Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:Conclusion not supported by given evidence (Score 1) 181

None of your data support your argument that this is a problem though. What if women just aren't majorly interested in programming in IT, just like it seems men are less interested in daycare work ?

What barriers do you perceive for women in IT/Programming ? Because I see none. I see a bunch of folks dumping a lot of good money into "fixing" it though, so I guess there's good money to be made in pretending there is a problem.

Comment Re:Drama is coming. (Score 1) 90

No no no, you got it wrong. Now I can post videos of my Bros, doing Bro-y things so that other Bros can like it, and "high five" comment it, without any women being forced at gun point to watch and then make a Facebook rant about how Bros will be Bros and how they should all be jailed 5 miles underground for it.

Because "if you don't like it, don't watch it" is literally impossible you know.

Comment Re:If race doesn't exist, how is this possible? (Score 1) 312

I thought the narrative was that race doesn't exist?

You have to understand who you're dealing with in these articles. The narrative is the EXACT opposite of "egalitarianism" or "humanism". The people posting these things are Snake-oil salesmen and their business is to sell on you on their Identity Politics as hard as they can.

To them, Humanism (one race) and Egalitarianism is like rat poison. The very basis of those idealogies runs completely contrary to Identity Politics, by virtue of not recognizing Race, Gender, Sex, Religion or any other "minority oppression points" someone may have.

Except Class. Identity politics idealogues, being mostly American slackitivists running on Trust funds don't recognize class inequality, and will call you "basement dwelling" or "low rent tenant" as an insult.

The narrative is anything that can get them preferrential treatment for a given characteristic they possess and that you do not. Oh and they can be bigots against you, because supposedly, you're the one oppressing them, with your basement dwelling 6$ an hour job, while they throw slurs at you from their cushy San Fran housing, paid for by Rich Daddy/Mommy money.

Comment Re:THANK YOU For Being an Inspiration! (Score 1) 727

How many ex-boyfriends do you know of, even ones with actually awful ex-girlfriends, pen an online screed designed to create a hate mob? How many?

Not many, because of attitudes and people like you, who instead of listening to them, and maybe looking into the situation, automatically accuses the male side of Misogyny and Hate, just for denouncing abuse performed by an ex-girlfriend.

Ever thought you might be the one preventing the voice of abused men to actually talk about their experience by labelling them as vile, sub-humans ? Because nothing makes a victim feel better than that amiright ?

Comment Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score 1) 467

Late to replying, but you're a bit wrong about SRD. It's Sub Reddit Drama, not Shit Reddit Does for one, and is the same crowd or thereabouts that uses SRS.

I've never seen "SRD" used to refer to Shit Reddit Does (which is as you described), only to refer to Sub Reddit Drama, which I invite you to peruse to see I wasn't wrong.

Comment Re:That's it (Score 1) 727

You mean the comments by AmiJoJo and narcc, which are replying to about everything trying to do damage control ?

I have a question for Mr./Mrs Wu : How much are you paying these guys, either in money or through other more basic needs, in order to get them to defend you so fiercely, and if not, what do you think of White Knights and do they have the chance of making your husband into a cuck or not ?

Comment Re:You have got to be kidding me (Score 1) 727

Conspiracy theories and unfounded accusations repeated over and over again in an attempt to disrupt a person's life is harassment.

Like calling large swats of people "Misogynists" because they disagree with women ? Because that's an unfounded accusation levied way to easily these days and has disrupted the life of many people for the only crime of not trusting a woman's or male feminist's words without proof.

Comment Re:You have got to be kidding me (Score 1) 727

Use facts that can be proven. Leave faith to religions.

Women are not anymore or less "believed" or "not believed" than men. Humans in general are believed when they are using proven or provable facts. They are also "believed" when they build credibility based on a history of using such facts and truths in their discourse. This particular human being has not been truthful, thus her credibility is in the pits.

This has no link to gender. It's not about gender. People that make it about gender want to shield a specific class of citizen from criticism.

The better question is : why should women be about to lie and distort the truth and not be criticized for it ? Answer that, Mr. Internet Feminist.

Comment Re:Well, she was an interim. (Score 5, Insightful) 467

Nope, SRS and SRD are still there and engaging in harassement as they usually do. So she didn't even manage to clamp down on harassing subreddits.

Don't mistake what the FPH ban was : a political move to gain mainstream political correctness point in the eyes of the HAES and FA movements. Remember : 70% of americans are now overweight (source : It pays to cater to the majority.

If the goal was banning harassment, FPH was not the subreddit to ban. For the most part, they were simply keeping to their own dark corner and doing their thing amongst themselves. You had to go out of your way to "get harassed", by visiting the subreddit while fat and looking for pictures of yourself. Or worse: submitting your pictures in an attempt to get attention.

You just bought the media narrative hook, line and sinker.

Comment Re:Its because she refused to censor a question (Score 2) 385

Bluntly stated, such a question can't possibly be "loaded".

You can judge for yourself if the question was or not loaded :

Yes, that was the actual question. Didn't seem to phase Rev. Jackson who just offered a non-reply.

Comment Re:Pao Wants "Safe Spaces" for Shills and Ideologu (Score 2) 385

The main target seems to have been GameJournosPro and Leigh Alexander who wrote the basis of what was the "Gamers don't have to be your audience anymore" piece, which came as an answer to gamers asking why journalists were not covering TFYC incident, after it came out that the person responsible for that had had positive coverage by a journalist whom she was in a relationship with.

The banning and deletion of discussion on these issues really didn't help. seems very journalist focused too.

