Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Regen

Why do so many people hate Zoe Quinn?

Recommended Posts

This is something I've been thinking about a long time and I've never really had a chance to talk about it. Why does everyone hate Zoe Quinn, like, I don't get it? I see they are making a movie on her life and so many people on the internet are outraged that they dare make a movie about her like she's some kind of evil entity. I could understand how someone could think it's sensationalist and commerce-driven on a topical issue, but actual fury over it? What the fuck? People often compare her to Anita Sarkeesian but they are nothing like each other in what they do. Anita is a feminist critic and whilst I think it's stupid that everyone is going bananas over her I can actually understand how overly-sensitive fanboys/fangirls would dislike her for it. It's totally fucking stupid and the hatred for her is laughably disproportionate, but okay, I can get it. But I don't understand why so many hate Zoe Quinn, she's just a random indie developer. Am I missing something?

From what I know, people are concerned because her friends were involved in promoting her game. Why is this an issue? No really, when do people care about ethics in gaming journalism aside from this case? Why are none of these people talking about other ethical issues in gaming journalism, like exclusive reviews, embargoes, gifts from publishers e.t.c.. Why do people in these cases not get such vitriolic hatred? So yeah, I don't think that holds any water, because the people who hate Zoe Quinn don't even care when any other ethical issues happen in gaming journalism. And even if she did use nepotism for publicity, so? I don't get it, who cares. Why do so many people on the internet lose their fucking shit over it? It's murky and unethical, sure, but does it warrant fucking hatred? I don't think so.

Then there's the other issue, that's she's a slut or something. Again, who the fuck cares? The evidence is piss-poor, because it's basically revenge porn from a very angry ex-boyfriend, so it's not very reliable information. But even if it is true, who cares? Really, if she slept with fity billion men like some kind of cartoon villain what business is it of yours? Because it's unethical business practice? Well I've already gone over why that's complete bollocks.

Is there anyone here who can tell me why so many people dislike Quinn, what has she actually done that's bad? Because unless I hear a genuine reason why everyone loses their shit over her I'm just going to have to conclude that the online gaming community has a massive problem with misogyny and that's really sad.

 

Edited by Regen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general consensus is that Zoe Quinn often whines about her "constant bullying". From a standpoint of say, me, her voice could be a voice I don't want the UN to interpret. I don't actually "dislike" her, but I am upset at the fact that both her and Anita (Who constantly whine about their "bullying" and want to make a female problem when it's really a problem that everybody deals with on the internet) were actually the voices of this situation to the UN. Not a reasonable person who doesn't have a clear bias or someone who actually knows what the fuck they are talking about.

I guess the spark was when she made a game (That imo was inaccurate about Depression), got a lot of press and basically got the internet trying to figure out what's up. Then they found out what's up and that caused a angry mob to get at her.

Edited by Kaze no Klonoa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a standpoint of say, me, her voice could be a voice I don't want the UN to interpret. 

There's plenty of voices that I don't want the UN to interpret, why is it only a problem when it's Zoe Quinn? Again, why does nobody care about all the other people unethical in journalism and why does nobody care about all the other 'corrupt' UN officials?

but I am upset at the fact that both her and Anita (Who constantly whine about their "bullying" and want to make a female problem when it's really a problem that everybody deals with on the internet)

Is it? I hear this a lot, but does everybody else really get the same kind of harassment as those two? Which examples could you use who get constant doxing, leaking of personal details, genuine death threats along the lines of someone saying "I'm going to go to this University speech you are actually going to be giving on this date and shoot you" and the rest of the works. Who else gets those kind of threats outside the unpopular proclaimed feminazis? I'm not talking about the common trolls everyone gets, the kind who say "Lol I'm going to rape and kill you", but the more serious stuff. Even people like Jack Thompson, who everyone hated about 7 years ago, didn't get that kind of harassment. 

Edited by Regen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They hate her because shes wanting to change video games to include women and girls. I mean... ewww get those icky women and girls out of our boys club. They have cooootieeeeesssssss

Seriously though its this mindset where if someone criques something you love then you must be wrong for loving it so the backlash. I have people before get angry with me for no reason when I say to them I am vegan. To them it means that I think them eating meat is wrong so they are wrong as people. Same goes for here. 

Edited by Sonikku.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I recently came across this, and it seems to explain well enough why people despise her:

Now, I'm not entirely sure how accurate this video is, so feel free to point out any bull shit this video may contain. I'm open to learning about the subject because I too am a little curious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I recently came across this, and it seems to explain well enough why people despise her:

Now, I'm not entirely sure how accurate this video is, so feel free to point out any bull shit this video may contain. I'm open to learning about the subject because I too am a little curious. 

Okay, 2 minutes in and we already have something astonishingly stupid. Why are we just believing the words of an angry ex boyfriend without questioning it at all? This ex boyfriend posted her nudes on the internet, he's clearly a fucking chump, why are we just taking his side of the story and not questioning any of it, like the fact he has a fucking agenda because he's an angry ex? I'm not saying everything he says is a lie, maybe some of it is true, but the idea he's some truth-teller is fucking hilarious.

