Sections

Kim Kardashian game points to underserved audience

Silicon Sisters CEO says hit proves a huge market for women's games, but she might not stick around the industry to reach it

Long before Glu Mobile produced a mega-hit with Kim Kardashian: Hollywood, the celebrity license was being shopped around to other developers. One such developer was Vancouver-based Silicon Sisters, a studio created specifically to create compelling games for girls and women.

Silicon Sisters CEO Brenda Bailey Gershkovitch told GamesIndustry.biz last week that the developer turned down the opportunity for two reasons.

"Sadly, most people in a decision-making capacity in business are not making decisions about doing the right thing; they're making decisions about the bottom line."

"At that time they were pitching it as a Facebook game, and I couldn't see how that would happen, what it would look like and how you would create a game with that brand," Gershkovitch said. "It was tricky for a couple reasons. One, my studio is really about high-quality games that are positive for girls, which presented a challenge in terms of who Kim Kardashian was and whether that would be a positive experience. At the time, what she was known for was that sex tape. So there was some question about brand match. The other issue was that we couldn't figure out what the fantasy was."

In the years that followed, Kardashian's celebrity evolved, Facebook gaming gave way to mobile, and Glu figured out the fantasy. Next week at the Montreal International Game Summit, Gershkovitch will present a talk examining exactly what Glu did right (and could have done better) with its game, and the considerable impact it's had on the industry.

"I think it's cracked open a new, important door," she said. "Whether or not you like that door, it's a game-changer."

For studios like Silicon Sisters, developers that are specifically trying to raise the bar for games aimed at girls and women, Kim Kardashian: Hollywood is providing them with a critical tool when it comes to achieving their goals: an over-the-top success suggesting that there really is a lucrative, underserved market in need of addressing.

Silicon Sisters' School 26 asks players to solve their classmates' problems using empathy.

Silicon Sisters' School 26 asks players to solve their classmates' problems using empathy.

"Without that, you're just arguing for people to do the right thing," Gershkovitch said. "And that's not very motivating. Sadly, most people in a decision-making capacity in business are not making decisions about doing the right thing; they're making decisions about the bottom line... Speaking as a business person, I can tell you that's a much more powerful argument than, 'We make better quality games for girls because it's the right thing to do.'"

Gershkovitch said her goal with the MIGS talk is to convince people that there's an opportunity there, that gaming aimed at women and girls is a market that should be aggressively pursued right now, especially if Silicon Sisters' experience is any indicator. Gershkovitch said that the company has been contacted by external companies "a lot more" since Kim Kardashian: Hollywood hit it big.

"I've thought about leaving games. I've found the struggle a bit much."

That interest hasn't led to any new projects because, as Gershkovitch explained, the studio is "not looking for a property right now." It already runs two games--School 26, an empathy-driven game about a magical girl who's new to her school, and Everlove, a narrative romance game for women with a feminist twist--and Gershkovitch doesn't seem to have the bandwidth for much more.

"I don't know how long we'll stay in this space," Gershkovitch said. "I've thought about leaving games. I've found the struggle a bit much. I think what happens is for about six years now, I've been talking about women in games, women in games, women in games and changing the space. But you can only say the same thing for so long before it gets really dull."

Gershkovitch founded Silicon Sisters along with studio COO Kirsten Forbes in 2010. The pair had been inspired to start the studio after their previous experiences in game development, Gershkovitch as a managing partner at Deep Fried Entertainment (Full Auto 2: Battlelines, MLB 2K8: Fantasy All-Stars) and Forbes as an executive producer at Radical Entertainment (CSI: Miami, Crash of the Titans).

"During my experience at Deep Fried when I was building sports games and running a studio, I was really unimpressed by the quality of product that was being delivered for girls, and continually ran into the reality that at that time, any [game] for girls was given short shrift," Gershkovitch said. "Smaller budgets, smaller teams. There was a lot of 'pink it and shrink it' going on."

"If you look at the numbers of women gaming, we still haven't even come close to properly serving that market. But we're moving in the right direction."

At the time, she was frustrated at seeing the quality of games marketed to her daughter compared to those aimed at her sons. Fortunately, she thinks the gap has become smaller in the intervening years.

