project.
Owens later went on the record to state she felt bullied by Quinn, that Quinn was arrogant, aggressive, and broke down in tears on the phone to her... and then alleged that Quinn shared her email address among her private Twitter followers - leading to Owens being flooded with online abuse (which she initially blamed solely on Quinn, rather than her followers).
Shortly afterwards, Social Autopsy was suspended by Kickstarter - something that Quinn's fellow anti-harassment campaigner, Randi Lee Harper, took credit for.
When the possible link between the abuse and Quinn's private Twitter account was unearthed... Quinn deleted the account. Then, after several days of once again being in the spotlight, Quinn announced she was taking a break from Twitter, citing depression. Obviously, she's back now.
Then the story got really weird.
It began when Owens was contacted by Zoe Quinn - the self-styled "ground zero of Gamergate" - who asked the Social Autopsy founder to rethink her project.
Owens later went on the record to state she felt bullied by Quinn, that Quinn was arrogant, aggressive, and broke down in tears on the phone to her... and then alleged that Quinn shared her email address among her private Twitter followers - leading to Owens being flooded with online abuse (which she initially blamed solely on Quinn, rather than her followers).
Shortly afterwards, Social Autopsy was suspended by Kickstarter - something that Quinn's fellow anti-harassment campaigner, Randi Lee Harper, took credit for.
When the possible link between the abuse and Quinn's private Twitter account was unearthed... Quinn deleted the account. Then, after several days of once again being in the spotlight, Quinn announced she was taking a break from Twitter, citing depression. Obviously, she's back now.
Then the story got really weird.
SIMPLY HARD
It's hard to keep it simple - but the short of it is, Owens was interviewed by Jesse Singal, a journalist from New York Magazine, who claimed he wanted to tell her side of the story.
When the piece appeared, it was critical of Owens, and positive regarding Quinn and Harper. Singal claimed that Owens had fallen for Gamergater "trutherism".
In a blog post, Owens claimed that Singal had sweet-talked her into agreeing to the piece - only to then turn around and stab her in back.
Then it was unearthed that Singal was friends with Quinn and Randi Lee Harper. As was (according to Owens) Caitlin Dewey - a reporter for the Washington Post - who also misled Owens with a view to telling "her story".
Suffice to say, all of this was stacked in favour of the whole journalistic ethics/media conspiracy that many Gamergaters claim to be fighting against.
As a result of her experiences, her three in-depth articles, her tweets, her interviews with pro-Gamergate site The Ralph Retort, and the fact that she's far from shy about criticising Zoe Quinn and Randi Lee Harper, Owens has unexpectedly become the latest figurehead of pro-Gamergate.
Despite - as she says - not having any interest in games, or even knowing what Gamergate was before starting her Social Autopsy campaign. It's an absolute coup for the pros, given that Owens is attractive, black and female - the exact opposite of the "white, male, misogynist" stereotype typically associated with the pro-Gaters by the antis.
THE PROBLEM
Now... the problem is this: Candace Owens comes across like a paranoid conspiracy theorist.
She started one of those ineffectual online petitions against Jesse Singal, her Tweets frequently come over as whiny and obsessive, and her most recent blog post is full-on off-the-deep-end. In it she joins invisible dots to claim that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is some sort of comic book villain, pulling the strings, and manipulating the media narrative. Frankly, that goes far beyond anything even the most rabid pro-Gamergaters would've dreamed up.
Consequently, any valid points she might've had in the beginning, any actual story she might've unearthed, is suddenly rendered irrelevant.
It's like David Icke; from time to time he'll mention something thought-provoking, that's worth looking further into... and then he'll say something like this: "A group of reptilian humanoids, called the Babylonian Brotherhood, control humanity."
Owens isn't quite at that stage yet, but she does say things like this: "My point: these women are NOT good people, and Idc what anyone thinks of my business, what they did to me was beyond horrific."
Beyond horrific? Not good people? Really? Get some perspective, woman. You're playing the victim card there just as much as anyone else.
It's hard to keep it simple - but the short of it is, Owens was interviewed by Jesse Singal, a journalist from New York Magazine, who claimed he wanted to tell her side of the story.
When the piece appeared, it was critical of Owens, and positive regarding Quinn and Harper. Singal claimed that Owens had fallen for Gamergater "trutherism".
In a blog post, Owens claimed that Singal had sweet-talked her into agreeing to the piece - only to then turn around and stab her in back.
Then it was unearthed that Singal was friends with Quinn and Randi Lee Harper. As was (according to Owens) Caitlin Dewey - a reporter for the Washington Post - who also misled Owens with a view to telling "her story".
