Insane Difficulty: Why Do Girl Gamers Seek Attention? Awesome Response - Insane Difficulty

Quote

Assuming money is everything... Or that money means a lot to other people as well.

IMHO, money ruins a lot of great things. This is a good example.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

By that logic, you could say that you respect crack dealers because they fit in a niche in society and there are people who want their crack so it must be okay for them to make money off of it. The people who would watch this are unknowingly wasting their time on trite BS when they could possibly find a more fulfilling experience in the gaming community.

I would agree that alone she isn't that big of a deal, but she's not. She's part of a much bigger trend I've been noticing that's been designed specifically to take advantage of a community that's been marked as anti-social and awkward and is being perpetuated as such. I want my community to be comprised of people I can respect and call friends or rivals, and I refuse to write them off and let them be taken advantage of by the metaphorical pimps and dealers who would treat them poorly.

Archael, on 19 January 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

Agreed, I'm not trying to push it on people of course, just putting a bit of a different perspective out there. I would say though that the value of respecting her as a gamer is only important to us(people ingrained in the gaming culture) and not many others. We want to have powerful people in our community that display a good image but we have to realize that we are talking about a niche culture here. This isn't like women's rights where fighting for the government to respect that is something that impacts over half our population. In the end I think its important to realize that the impact probably isn't as big in the grand scheme of things, its more likely that we just don't like it and want to do something about it or at least speak our piece.

Gaming has different levels. Over 20,000,000 people find Pewdiepie entertaining although I don't know how much of a service he does for games when compared to someone like Sheever, because the focus of his content is not gaming as much as it is comedy and entertainment. I would argue to a lesser extent that with Kaycetron she is targeting a good demographic and although she does game she is trying to entertain and feed the needs of people who are looking for what she gives.

All of this is just really dragging it on though because why should we really care if Kaycetron isn't what we want her to be? I didn't even know she existed before and I felt just fine as a gamer. Now that I know she does I feel just the same. The people like Sheever who do a much bigger service are still making their mark. Its just not that big of a deal imo.

Abaddon, on 19 January 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

That comparison is a bit extreme, isn't it? You can't compare what she is doing to dealing crack. It has nowhere near a speck of the impact. Furthermore, it is their money to do with what they want and its not our responsibility to look out for grown adults who make a decision to donate money to someone. Your community is still the same and it would still be the same even if she didn't exist because those people who gave her the money would still be who they were. I would also say you probably wouldn't even associate with the type of people(I hate even saying that because honestly we are generalizing way too far at this point) who did give her money, so you wouldn't even know the difference.

How do we even know how the people that donate to her perceive her? What if to them she is a legitimate gamer? But again, none of those things are that important because if we didn't know she was around our lives would go on a usual because she is only making an impact on you and others who don't like it. I don't feel she is actually making a contribution to gaming as a whole that is very significant.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

That doesn't matter. Just because someone is fitting a niche and there are people who use their service, doesn't mean they deserve respect. That's just butchering the word.

quadpolar, on 19 January 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

Its not really that simple, but I will just say that there are different kids and levels of respect. You can put whichever amount of whatever kind you feel is appropriate to her. That is your right and I wouldn't begrudge you for it the same way I wouldn't anyone else.

My vibe that I am getting is that many of us hold what we have as gamers sacred and don't want others to make a bad name for it. The thing is that we still have that, and her showing her tits and getting money for it doesn't really impact that, does it? It just upsets us because we don't want to have people associate that with us, and I get that. But the people who actually would do that(associate her with games or gamer girls) aren't people you would want in your circle anyway.

You wouldn't respect those guys that gave her the money either I imagine. Now you know who they are so its alot easier to weed out who you don't want to associate with, right? And through all of this our lives still go on and we still love games and the people who we can talk about them with. None of that has changed so again I don't see how this is really that big of a deal.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

Hah, no. Respect is a very powerful concept, and one that I personally give out very rarely. This creature has done nothing whatsoever to garner my respect.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:06 PM, said:

It is really that simple. That's like saying "Hitler deserves respect because his books fill a niche."