"I really do think there has been improvement," Gershkovitch said. "And we're doing a better job in mainstream gaming including options for women and girls, so that's important too. The indie scene has really addressed this to some degree, but I think also in mainstream games and the core world, we're seeing an effort being made to include the female audience in a way they previous hadn't... If you look at the numbers of women gaming, we still haven't even come close to properly serving that market. But we're moving in the right direction."

Even so, that progress might not be enough to keep Gershkovitch in gaming.

"It's taxing when you lay down so much effort to make change," she explained. "And even if you do see some change happening, you're still pooped."

Gershkovitch will give her talk at MIGS 2015 Tuesday, November 17 at 3 p.m.

Full disclosure: MIGS has a media partnership with GamesIndustry.biz, and will be paying for our travel and accommodation during the event.

Related stories

Silicon Sisters: Industry is failing female gamers

Vancouver-based developer believes most games for female audiences are "superficial"

By Matthew Handrahan

The Great Divide

Silicon Sisters Interactive is making games for women and girls, but to do that properly means going back to basics

By Matthew Handrahan

Latest comments (24)

Anthony Gowland Consulting F2P Game Designer, Ant Workshop2 years ago
A woman saying she's found the games industry tough going? Boy am I looking forward to this 30+ post comment thread of posters who could probably do with playing her studio's game that teaches empathy.
15Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Alfonso Sexto Lead Tester, Ubisoft Germany2 years ago
@Anthony: I also know far too many men (a lot in the industry) that should totally play it. Maybe we should ask GI to link this article with the one about Zoe Quinn's movie. :)

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Alfonso Sexto on 13th November 2015 7:22am

4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
I'm going to give the obvious a swerve as in the world of free speech, only the left seem to be allowed to have any here, by order of the left.

So anyway. What I will say is that if there's a market being underserved by games like Kim Kardashian, women are being done a major disservice by being dragged into it in this way. If I were to ascribed a phrase to the people who'd like more KK games, it'd probably be more along the lines of "Vacant, shallow airheads". Hardly an aspiration.
12Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Show all comments (24)
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 2 years ago
So anyway. What I will say is that if there's a market being underserved by games like Kim Kardashian, women are being done a major disservice by being dragged into it in this way.
Soooo... Because you don't rate it, you regard those who do like it as
"Vacant, shallow airheads"
Nice.

That is, "nice and elitist," I mean. Why be abusive to a game's audience? I mean... Why? What does it even serve you? So you don't like it - that's fair. But don't call the target audience names.

Meanwhile, Leigh Alexander rated it awhile back as
Hooky, unintrusive, digestible, memetic, funny, of-the-minute, fashion and celeb culture spoof Kim Kardashian: Hollywood is really good, and no amount of brand power or lunar gravity could have made it so popular if it wasn't (and hey, look: racial diversity and player-led sexuality like it ain't even a thing. Was that so hard?).
6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
That is, "nice and elitist," I mean.
I actually don't consider myself an elitist, but lets say I am for arguments sake. Is it written down in any bill of rights etc. that elitist is a bad thing? No, it's not is it. It's you casting judgment on others that don't fit your own ideal. I thought you really didn't like that sort of thing?

You need to get off this self assurance that you're the morality police. You seem to think that insulting me is fine and seem to be doing so with no sense of hypocrisy whatsoever. For my part, I find your constant and predictable derision of anyone who says anything contrary to your own world view to be quite repellent. And when you call others elitist that really, genuinely, makes me smile.
Why be abusive to a game's audience?
Because someone else held this up as some sort of example to strive for. It's just not, ok. Celebrity gossip is the absolute bottom rung of culture, and who are we celebrating exactly? Alan Turing? Mother Theresa? Ah no, some performing seal and family doing tricks for the cameras, mainly famous for being famous.