Suffice to say, all of this was stacked in favour of the whole journalistic ethics/media conspiracy that many Gamergaters claim to be fighting against.
As a result of her experiences, her three in-depth articles, her tweets, her interviews with pro-Gamergate site The Ralph Retort, and the fact that she's far from shy about criticising Zoe Quinn and Randi Lee Harper, Owens has unexpectedly become the latest figurehead of pro-Gamergate.
Despite - as she says - not having any interest in games, or even knowing what Gamergate was before starting her Social Autopsy campaign. It's an absolute coup for the pros, given that Owens is attractive, black and female - the exact opposite of the "white, male, misogynist" stereotype typically associated with the pro-Gaters by the antis.
THE PROBLEM
Now... the problem is this: Candace Owens comes across like a paranoid conspiracy theorist.
She started one of those ineffectual online petitions against Jesse Singal, her Tweets frequently come over as whiny and obsessive, and her most recent blog post is full-on off-the-deep-end. In it she joins invisible dots to claim that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is some sort of comic book villain, pulling the strings, and manipulating the media narrative. Frankly, that goes far beyond anything even the most rabid pro-Gamergaters would've dreamed up.
Consequently, any valid points she might've had in the beginning, any actual story she might've unearthed, is suddenly rendered irrelevant.
It's like David Icke; from time to time he'll mention something thought-provoking, that's worth looking further into... and then he'll say something like this: "A group of reptilian humanoids, called the Babylonian Brotherhood, control humanity."
Owens isn't quite at that stage yet, but she does say things like this: "My point: these women are NOT good people, and Idc what anyone thinks of my business, what they did to me was beyond horrific."
Beyond horrific? Not good people? Really? Get some perspective, woman. You're playing the victim card there just as much as anyone else.
COMMON
Now here's another thing.
One of the common lines rattled out by Kotaku in Action and pro-Gamergaters is this: "Where's the proof of harassment?".
They might want to take a look at what's trending on Twitter today, because it's writ large.
The hashtag #TrigglyPuff - dreamed up by members of 4Chan allegedly - has almost 12,000 tweets as I write this... and every single one of them is targeted at one individual.
The person in question is a US college major. She's gay, she's a feminist, and she was filmed losing it - literally screaming at the speakers (who included pro-Gamergater Milo Yiannopoulos) - at a university event discussing free speech and political correctness.
Bottom line: she doesn't appear to be particularly emotionally stable. She looks unhinged, and suffice to say, becoming a meme which labels her as a "white whale", "obnoxious lardo", "fatty mass" - and worse - is unlikely to help that.
It's disgusting, it's upsetting, and it rattles my faith in humanity. And it's exactly what anti-Gamergaters are against; they rightly see that as abuse and bullying - frankly, would any of us want to be her today?
There's certain chaotic contingent, many of whom appear to identify as pro-GG (or, at least, "anti-SJW"), responsible for promoting that hashtag who see their target as deserving of their abuse because... what... she shouted at one of the movement's most high profile proponents at a rally? Or is it because she's a feminist, a woman, and she's overweight? And they're bullying for the sake of bullying - for the reasons every bully does; to feel powerful and in control?
Either way, she seems to me like someone who'd benefit from a little empathy and compassion, not a concerted attempt to destroy her. It took me close to seven years to feel I'd recovered from the grief I got online, and I never had anything as bad as she's received in the last 24 hours. What has happened will probably stay with her for the rest of her life.
It's an issue... because, again, I think the non-abusive element of the pro-Gamergate movement is capable of making some valid points about media bias - and that message does get obscured by, ironically, media bias. But equally, the anti-Gamergate side has a noble reason for existing - resisting the sort of wholesale abuse that this person has been receiving.
Now here's another thing.
One of the common lines rattled out by Kotaku in Action and pro-Gamergaters is this: "Where's the proof of harassment?".
They might want to take a look at what's trending on Twitter today, because it's writ large.
The hashtag #TrigglyPuff - dreamed up by members of 4Chan allegedly - has almost 12,000 tweets as I write this... and every single one of them is targeted at one individual.
The person in question is a US college major. She's gay, she's a feminist, and she was filmed losing it - literally screaming at the speakers (who included pro-Gamergater Milo Yiannopoulos) - at a university event discussing free speech and political correctness.
Bottom line: she doesn't appear to be particularly emotionally stable. She looks unhinged, and suffice to say, becoming a meme which labels her as a "white whale", "obnoxious lardo", "fatty mass" - and worse - is unlikely to help that.
