https://newdiscourses.com/2020/09/gamergate-gamers-first-stand-up-against-grievance-social-justice/
This one is pro-GG. Nothing to it. Very in depth. I recommend getting some snacks if you start with this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/comments/ra7s7y/video_games_gamergate_the_controversy_that/
And a reddit post that is very in-depth also, with a leftist point of view. It tries to be neutral on the matter and I believe it succeeds, although the author's personal thoughts on the matter gets shown here and there but are few and far between.
The first link, the pro-GG one, is more on warning signs of the woke. And yes, the author uses the word woke in that essay.
Gives a full rundown of woke takeovers of things like Occupy Wall Street, Atheism and then gaming, which was thwarted of course.
Proceeds to say the who's who and the what's what of Gamergate. I particularly like the part where the author addresses the talking points that cause "misinformation", I have decided to copy-paste it.
A great deal of misinformation surrounds what lead to the GamerGate scandal. It is frequent to hear the talking point that there was “no review” of Depression Quest, despite the three articles. It is also common to hear that it doesn’t matter if there was coverage because the game is free (when in fact Quinn has received thousands of dollars in donations and therefore benefited from publicity). Another talking point is that the sexual relationship between Grayson and Quinn hadn’t yet started when Grayson wrote his coverage, something that isn’t clear from the timeline of events.
The article continues with the moral panic, comparisons with the right-wing nuts of the 80s and 90s. How GG succeeded and the like.
Okay now on to the next one.
The second one's title alone is indicative of whose side the author is on. I still believe the author did a swell job of being neutral in the writing. No emotions, no nothing. Although I may attribute that to my lack of experience in the deconstruction of arguments and finding out about GG in hindsight.
Okay, the post starts with Anita Sarkeesian. I've seen her work, the first three videos. Damsel in Distress. She speaks like Jonathan McIntosh. Not too shabby but McIntosh has a much more pleasant voice.
I'm getting distracted, apologies. Alrgiht, Anita and her criticisms of video games in Tropes vs. Women. The reaction to that was, if I interpret it correctly, the makings of what Gamergate would become. Wack.
People's knees were soggy all around and that shit and all that.
Then Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson and Eric Gjoni happened and boom Gamergate. Misogyny here and misogyny there.
Vivian James was born and all that. Interesting this about that sgment. I have copy-pasted it in it's glory:
Vivian never mentioned her gender, her ideas or her politics when she played a game - you could play against her and mistake her for a guy. Rather than disrupt the status quo by existing, she allowed it to absorb her. And that's what Gamers wanted from all minorities - they were welcome as long as they didn't disrupt games as a haven where everything is catered to the default player, a white straight American man. Vivian was a 'real gamer' because she embraced the default. Anyone who rejected that default was a fake gamer, whose love of games was a lie, and whose real purpose was sabotage.
To which I say, beotch. That's the plan. Uniformity in good fun. Soldiers are uniform.
The only individuality needed in gaming is skills. The author made a good objective point without realizing it.
So the post ends with gamergate's legacy has yet to be determined.
The second one sounds a lot like baloney, the first is a bit too extreme at times but is particularly better.
I have shared my THOTS and the links, cause you know, whatever.
there doesn't seem to be anything here