Yes, I really do have nothing but loathing for anyone who considers watching that to be good quality entertainment. And I dislike them for it because if there were less of them, maybe the TV would be accessable for people who don't dribble and would prefer learning stuff or seeing and discussing new ideas instead.
Why? What does it even serve you?
I do actually have the right to express my feelings even though you think only you do. I could equally well ask why you have to weigh in like you're the the higher authority every time someone says anything you don't agree with.
Meanwhile, Leigh Alexander rated it awhile back as
Good for her. I've not even played it myself, so you let an easy point pass by there. Just so you're in no doubt, I think "Kim Kardashian" or even the wider phrase "celebrity" functions perfectly well as a "keep away" sign for anyone that even knows what an IQ is. If there is a game under here that actually has some content for people with a brain, take the KK badge off it and I'll take a look once I'm not being warded off by their own marketing.

See what I mean about the state of free speech on this board?

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 12:58am

13Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
Oh go on then, I'll get it started...
Boy am I looking forward to this 30+ post comment thread of posters who could probably do with playing her studio's game that teaches empathy.
Maybe she should stick around then and ensure we all get to play it.
1Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Curt Sampson Sofware Developer 2 years ago
I'm going to give the obvious a swerve as in the world of free speech, only the left seem to be allowed to have any here, by order of the left.
I swear, the irony here is going to kill me. Paul, you're not going to get far in your complaints that you don't want to hear about oppression if you start out by claiming that you're oppressed yourself. How tone-deaf can you be?

Not that you are oppressed even in the slightest. Nobody's stopping you from stating your opinions, even here. They maybe saying that they don't like and/or disagree with your opinions, but that's exactly what you say you want people to be able to do without others complaining about that. (Complaining about receiving the exact experience you asked for? Again, tone-deaf.)

If you're wondering why people are annoyed by you, and express that, maybe you should think about the moral implications of your apparent position that cyber-bullying and threats of physical violence to people are a not problem that should be addressed, (If you think that they are a problem that needs to be addressed, you've hidden it quite well, because any time anybody brings it up you instantly try to shut things down with cries of, "but what about free speech? You're trying to kill free speech!" When your only proposed response is, "don't change a thing," your position is that there's no problem.)

I also don't know what you were smoking when you responded to Morville with, "You need to get off this self assurance that you're the morality police." What kind of person do you have to be respond like that to someone who simply suggested we all be a bit more polite? You actually come right out and say that being abusive to a game's audience is justified because you disagree with their choice of entertainment. That's simply not acceptable, and I think that should get you moderated. (Disclosure: I have a mod bit here, but do to my involvement in various arguments with Paul, I don't feel I should be using it in this instance.)

Talking about the game itself, 'If I were to ascribed a phrase to the people who'd like more KK games, it'd probably be more along the lines of "Vacant, shallow airheads"' is hardly a convincing critical argument.

Much as I love playing shooters and am bored to tears by celebrity gossip, I can't say I see any kind of huge (or even noticeable) artistic difference between me spending an hour mowing down cops in Payday 2 and someone spending an hour watching Kim Kardashian on TV or doing whatever it is they do in the game. I may have no idea what such games are about, but I know games like Payday 2 pretty darn well and have plenty of hours in them, and I can tell you that nobody's getting a whole lot of edification from those.

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Curt Sampson on 14th November 2015 2:06am

7Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 2 years ago
Is it written down in any bill of rights etc. that elitist is a bad thing?
Nope. But here's the thing - as a generalisation, gaming (along with a lot of nerd-culture) takes pride in being elitist. The barrier to entry for being "into" games (and comics, and sf, etc), is "knowing your stuff" and "liking the right stuff". Just look at the PC gamers who look down at console gamers, or the CoD fanboys who look down on Candy Crush. The comics fans who are "indier than thou". It's not something we need to encourage on a professional website.
I do actually have the right to express my feelings even though you think only you do. I could equally well ask why you have to weigh in like you're the the higher authority every time someone says anything you don't agree with.
I weighed-in because it seemed nothing more than being rude to a group of people for the sake of being rude. Had your comment been more thoughtful (like the comment I'm responding to now), there's a fair chance I would've been less... abrasive, shall we say? But when you call a group of people who like something names for no reason, then that veers too close to arrogance and bullying for me to really let it slide.

