Make your TwitLonger posts ad-free

For just £1 a month, you can support TwitLonger directly and remove ads from your posts
Click here to make your TwitLonger posts ad-free.

#gamergate - you asked for specific factual inaccuracies

.@helenlewis Someone took you to task about your #gamergate piece in The Telegraph and you asked for specific factual inaccuracies. For anyone reading, the article in question can be seen here - obviously we're not going to be linking to @telegraph. They have demonstrated they don't want our clicks.

So here we go:

Firstly, your tweet says "it's a comment piece, clearly marked as such..." no it is not. There is nothing clear about it.


Paragraph 1, sentences 1, 2 and 3 are all incorrect.

Where is the evidence that "angry young men" have been articulating the fear that "evil women are coming to take away [their] computer games".

Nobody on #gamergate is saying that, Helen.

Again, please provide evidence that shows how a group of men are saying that games are being "ruined" by the "monstrous regiment". Now, I don't expect you to provide evidence of that "monstrous regiment" line - that's obviously just journalistic hyperbole - but I'd love to see specific claims or complaints that it is women (not SJWs, not journalists, not feminists, but *women*) who are ruining gaming.

The reason I ask for evidence of a *group* of men saying these things rather than one solitary example, is because the occasional insane outlier always exists. For this to be the insidious movement you suggest it is, there would need to have more than one player. Surely even you wouldn't base an entire screed on the rantings of one Twitter user? Right?

Anyway, back to your errors...

Paragraph 2, sentence 1.

"Their livid arguments and the vitriolic online abuse, all gathered on the internet under the hashtag “gamergate”, is another example of the way in which women are targeted on the internet. "

#gamergate is directed at anyone involved in corruption in gaming and/or unjustly attacking gamers. It doesn't matter whether they are male, female, white, black, pink, orange or Canadian. Just click on the damn hashtag and you'll see that EVERYONE is eligible for criticism.

In your first two paragraphs, not only do you lead the reader to believe that only men are taking part in #gamergate (your anti-male bias shines through once again; there are thousands of women sick of corruption and bigotry in gaming - yes, even me) but you also guide the reader to the conclusion that the 'victims' are all female (is that what feminism is, Helen - making us all out to be weak victims?)

Let me ask you straight: why are you lying?

Why are you painting men as aggressors and women as helpless casualties in some war being waged by the merciless forces of misogyny? What are you trying to achieve by avoiding the truth so doggedly?

The next falsehood. In the last sentence of paragraph 3, you say:

"A few weeks ago, she (Anita Sarkeesian) had to leave her home because she feared for her safety."

There is zero evidence to support Anita's claims that she was threatened. There is a screenshot of a Twitter account that shows messages sent to her, but this is widely believed to be a sockpuppet account she ran herself.

Furthermore, Anita repeatedly contradicts what law enforcement agencies would advise her to do if she *were* being threatened. She clearly is not.

(As a side note - if these tweets turn out to be real, then whoever sent them deserves to face the full force of the law. Threats are not cool, wherever they come from. Nobody taking part in #gamergate would suggest otherwise).

On to the next mistake...

Pretty much ALL of paragraph 4.

Quinn admitted to cheating on her boyfriend. When someone admits that they repeatedly cheated on their partner and is also hoist by their own petard by implicating themselves as being a rapist using their own twisted definition of rape, things stop being 'accusations'.

In this paragraph you go on to say that "a few impressionable young men decided this was their opportunity to end “corruption” in games journalism once and for all. They bombarded Quinn with abuse and threats..."

Once again, Helen. Men? Really? Are you really going to try and diminish the my gender of the gender of many thousands of pro #GamerGate women who took Quinn to task.

Just the teeny, tiniest bit of original research would have showed you that there are a lot of us sans-penis people who think that the behaviour of characters like Quinn, Faraci, Bob Chipman is abhorrent.

At 4000 characters I'm going to bow out, but rest assured, the remainder of your article is riddled with the same kind of inaccuracies and either a) misunderstandings or; b) outright lies.

I'd like an apology from you, an apology from The Telegraph and reassurances from you both that you will hold yourselves to higher standards in future. I'm not going to hold my breath though. What #gamergate has taught me, is journalists of a certain hue are not very good at admitting they have the wrong end of the stick.

Stop attacking gamers, Helen. And stop attacking men on my behalf. I am #notyourshield. The behaviour of gaming journalists prior to #gamergate and journalists of all persuasions since has shown just how bigoted, biased and prejudiced you are. Anyone who has a different point of view is apparently wrong. Anyone who calls you out on your errors is a harasser or a bully.

We're not harassers, Helen. Nor are we bullies. Nor (as you insist on calling us) are we all men.

What we are is a group of people sick of your shit.

Reply · Report Post