What you are doing is overcomplicating the issue. Who she is, as a person, is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. And for the sanctity of my earlier post, I'm going to maintain that everything I'm saying is not directed towards her because I haven't seen her stuff.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:06 PM, said:

Yes it does, actually. It cheapens it.

What you're missing is that it is the broad perception that matters. If I have those in my given subculture that cause those of us that enjoy what we do to be lumped in with that cancer, I'm going to do whatever I can within reason to cut them off like the diseased limb they are. You cut the disease out before it infects the whole. It's not that difficult to understand.

Is that an extreme example? Yes, but no matter how extreme that sounds, that is what happens in every subculture. That's what happened when World War 2 started with the Japanese (it might be Asians as a whole; I'm not too sure) in America.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:06 PM, said:

I wouldn't, no. But this has its roots in the larger issue of society. If everyone was this complacent, before long this cancerous ideology (the "fake" person's ideology) would have a firm foothold in any given subculture. It's survival, in a way.


Edit: I didn't see this earlier, so I'll just stick it at the end of this post..

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

Uhh.. yes. Yes, it is. We're talking about the idea, not the person. Kaceytron is nothing more than the personification of that idea. The idea of what I described earlier as "fake" is far more destructive than crack has ever been. It is nothing less than a cancer on our society.

Furthermore, Abaddon wasn't speaking literally. I think it's apparent to everyone here that he was using an analogy to describe the idea behind it.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

Who the fuck cares? Why does it matter what those people are thinking? What difference does it make how they perceive her in that one instance?

This post has been edited by Advent: 19 January 2014 - 02:30 PM

FFTA, on 19 January 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

Again, this is putting things at another extreme. Money in a sense means alot because we have to have it to survive. There is nothing wrong with prioritizing making as much money as you possibly can(through legal means) and there are alot of advantages to this, long term mostly. There are different ways of making money and the way she is making it isn't illegal, unlike the crack example, which is one reason why it isn't a great comparison.

Money should mean a lot to you unless your goal isn't to strive to live a comfortable life. I mean she could quit what she was doing at work at lets say McDonalds for example but why would she ever do that? Why intentionally sacrifice your quality of life? Of course if you are doing something illegal that would be good incentive to quit what you are doing. Furthermore, what is she actually ruining besides others egos when it comes to what they feel gaming should be represented as?

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:32 PM, said:

The crack example is perfectly valid. You're just focusing on the delivery instead of the message itself.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:32 PM, said:

So, from what you're saying, Capcom and Square Enix are amazing companies that deserve our respect as gamers?

Advent, simply put can you describe to me what she is actually doing that is harmful to society in any way? Or is the argument going to be that she is poisoning gaming? What is she actually doing that is wrong besides doing something you don't like? This is as simple as I can put it because I don't think she is making the impact that everyone is claiming.

Advent, on 19 January 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

They deserve respect for having a business model that is successful(and legal), but the argument for respect as gamers is up for interpretation. Don't forget those companies made many games that we love and still love. The goals of the companies have shifted over the years of course but in the end it up to us how we decide to handle that. We are fighting a losing battle because we are a small subculture of gaming. We aren't the larger mainstream they are marketing towards.

Its up to you and others as consumers how handle your relationship with those companies and I wouldn't blame you for disrespecting their direction. I don't blame you for disrespecting Kaceytron with regards to how you may feel she doesn't represent gamers or for that matter whatever she does that you don't like, but I personally at least respect her for having a successful model to make money and moreover because she is a human and I would think has no intentions of harming anyone. There is a clear distinction between different types of respect imo.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

Why do you still use your made up definitions when it was shown that they are wrong? It simply adds nothing but confusion.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Dude, I already explained it perfectly. This kind of ideology is cancerous because it creates and perpetuates an already growing trend. Many trends, actually.

She is subverting an entire subculture in order to profit from it.

If you want to say that's not hurting anyone, then that's your opinion. If by that you mean like physically hurting someone immediately, then you're right. But that's not what anyone is talking about here. You have been addressing and arguing against a point that no one here has been trying to argue since the beginning.