It's disgusting, it's upsetting, and it rattles my faith in humanity. And it's exactly what anti-Gamergaters are against; they rightly see that as abuse and bullying - frankly, would any of us want to be her today?
There's certain chaotic contingent, many of whom appear to identify as pro-GG (or, at least, "anti-SJW"), responsible for promoting that hashtag who see their target as deserving of their abuse because... what... she shouted at one of the movement's most high profile proponents at a rally? Or is it because she's a feminist, a woman, and she's overweight? And they're bullying for the sake of bullying - for the reasons every bully does; to feel powerful and in control?
Either way, she seems to me like someone who'd benefit from a little empathy and compassion, not a concerted attempt to destroy her. It took me close to seven years to feel I'd recovered from the grief I got online, and I never had anything as bad as she's received in the last 24 hours. What has happened will probably stay with her for the rest of her life.
It's an issue... because, again, I think the non-abusive element of the pro-Gamergate movement is capable of making some valid points about media bias - and that message does get obscured by, ironically, media bias. But equally, the anti-Gamergate side has a noble reason for existing - resisting the sort of wholesale abuse that this person has been receiving.
MY ISSUE
Neither side in Gamergate actually helps themselves.
There are undoubtedly individuals who have sincere intentions - in the last few weeks I've spoken with anti-Gamergaters and pro-Gamergaters alike, who come across like reasonable, rational individuals.
People who, I honestly believe, would get along fine if you sat them down in a pub together for a chat. I think I understand now what they're both fighting for.
Unfortunately, their figureheads, the most visible individuals who are the public faces of the movements, are unstable and damaging to their message. The likes of Zoe Quinn and Randi Lee Harper are bloody awful representatives of anti-Gamergate. Too quick to play the victim card, too quick to bully, too inflexible, too ready to leap to conclusions about their evil opponents.
And likewise, high-profile pro-Gamergaters such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Ethan Ralph - who conducted a couple of what seemed like decent interviews with Candace Owens - manage to undermine their own message with abusive language, or by encouraging harassment (I mean, Yiannopoulos did his upmost to ensure #TrigglyPuff got trending).
And then when you throw the mobs in there - that chaotic drone mentality, rallying behind the loudest voices - and it becomes impossible. Any more moderate message gets obscured by harassment, abuse, oversensitivity, and, frankly, those who absolutely adhere to the negative impression the other side has of them... whether it's knee-jerk political correctness and bullying, or rampant misogyny and bullying.
When I started looking into Gamergate it was because I realised I didn't understand it. I'd blindly swallowed one version of the story, without even thinking to dig deeper. I now know that it's more complex and multilayered than I could've realised... while simultaneously being quite simple, and easy to break down. Both sides are equally right and equally wrong, like opposing, evenly balanced forces in a real-time strategy game.
I'm now at a point, frankly, where I'm almost resigned to the push-and-pull drama of it.
Because we all love a bit of that, eh?
Neither side in Gamergate actually helps themselves.
There are undoubtedly individuals who have sincere intentions - in the last few weeks I've spoken with anti-Gamergaters and pro-Gamergaters alike, who come across like reasonable, rational individuals.
People who, I honestly believe, would get along fine if you sat them down in a pub together for a chat. I think I understand now what they're both fighting for.
Unfortunately, their figureheads, the most visible individuals who are the public faces of the movements, are unstable and damaging to their message. The likes of Zoe Quinn and Randi Lee Harper are bloody awful representatives of anti-Gamergate. Too quick to play the victim card, too quick to bully, too inflexible, too ready to leap to conclusions about their evil opponents.
And likewise, high-profile pro-Gamergaters such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Ethan Ralph - who conducted a couple of what seemed like decent interviews with Candace Owens - manage to undermine their own message with abusive language, or by encouraging harassment (I mean, Yiannopoulos did his upmost to ensure #TrigglyPuff got trending).
And then when you throw the mobs in there - that chaotic drone mentality, rallying behind the loudest voices - and it becomes impossible. Any more moderate message gets obscured by harassment, abuse, oversensitivity, and, frankly, those who absolutely adhere to the negative impression the other side has of them... whether it's knee-jerk political correctness and bullying, or rampant misogyny and bullying.
When I started looking into Gamergate it was because I realised I didn't understand it. I'd blindly swallowed one version of the story, without even thinking to dig deeper. I now know that it's more complex and multilayered than I could've realised... while simultaneously being quite simple, and easy to break down. Both sides are equally right and equally wrong, like opposing, evenly balanced forces in a real-time strategy game.
I'm now at a point, frankly, where I'm almost resigned to the push-and-pull drama of it.
Because we all love a bit of that, eh?
RSS Feed