And even if this is true, who the fuck cares? He calls it a 'low point in journalism', what, an obscure indie game developer no one's heard of sleeping her way to the top like a cartoon villain. Like I've said before above, there's way worse stuff that happens in the gaming industry that no one gives a fuck about.

I'll see how much more of this I can sit through, but I'm not promising anything.

He's comparing her affair, an individual indie game, to Fox News being bribed with money. This guy is a fucking comedian.

As for the game being unusually boring to get on Greenlight (which is really fucking subjective) but got on because of her evil feminazi brainwashing ways, uhh no. Loads of fucking awful games get on Greenlight. Her game isn't even that terrible for Greenlight. As far as I'm aware, her game wasn't even a hit. So what is he going on about. Nonsense.

I've watched ten minutes of this awful video and, sorry, but I'm not going to watch almost 2 hours of it, I'm busy. If there's a shorter and more concise video I would consider watching it. As far as I'm aware, he's either a misogynist in denial who's just looking for reasons to single her out or he's a legitimate moron who doesn't know or care that the Zoe Quinn event, which lies on dodgy as fuck evidence, is tiny in the realms of corruption in the wider spectrum of videogame journalism.

Edited by Regen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I really have a say at this? I have problems with both her and Sarkeesian, as well as people involved with Gamergate and the retards who threatened her.

Sarkeesian is just a mysandric girl trying to bend the gaming world to her will at my viewpoint, not because of Gamergate, but because of her attitude. I don't know about Quinn, but to me it seems she started the entire decadence spiral caused by her debate, that ex of hers and the Gamergate shit that actually became a symbol for mysoginy and discrimination among gamers.

Simpler version: I don't like Quinn, I don't like Sarkeesian, and I sure never liked those Gamergate chumps who actually caused this retard shitstorm that got those two into the UN. (I mean, seriously? Hack them, expose their addresses and threaten them with death? Those retards have just gone extremist muslim on them. I may not like the girls, but shit, man. This is a rock-bottom at any human standard imaginable.)

Those women are not representatives of women's rights in my opinion, they are only representative of themselves and their egoistical view of things.

I don't even know why I'm sayng this. Discussions about Gamergate or those girls will always end in some shitstorm for what I've already seen on Internet.

Edited by ZDozer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarkeesian likes to invent neeldess shit like "control schemes for women" and such. I don't know why in the fuck would women need a different control scheme for the same game, or a different controller, or a different anything for any game. I can understand games made for women, but entire settings and configuration? Why would women need an entire separate set of controllers, commands and such? It's like implying they don't have the same gaming abilities as a man and I think that would be bullshit. Sarkeesian talks like she knows about videogames, but truth be told, her mind looks like she never has put her hand on any console. Like "I don't like that controller, change the aesthetics so it appeases me". And that's just one case where she punched her nose into something she doesn't know.

Also, for what I know, anyone could say that he's advocating for anyone's right when they are actually bending shit into their own will. I believe that's Sarkeesian's case: she uses the feminist banner to gain power for herself, not for others.

Edited by ZDozer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarkeesian likes to invent neeldess shit like "control schemes for women" and such.

She's never wanted a different control scheme for Mirror's Edge, it was a troll account that was pretending to be her. She's said publically that she's never said such a thing and that obviously it's ridiculous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah8mhDW6Shs&ab_channel=XOXOFestival

From 6:30

Edited by Regen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My views on the Gamergate situation tend to fluctuate, so I can't really seem to comment with her involvement there.

However, I did have a big issue with her and Anita going to the UN and proposing that the Internet should be censored because to her, disagreeing with women online is apparently harassment and misogynistic. Anita whined about people on forums saying she "sucks," but the last time I checked there's a fine difference between harassment and criticism. Don't get me wrong, both of these women are harassed constantly, but saying the Internet should censor negative opinions about her is just absolutely insane. Their voices don't represent all women, and their overall desire for political correctness is what makes me dislike them both.

Edited by MugiMikey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, one thing is feminism, the completely different thing is what those girls do.

Thank God I checked about that Mirror's Edge: Catalyst rumor about her being at the team and getting to know it was fake.

Nonetheless, it doesn't change the fact that I don't like her. I said it once and I'll say it again, she doesn't represent feminism, she's in it only for herself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why I and many others don't like both of them is because their upset over idiots "bullying them" are hurting the integrity of games themselves. In particular, I absolutely can't stand Anita simply because her whole series revolves mainly around blaming games for "being inoffensive to female figures". She does not know what she's talking about and she never will. Zoe Quinn on another hand is a game developer that's controversy set gaming journalism back by years. The amount of threats towards them are coming from idiots and I personally can't stand anybody receiving such hate, but both of them are figures that I do not want video games to be synonymous with.

And regarding the UN thing, this political cartoon sums up exactly what happened

UN-e1443714120772.png?resize=1280%2C1070

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Zoe Quinn on another hand is a game developer that's controversy set gaming journalism back by years.