Being elitist in-and-of-itself isn't something to be ashamed of. Using that elitism to tear into what others find enjoyable, though? That is at best unkind, and at worst pretty awful. I love opera and loathe dance music, but that doesn't give me the right to question the intellectual capacity of people who enjoy dance music.
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
They maybe saying that they don't like and/or disagree with your opinions, but that's exactly what you say you want people to be able to do without others complaining about that
No it's not. You are more than welcome to disagree with me and openly challenge me about something, that's fine and the nature of a debate.

What morville seems to do, and a small group of other regualr posters who do it more to be fair to him, is rely on some sort of "higher morality" wording on how he choses to do it. Can I not just be wrong without having to be "elitist" for saying there is someone in the world I consider myself above? Am I sexist for not agreeing with every single word any feminist says? Etc. It's the self assured moral superiority thing that pushes my buttons. Because it's pure pot and kettle usually.

If I say X you don't like, challenge X not me. That is the difference. Insulting my personality and not my particular 'offensive' comment is the first step to bullying. No really.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 10:13am

4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
That's simply not acceptable, and I think that should get you moderated. (Disclosure: I have a mod bit here, but do to my involvement in various arguments with Paul, I don't feel I should be using it in this instance.
This. Thank you very much for having power over me, reminding me of it, but not using it. It's very gracious of you to honour me with grace and favour.

Are you even aware of how many times you used the word oppressed up there? I never used it once. You just can't help yourself pulling to one extreme end or the other to help win a fight. Do I consider myself "oppressed"? No. I consider myself unwelcome because I didn't drink the kool aid and don't want to sit around the campfire singing kumbaya. But oppressed? No.

Don't worry, I might stick around to see how everything else in this thread gets twisted out, but I won't be returning in future as I don't fit the accepted profiling. I'm sure my passing will not be sadly missed...

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 10:29am

2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
Bingo John.

I can't even fathom how one woman saying that other women should aspire to playing games like KK hasn't been shot to flames already. It's one of the most insulting generalisations I've ever heard and I can't imagine it is anywhere near correct in practice. I certainly hope not anyway.

An unstated backgrounder in that assumption is that the way to get more girls into games is to provide them with more pulp garbage instead of stimulating them to get interested in more challenging gameplay and ideas. If fluffy pink kittens and positive reinforcement "you're awesome" is the only way to do this, it doesn't deserve to get done.
1Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
You're right actually, I misinterpreted that completely. I think I was guilty of reading what I expected as soon as the "celebrity game" thing brought the red mist down.

I agree with you that the way to get girls is to give them what they want. What I can't get behind is that the mostly female audience for KK is any indicator of anything at all. Kids of both sexes pick their heroes, sadly based on TV exposure and not any real world achievements, and most kids will be playing this game because KK is their hero. There'll be a shitload of other girls that have picked someone else but there isn't a game for them. Similar for boys, maybe an app about Jay from the wanted would sell a trillion.

So if anything, if KK is to be used as an indicator, it's for what kids want, not specifically girls and definitely not women.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 11:15am

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 2 years ago
Insulting my personality and not my particular 'offensive' comment is the first step to bullying.
Can you not see, then, why I took offense to this comment of yours:
If I were to ascribed a phrase to the people who'd like more KK games, it'd probably be more along the lines of "Vacant, shallow airheads"
Edit to add:

I feel I should apologise if I came across as bullying, myself. The older I get, the more I can't understand how and why certain forms of entertainment (not just gaming) tend towards factionalism and aggression, and it's disheartening. From Marvel vs DC down to the aggressively titled games, it's all just... rather wearing.

Anyways, apologies. No offense meant, though I'm sure some caused.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 14th November 2015 1:07pm

5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
Accepted, and likewise. I do tend to throw my toys out of the pram at times when I feel I have to step on eggshells without offending anybody, but I admit I was a bit OTT there. Sorry.
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 2 years ago
:)
1Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Curt Sampson Sofware Developer 2 years ago
Thank you very much for having power over me, reminding me of it, but not using it. It's very gracious of you....
Do I consider myself "oppressed"? No.
So in other words, you weren't being sarcastic in that first comment of yours, and I can interpret you as saying, 'I'm glad you said that, and I very much want you to continue to say things like this to me because "free speech" gives me the warm and fuzzies'?

If you're not being oppressed in any way, you agree that free speech or whatever it is you're going on about is being well served, your opinions are sufficiently well accepted, and you have no complaints. In which case, it's entirely unclear as to what you're complaining about.