I am a gamer. All of us are. I do not want people who are not gamers -- people who enjoy playing these games, going in depth on them, challenging themselves, etc -- to have that label. For someone to take something that is very much a part of me and monetize it without actually being a part of that subculture is something that I reject on every premise. It is an insult to who I am, and what I stand for.

If I went and tried to start a Facebook page about cows and monetize it in some way, I would be the same as the people I'm talking about right now. The argument isn't that she's poisoning gaming, it's that she is subverting an entire subculture and manipulating it for her own ends when she is not even a part of it.

To be honest, I find these kinds of people to be an infection, no matter what subculture they're in. It's like someone going into politics so that they can get bribed by a big company or something to vote a certain way. The entire ideology that provokes that train of thought is absolutely disgusting.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

It doesn't matter if you think they are or not. They are, and to be honest I don't think every subculture in the history of the human race would have this instinct of rooting out pretenders if I was wrong.

You are viewing this in a binary way without any thought whatsoever for anything beyond it, which is why you can't see what everyone else has been saying.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

You can continue to respect her for something that has never been and will never be the issue at hand in this thread. That is something that is completely beside the point, and if you would like to respect her for that, that is just fine.

Furthermore, this entire thread has, again, been about the ideology that provokes these actions not Kaceytron herself.

Advent, on 19 January 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

I feel you are giving her way too much credit here. It is understandable to feel that way though for something you are passionate about and I don't argue against that at all, but I am more or less saying that although you may feel that way I don't actually think it is having an impact on gaming as a whole, instead it is only having that impact on you. I am just trying to step back and say that we will still be who we are even she exists, and the people who are as passionate about gaming can still be that way because we are already in a minority and have existed that way for quite some time, and the stupid people that are out there were always out there, now you just know who they are.

Advent, on 19 January 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

I do see what you are saying and again I understand and I am not against you for feeling that way because I have felt that way about gaming as well in the past but I just don't agree with putting that much emphasis on it any longer. Gaming has given me great things and will continue to whether she exists or not.

EDIT: also I want to ask what you think is beyond this? What is the result of the infection? I don't speak of much beyond this because I just don't think much will come of it that actually effects us and our experience as gamers.

Advent, on 19 January 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:

That was never my main point, it was just a side point of the situation. I felt it important to try to humanize her to help give perspective. When I speak of her in some contexts I also mean her ideology as well. She could be anyone who was doing the same thing that is being talked about here.

quadpolar, on 19 January 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

If you want to contribute to this discussion I would be more than happy to debate it but these little one liners I feel are just more of a jab attempt than an attempt to actually argue a point. We obviously disagree and I respect that, I am not trying to change people's views but just giving my perspective. I don't expect people to agree with that and I don't fault them if they don't.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

It matters because people like Kaycetron do actual women in gaming a disservice by re-inforcing the "dumb attention whore with cleaveage that isn't actually into games, just money" stereotype.

She's hurting our ability to attract actual talent, like Sheever.

As an entertainer / streamer, Kaycetron doesn't have to be what we want her to be. I understand that. But then Kaycetron doesn't get to complain when she gets criticism, and you don't get to tell other people that their complaints are not valid.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

You can think that way and ignore the increasing trend that speaks to her ideology, then. You think I'm talking out of pure emotion and pulling this shit out of my ass. I'm not. The evidence is there.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

Speaking from being in an already ostracized minority, I'd rather the other minority and subculture I'm a part of (gamers) not turn out the same way. Like I said, if you want to ignore it, that is fine. The evidence is there.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 02:59 PM, said:

You cannot approach something like ideology with a binary mindset. There are no absolutes here. The result of the infection won't make itself shown for many years to come more than likely, but it ends in that ideology disappearing. That's how all ideological infections end.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

Humanizing it does not give perspective. Perspective is not needed here. Anyone who does this will get the exact same treatment from me.

It is ignoring who you are and spitting on the identity of others. You can choose to not see it that way, but I see it on a deeper level; I see it for what it is.

auraplatonic, on 19 January 2014 - 03:07 PM, said:

I pointed out a fundamental error in your posts, namely that you can't make up definitions like that. That's more than I'm willing to contribute, with regard to Advent's spot-on responses to your ramblings which fill most of this thread.