Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Oct 2014 08:50 UTC

It's been another fantastic few days in the fabricated GamerGate terror campaign. This past weekend, female game developer Brianna Wu was forced to alert the police and leave her home, after receiving threats that she, her family, and possible children would face rape, mutilation, and death. Wu has vowed to not bow to the terrorist threats, and will continue to develop games.

Wu's ordeal was just the last in a long line of GamerGate terrorism, and yesterday we reached a new low.

Gaming critic Anita Sarkeesian was scheduled to hold a talk at Utah State University. However, GamerGate terrorists threatened to enact "the largest school shooting in American history" if the talk were to take place. The contents of the terrorist threat are horrific, and fit the general tone of GamerGate terrorism; threats of rape, murder, mutilation, the usual stuff, but now also with mass murder, automatic rifles, and pipe bombs.

Sadly, the GamerGate terrorists have won, because of concealed carry laws in Utah. Sarkeesian asked the police to perform pat-downs and check for firearms so she would not get murdered, but the police told her that if someone has a valid firearm permit for concealed carry, they are allowed to bring the weapons to the talk. As a result, Sarkeesian was forced to cancel the talk to ensure she and attendees would not get murdered.

And so, these people have successfully employed terrorism to stifle free speech. These GamerGate terrorist threats will continue, because sadly, there is very little that can be done to stop them. Sarkeesian - and several other women who have received terrorist threats from GamerGate supporters - have vowed to continue doing their work.

At this point, we're essentially just waiting for the first GamerGate supporter to murder someone. We like to think of terrorism as something done by outsiders, something imported from other countries or cultures. However, these GamerGate threats are just as much terrorism - we just hate calling it that because it hits too close to home.

Meanwhile, we're hearing very little - if nothing - from large game companies and distributors. These companies and distributors should, of course, take a stand against GamerGate terrorism, but they also know full well that they might lose business over it. So, they decide to shut up. Will it take an actual murder before they speak up?

Thread beginning with comment 598135
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Not sure
by mieses on Wed 15th Oct 2014 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Not sure"
Member since:

The chances of some unstable person acting out are higher because the media takes both sides seriously. Both sides are a joke and should be ignored or, at best, ridiculed. Thanks, media, for raising the level of discourse. Good job as usual. Now I'm off to visit your banner ad.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Not sure
by RobG on Sat 18th Oct 2014 00:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure"
RobG Member since:

Personally, I don't see what's ridiculous about campaigning to change the representation of women in games (or other media for that matter).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Not sure
by mieses on Sun 19th Oct 2014 05:31 in reply to "RE[3]: Not sure"
mieses Member since:

It's ridiculous because it's a path for ridiculous people. Changing the representation of others is easy and glamorous. Changing the substance of oneself is neither.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Not sure
by CaptainN- on Mon 20th Oct 2014 21:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Not sure"
CaptainN- Member since:

Ads here (and on most websites) are based on your own browsing habbits. For example, I recently bought some Zenni eye glasses, my wife searched for a bra, and I checked out some AI based web design platform. It's not surprising that I get ads for exactly those three things on just about every website.

So, if you are getting ads for - they are YOUR ads.

Reply Parent Score: 2