If you think that "the liberals" are coming down on you every time you open your mouth, you need to explain why you're not rejoicing every time they exercise their right to free speech whilst doing that.

You can't whine out of one side of your face that the chicks being told that they deserve to be raped should should man up and live with the Internet, and on the other hand complain that "only the left seem to be allowed to have any here [sic], by order of the left." And keep in mind, you have never even once, as far as I can tell, actually come out and say that the free speech of those saying you should be raped and killed" should be limited in any way. (At least, those who are western gamers.)
I consider myself unwelcome...
Yeah, well, join Anita Sarkeesian and a whole host of others. If you seriously think that your degree of "feeling unwelcome" even starts to compare with theirs, you're in cloud-cookoo-land, buddy.
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
If you think that "the liberals" are coming down on you every time you open your mouth, you need to explain why you're not rejoicing every time they exercise their right to free speech whilst doing that.
Just call it a punt for equality. Other viewpoints are available.
Yeah, well, join Anita Sarkeesian and a whole host of others. If you seriously think that your degree of "feeling unwelcome" even starts to compare with theirs, you're in cloud-cookoo-land, buddy.
What? Just what?!? You're even making stuff up now to keep the flames burning. And it's kinda that that I object to, to be clear. Just WTF has ms Sarkeesian got to do with this? Please explain?
And keep in mind, you have never even once, as far as I can tell, actually come out and say that the free speech of those saying you should be raped and killed" should be limited in any way
I think you have actually lost the plot. Try going outside or something. There's a ton of stuff, in fact an almost infinite amount of things, I've never said.

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th November 2015 3:18pm

8Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
Sorry, not finished yet.
You can't whine out of one side of your face that the chicks being told that they deserve to be raped should should man up and live with the Interne"
I demand a full apology for that shite. I don't know who you're speaking to or about, but not a single word, or even hint, of any of that came from me, and the implication that it did is libellous. Recant it now.

You should be ashamed of yourself for such blatent flaming. How the hell you got to be a moderator I'll never know, but I'm writing an official complaint about your conduct right now.

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 4:34pm

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Curt Sampson Sofware Developer 2 years ago
What? Just what?!? You're even making stuff up now to keep the flames burning....Just WTF has ms Sarkeesian got to do with this? Please explain?
No, it's your comments I'm directly responding to. Let's start with these:
If I were to ascribed [sic] a phrase to the people who'd like more KK games, it'd probably be more along the lines of "Vacant, shallow airheads".
Yes, I really do have nothing but loathing for anyone who considers watching that to be good quality entertainment.
I think "Kim Kardashian" or even the wider phrase "celebrity" functions perfectly well as a "keep away" sign for anyone that even knows what an IQ is.
So would you say that these quotes are, in pretty much your own words, "challeng[ing] X [the thing] not [the person]"? Would you say that you're not "insulting...personality" (by which I assume you mean the person), and are instead addressing "particular...comments"? Because if they are attacking people rather than ideas, as it appears, wouldn't that mean that they are, again in your own words, "the first step to bullying. No really."?

I've already covered some of your complaints about feeling you can't say what you want in this forum and feeling unwelcome, as expressed in comments such as:
...only the left seem to be allowed to have any here, by order of the left.
See what I mean about the state of free speech on this board?
But despite this, you're awfully sensitive when someone expresses an opinion that you are merely "elitist." (I suppose in some circles that's worse than being a "vacant, shallow airhead" for whom one has "nothing but loathing", but not in mine, I'm afraid.) The "elitist" label starts you off on a rant that the poster "needs to get off this self assurance that [he's] the morality police." You don't address what he said; you simply try to shut him down. Doesn't this go precisely against the sort of free speech you're calling for?

What's coming across here is that you feel you're the only one that ought to be able to speak freely, your "free speech" can be simple insults with no proper argument or analysis behind them, and you're upset when people call you out on it and feel that there's some huge conspiracy of the rest of the people here to silence you. (This despite the fact that nobody appears to be editing or deleting your posts.)