How? I hear a lot of bold statements thrown around by people, but Zoe Quinn is an insignificant indie developer. Do you really think any murky ethics she was part of stacks up to the AAA publishers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was commenting on her involvement at the UN, in which both her Anita were in on together. Also, your question went unaddressed: 

When has Sarkeesian said anything misandrist? 


"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."


"Not a coincidence it’s always men and boys committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of toxic masculinity in our culture."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why I and many others don't like both of them is because their upset over idiots "bullying them" are hurting the integrity of games themselves. In particular, I absolutely can't stand Anita simply because her whole series revolves mainly around blaming games for "being inoffensive to female figures". She does not know what she's talking about and she never will. Zoe Quinn on another hand is a game developer that's controversy set gaming journalism back by years. The amount of threats towards them are coming from idiots and I personally can't stand anybody receiving such hate, but both of them are figures that I do not want video games to be synonymous with.

And regarding the UN thing, this political cartoon sums up exactly what happened

Hidden Content

Hey I respect you but I have to disagree.

No one is blaming video games but shes right video games are a little part of what help to shape society. So when games say its OK its OK to focrce yourself on women its actually reflects on real life situations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was commenting on her involvement at the UN, in which both her Anita were in on together. Also, your question went unaddressed: 

"We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings."


"Not a coincidence it’s always men and boys committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of toxic masculinity in our culture."

She's talking about masculinity as a gender construct and how masculinity in society is artificially toxic and that it needs to be dealt with. I completely disagree, it's the only extreme position that she holds as far as I'm aware but it's not misandrist, because she's blaming artificial masculinity she believes boys are indoctrinated with rather than it's in their male nature.

Edited by Regen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I respect you but I have to disagree.

No one is blaming video games but shes right video games are a little part of what help to shape society. So when games say its OK its OK to focrce yourself on women its actually reflects on real life situations. 

Video Games do shape society, but the whole concept of the show is that these video games are damaging and offensive to women. Something that really isn't true.

How? I hear a lot of bold statements thrown around by people, but Zoe Quinn is an insignificant indie developer. Do you really think any murky ethics she was part of stacks up to the AAA publishers?

https://thezoepost.wordpress.com/

This whole post made by her ex-boyfriend arguably started the whole thing. This happened shortly after she released Depression Quest, which was getting a lot of news at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already explained why I find that evidence as unreliable as fuck.

The evidence is right up there, and that's Zoe Quinn's reaction to the angry mobs from the whole thing. Listen, I don't give a shit whatever or not it's true but if what you're doing is going on UN and claiming that this is a female's problem and that the internet should be censored for it, then don't work on games. Be like Phil Fish and just step out while you still can. Again, I don't dislike her (as she has some credibility as a game developer), but the fact is people don't want her to be up at the UN. They don't want the whining of these two figures that are discrediting the real problem to be up there. Whatever or not being a asshole and giving death threats does anything, well yeah. The Quinn incident became big because it was from a game developer that a lot of people knew about because of her game. Anita just straight-up has no idea what the fuck she's talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's talking about masculinity as a gender construct and how masculinity in society is artificially toxic and that it needs to be dealt with. I completely disagree, it's the only extreme position that she holds as far as I'm aware but it's not misandrist, because she's blaming artificial masculinity she believes boys are indoctrinated with rather than it's in their male nature.

I find the hypocrisy interesting; if you were to say "it's no wonder girls and women (insert politically incorrect opinion here)," even if it's true, SJWs and people like Anita would be quick to label you a misogynist and "part of the problem." It's exactly things like that on the Internet that Anita and Zoe want to censor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the hypocrisy interesting; if you were to say "it's no wonder girls and women (insert politically incorrect opinion here)," even if it's true, SJWs and people like Anita would be quick to label you a misogynist and "part of the problem." It's exactly things like that on the Internet that Anita and Zoe want to censor.

On a conceptual level, it's really not.  The feminist movement literally started out and continues to call out arbitrary femininity when we call out things like, "This woman wearing jeans is unfeminine," and other social factors that prohibit us from excelling in certain fields because they don't match the image of what society associates with "girl."  That is the same thing they're doing with masculinity, calling out the arbitrary stupid things that people say and do that limit the freedoms and quality of life of people because it doesn't align with the socially-constructed image of "boy."  (Think: "Pink sprinkles will make my son gay" style of thinking.)  It's not hypocrisy when executed correctly (though I'm not sure that Zoe or Anita execute it correctly at all), and especially if you want to ignore the social constructs that make the two scenarios different on a connotational level in the first place.  The difference is that a woman foregoing a traditionally "feminine" lifestyle in favor of what is typically associated with men is seen as a revolutionary diversion of gender roles, while the reverse is met with jeers and harassment more often than not.  It's the idea that rather you're a man or a woman, the arbitrary concept of "masculinity" is the default desired role, as opposed to letting men, women, and any other gender identity in between find happiness in whatever they pursue, which is why masculinity in particular gets called out and why I think Anita is referring to people who put on an overtly-masculine facade to compensate for this societal shortcoming, rather than suggesting that men are just deceived into enjoying what they enjoy.

Edited by Tara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.