"Muslims are fundamentalist terrorists!" "That's not cool, not all muslims are like that." "Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"All black people take advantage of welfare!" "That's not cool, not all black people are like that." "Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"All feminists want female superiority, not equality!" "That's not cool, not all feminists are like that." "Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"Gamers are misogynists!" "That's not cool, not all gamers are like that." "Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
Which line of thinking is this? The open-minded, intelligent, loving person? Or the small minded bigot? This is hate speech, pure and simple. You have lowered yourself to the lowest of their camp and are pretending you are better for it even though the only improvement your argument exhibits over theirs is vocabulary.
I have agreed with most of the things you've said before, I have always supported Anita and Zoe and spoken out against mysoginy, written hundreds of e-mails and letters to developers that they should deal with the toxicity of some of their audience. And as someone like that, I can honestly say you have revealed yourself to not be worth listening to as much as those toxic players. It is just sad.
If I may point out, you are missing a crucial part of his opinion. From my understanding of reading his journals, the last line of all these dialogues you've listed is incomplete. The correct writing of these conversations should go as follows (insert whatever group and stereotype you'd like in the blanks):
"_____ are/do/want/etc ______!"
"That's not cool, not all _____ are like that."
"Are they doing anything to fix the issue? If not, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
The key part you didn't mention was "Are they doing anything to fix the issue?" If you do anything to try and fix the issue (in this case and the ones you mentioned, proving the stereotype wrong and combating those propagating the stereotype, without sinking to their level when possible), then you should not be held accountable for the toxic minority, nor labeled as such. However, as Tom has also mentioned (here and in the past on multiple occasions), the majority of news outlets and non-gamers (and a number of gamers in the personal experience, though that latter bit means little) will still label all gamers as such so long as what they see most of fits the stereotype; those who do not fit the stereotype will, at best, be called exceptions to the norm rather than an example of the norm.
If I may put in my own two cents here: It takes time for these issues, like any cultural issue, to be remedied. Those who try to remedy the situation are often bashed from all sides for practically any reason. That doesn't stop a remedy from being formed though; it only delays it, and angers everyone to ever-increasing levels until the solution is put into effect. This is just another issue, and it will be resolved once enough people take to remedying it. I would personally prefer to be solving this (and other) issues instead of insulting what others have said just because something about it (perhaps a lot of it) wasn't something you liked for any reason.
Your argument has some flaws there. Foremost you leave out ability for people in the group not part of the stereotype to take any sort of action to change the image. Which, I believe is the point of this journal.
How about this:
"Gamers are misogynists!" "That's not cool, not all gamers are like that." "Then why don't we ever hear about the ones that aren't?"
If all you ever see is one way of things being done, you think that's how it's done regardless. You need to SHOW people that there is something different out there, otherwise all they have to go on is a "not all ______" argument with nothing to back it up.
because no one cares about the ones that aren't. No one wants to read about them. And if anyone did, the ones that are still make more noise so they get more attention
Actually, my earlier post in the comment thread has clearly stated that I do this all the time. Which makes being lumped in with that filth more anger inducing. I am %100 sure I have done more to help than Tom has, in any case, as I have banned my fair share of of these people from forums I moderate and in duties as a community manager.
And if you're doing your part, all the better! But that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the world runs on generalizations, and if you call yourself a "Gamer" then to the outside world they think you're like the stories they have heard about. It's not fair, but it's still accurate.
Sta.sh
"Muslims are fundamentalist terrorists!"
"That's not cool, not all muslims are like that."
"Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"All black people take advantage of welfare!"
"That's not cool, not all black people are like that."
"Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"All feminists want female superiority, not equality!"
"That's not cool, not all feminists are like that."
"Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
"Gamers are misogynists!"
"That's not cool, not all gamers are like that."
"Well, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
Which line of thinking is this? The open-minded, intelligent, loving person? Or the small minded bigot? This is hate speech, pure and simple. You have lowered yourself to the lowest of their camp and are pretending you are better for it even though the only improvement your argument exhibits over theirs is vocabulary.
I have agreed with most of the things you've said before, I have always supported Anita and Zoe and spoken out against mysoginy, written hundreds of e-mails and letters to developers that they should deal with the toxicity of some of their audience. And as someone like that, I can honestly say you have revealed yourself to not be worth listening to as much as those toxic players. It is just sad.
Devious Comments
"_____ are/do/want/etc ______!"
"That's not cool, not all _____ are like that."
"Are they doing anything to fix the issue? If not, then they should be held accountable for being part of that group."
The key part you didn't mention was "Are they doing anything to fix the issue?" If you do anything to try and fix the issue (in this case and the ones you mentioned, proving the stereotype wrong and combating those propagating the stereotype, without sinking to their level when possible), then you should not be held accountable for the toxic minority, nor labeled as such. However, as Tom has also mentioned (here and in the past on multiple occasions), the majority of news outlets and non-gamers (and a number of gamers in the personal experience, though that latter bit means little) will still label all gamers as such so long as what they see most of fits the stereotype; those who do not fit the stereotype will, at best, be called exceptions to the norm rather than an example of the norm.
If I may put in my own two cents here: It takes time for these issues, like any cultural issue, to be remedied. Those who try to remedy the situation are often bashed from all sides for practically any reason. That doesn't stop a remedy from being formed though; it only delays it, and angers everyone to ever-increasing levels until the solution is put into effect. This is just another issue, and it will be resolved once enough people take to remedying it. I would personally prefer to be solving this (and other) issues instead of insulting what others have said just because something about it (perhaps a lot of it) wasn't something you liked for any reason.
How about this:
"Gamers are misogynists!"
"That's not cool, not all gamers are like that."
"Then why don't we ever hear about the ones that aren't?"
If all you ever see is one way of things being done, you think that's how it's done regardless. You need to SHOW people that there is something different out there, otherwise all they have to go on is a "not all ______" argument with nothing to back it up.
Consider this a call to action, not a put-down.