If you want even to start to be taken seriously, you need to stop with the "I'm not loved" whining that's approaching Morrissey-level proportions, for two reasons. First. what you're experiencing is exactly the "free speech" you claim you want and you're not getting (except for the fact that it's other exercising it, and they're being a lot less insulting than you. Second, there are plenty of people on the Internet that have it way, way worse than you, as far as nasty comments being directed at them (that's where the Anita Sarkeesian comparison comes in), and your general attitude seems to be that this is a lot more acceptable than any attempt to limit the speech directed at them. (If you're in favour of limiting "free speech" of that nature, please come out and say so!)
I demand a full apology for that shite. I don't know who you're speaking to or about, but not a single word, or even hint, of any of that came from me, and the implication that it did is libellous. Recant it now.
I'll admit I did confuse you for a moment with another poster to this site who appears to hold views even more extreme than your own. I won't completely recant, but I will rephrase: you can't whine out of one side of your mouth that you're allowed to call people "vacant, shallow airheads" for whom you have "nothing but loathing," and then complain out the other side that someone who calls you "elitist" is being rude to you and making you feel "unwelcome."

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Curt Sampson on 14th November 2015 5:47pm

4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
Get off it mate, you're making stuff up and digging deeper and deeper. What you are doing now is internet bullying. No ifs, no buts, no maybes. The very fact that you treat me as an "extremist" says all everyone needs to know about your super-narrow view of what is acceptable and what isn't.

It's a brave man to use that word given what else is happening in the world right now. If you want to see the difference between your idea of extremism and everyone else's, go put your telly on. What an idiot.

Edited 5 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 14th November 2015 6:44pm

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Curt Sampson Sofware Developer 2 years ago
What you are doing now is internet bullying. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.
Seriously? Me quoting back at you your own statements is Internet bullying, but the things you said in my first three quotes (unprompted by anybody else) in my previous post are not?

I'm afraid I find it very difficult to agree with you (Note that's not to say I'm disagreeing that you may feel bullied; your feelings are you own of course and I'm happy to acknowledge them.) However, I'm certainly open to examining that thought, and comparing, say, my behaviour to yours, along with talking about whether what you've said and what I've said should be praised as free speech doing its work or condemned as poisoning the atmosphere. So, why don't you start with your early statements, and your current attitude toward "free speech" in the light of your experience here?
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development2 years ago
And who would that poster be? :-)
He doesn't have the self awareness to realise that the only one being inflammatory and commenting on assumptions rather than statements is actually him.

There's nothing so sad to watch as the meltdown of the self-righteous.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Paul Johnson on 15th November 2015 3:27pm

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Curt Sampson Sofware Developer 2 years ago
Is it really extreme to not want a bunch of feminists to be given the power to censor social media?
I am strongly and emphatically against "giv[ing] a bunch of feminists the power to censor social media." I also firmly believe that no idea system is sacred and all should be questioned.

Now that we've got that out of the way, anybody who cares to can feel free to address my real arguments if they like. And John, do feel free to tell Paul (since my "libellous" statement was retracted before you even started posting here) your point of view that how his feeling unwelcome is not a problem because "free speech."

Not that I think this will go much further. Paul's made it clear that I am "the only one being inflammatory," (apparently statements such as "Vacant, shallow airheads" and "I have nothing but loathing for..." are not inflammatory though being called out on making such statement is), and that it's bad when he feels "unwelcome" but not when "the left" does.

Since several replies from the opposing side in this debate have not even begun to answer the questions I posed a few posts back, I reckon I might as well bow out. I'll just say that I'm very pleased to have enjoyed two excellent ironies: a) someone from a group not at all marginalized or looked down upon in the gaming world feel "unwelcome" when he looks down on others and then complain about it, and b) being told that one can't hold any idea system as sacred or immune from criticism by the very people telling me I shouldn't be questioning their sacred idea of "free speech."

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Curt Sampson on 15th November 2015 11:03pm

4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Alfonso Sexto Lead Tester, Ubisoft Germany2 years ago
"Vacant, shallow airheads"

Is the gamer trend of insulting people who likes a particular product a thing with industry members now too? I already get called things in game websites for playing Destiny, so just wondering.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Alfonso Sexto on 16th November 2015 10:04am

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.