Comment Re:Tired of gamer gate people (Score 1) 385

It would be nice to talk about genders in gaming, without all the faked outrage. I mean, you realise that Anita is just a massive troll right ? Her E3 "1 outrage every minute" type posting was clear as day. I'd like a discussion about actual gender in gaming, and how gaming has always been open to both genders, but still has failed to draw women in further than casual games (my mother was a big fan of Doctor Mario and Tetris for one thing). Even though we had great women designing games like Roberta Williams, and even female protagonists as early as the 80s (Laura Bow anyone ?) : I think Anita doesn't help any. In fact, polarizing the debate, and making it about "either you agree there's an issue or you're a misogynist" doesn't help anything.

Comment Re:Indeed (Score 2) 385

I've never heard of either of these people, nor are they mentioned in my post.

You talked about Gamergate no ? From researching this stuff, I have found both to have been prominent Gamergate figures. So are you admitting you do not have all relevant information about the Gamergate campaign ?

I suggest more research before you continue discussion on the matter, because it's now apparent you're ill informed.

This is a piece Oliver wrote last year about this topic :

What the ever loving fuck are you talking about? Or is this a #notyourshield troll?

What ? What's "notyourshield" ? Guess it's other stuff I gotta look up.

Oh well, chatting with you is nice, I get to uncover a lot of things digging around following your posts. It seems this Notyourshield thing is exactly against what you seem to be doing here : dismissing women and minorities because they agree with Gamergate. Pretending they don't exist and erase them.

My question becomes, what do you have against women and minorities that hold different world view than you do that you would go to such length as to completely deny their existence ? I hope this is simply lack of information on your part, and not intolorence to people who disagree with you.

Comment Re:Indeed (Score 3, Interesting) 385

Plenty. You can start here.

The wikipedia article on this subject is rooted in controversy, up to the point that some of its editors were both topic and site banned from Wikipedia. At this point, no, I won't start with it as it's obviously not a neutral source.

we read what you write...
because you fuckers SHITPOST...
  you really are so stupid...

What's this YOU stuff ? Who are you talking to ? You're assuming things about me... for instance :

in your own words on 8chan, /r/KIA, and under the #gamergate hashtag.

I never visited the chan's, and have neither Twitter nor Reddit accounts. So those words can't be mine.

Now, let's review your list of allegations, all of which have no backing or evidence :

- Do everything possible to prevent discussions of women in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Where have you been prevented from discussing women in tech and how have you been prevented from doing so exactly ? I mean, if you try to inject "women in tech" in discussions unrelated to women, I could see how people would dismiss you and downvote you, but in actual discussions about women in tech ?

- Harass female game devs constantly, because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Do you have any evidence showing these female game devs were not harassed because of ethics in gaming journalism ? It seems the whole issue that launched this (outside of years of build up with things like Doritogate and other growing concerns) is the fact that Nathan Grayson wrote this favorable piece :

It seems to me that the issue people have is not that the developer is a woman, it's that Nathan Grayson (a man) used a screenshot to feature prominently the game of a person he had a personal relationship with, without disclosing said relationship. On top of that, it seems Nathan participated in making the game as his name is part of the credits, so essentially pushing his work.

Rather shoddy for a journalist.

- Talk non stop about so-called "SJWs" and never mention journalists. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Looking at one of Gamergate's projects,, all the listed journalists seem to in fact be journalists.

I mean, I could see where SJW (a pejorative term used for people who use Social Justice causes to label and attack other people, with little care to the actual cause itself) could be used to describe some more fringe "journalist" like Jessica Valenti of the Guardian, because some of her opinions are pretty extermist in nature (nothing to do with her gender before you draw the conclusion it's because she's a woman) though.

- Demand Slashdot ban discussions related to diversity in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Do you have a citation for Gamergate asking Slashdot (specifically) to not discuss diversity in tech ? Because Slashdot doesn't seem to have listened, we have diversity in Tech articles all the time.

- Call JACK THOMPSON "BASED DAD", a lawyer who has actually tried to ban games, while calling Anita Sarkeesian a "censor" or "authoritarian", because she produced a video identifying tropes she feels are sexist in various video games. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

I'll have to ask for a citation on this. In fact, looking at GamerGhazi's (which seem to be a group that opposes Gamergate) post about this situation, it seems that Gamergate equates Anita and Jack Thompson, not hold them to different standards :

Do you have a different citation ?

- Support the "journalism" of Milo Yiannopoulos, because he certainly has NOTHING to do with "ethics in (ANY) journalism" FFS.

I've read some of the Milo pieces, last one he did on Gamergate itself (in the headline) seems to be this one and it seems to be about bomb threats at a meet up people of Gamergate did, which coincided with strange comments on Twitter by a MAN (not a woman).

- Pretend a mass harassment campaign against prominent women in journalism is not going on, pretending instead it's some kind of fund raising stunt (even though it doesn't apparently help any of the targets that it's going on), because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Wait, women in journalism now ? I mean, looking again at their Deepfreeze stuff, there are a few women there, but they seem to be targetted for their behavior, not their gender, and are no more or less targetted than the men on that list.

Do you have evidence that show this targetting of women in particular, and evidence as to it being done because of their gender ? Are you suggesting women cannot be held to ethical standards, because of their gender ?

You seem to talk a lot about misogyny, you realise that means hatred of women because they are women right ? No disagreeing with someone who happens to be a woman ?

Just checking.

Don't be irreplaceable, if you can't be replaced, you can't be promoted.