Gamergate

Gamergate is a controversy centered on journalistic ethics, censorship and accusations of sexism in the video gaming community among others. It came to a head in August 2014 due to personal attacks on game creators Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, and game culture critic Anita Sarkeesian.

This conflict has seen harassment, doxxing (revealing of private info), and death/rape threats on both sides of the debate. Various social media forums have likewise become heated battlegrounds regardless of which side they're supporting or not.

Two general camps have emerged:


 * pro-Gamergaters - They view this as a war against questionable ethics in video game journalism, feeling it is imperative to expose favoritism and and corruption in the gaming press (often simplified to plain "paid reviews" - some of those were exposed not long before the scandal). Over time, this has extended to fighting against censorship and defending free expression in gaming and elsewhere.


 * anti-Gamergaters - They see this as an attack on women (both transgender and birth gender women) in the gaming industry, prompted by misogyny in the gamer culture, and thus the accusations of corruption in gaming journalism are merely a shroud for this aforementioned goal of marginalizing women in the gaming culture. They also tend to view this as a reactionary backlash to what they see as an increasingly diverse and progressive gaming culture.

Games influenced or inspired by the events of this controversy

 * Depression Quest - An interactive browser game in Flash by Zoe Quinn centered around the issue of helping the clinically depressed protagonist overcome that depression.
 * Oppression Quest - A parody of the above, focusing instead more on the motives of the creator of Depression Quest (though she is never referred to by name)


 * Anthropomorphic Personification: Vivian James, after a fashion. In addition to being associated with GG though her origins are traced back to 4chan and a group called The Fine Young Capitalists, she's sometimes affectionately used to symbolize modern gaming.
 * Flame War: Taking sides guarantees you will be one side or the other of this.
 * History Repeats: In addition to GG being one of the latest manifestation of the culture wars, pro-GG supporters point out how the narratives and arguments being presented are more than a little reminiscent of those touted by the moral guardians and anti-video game violence crusaders of yesteryear.
 * Memetic Mutation:
 * "Actually, it's about ethics in the video game journalism". Explanation: the detractors often paint GG as some sort of nebulous world-wide conspiracy; consequently, both sides like to repeat variations of this phrase - anti-GG sarcastically implying that the opponent tries to hide the nefarious nature of GG, and pro-GG sarcastically implying that the opponent is a Conspiracy Theorist.
 * Sockpuppets. Explanation: detractors are fond of painting GG supporters and pro-GG online sites as being comprised primarily of fake "sockpuppet" accounts controlled by a handful of shady individuals. While pro-GG mockingly point out both how ludicrous the accusation is and how hypocritical it is in practice.
 * "Current Year." Explanation: a mocking reference to Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, in particular to the tendency to cite some variation of "It's 2015" as a catch-all to silence criticism, including GG.
 * "Gamers are Dead/Gamers don't have to be your audience." Explanation: A reference to a torrent of articles released on late August 2014 which helped set GG into full steam, all of which containing some variation on the death/demonization of gaming and/or the notion of gamers. Among the most infamous coming from Leigh Alexander.
 * Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment: Enforced on most websites that wish to discuss this in anything resembling a relatively neutral (not fanning the Flame War) fashion.
 * Serious Business: Both sides regard this event in this fashion.
 * Small Name, Big Ego: Sometimes the drama on both sides can stem from certain "e-celebs" more interested in stirring up trouble or bolstering their own ego than anything else of note.
 * Suspiciously Specific Denial: Early on, those implicated in the initial incident insisted that there was no collusion, let alone ethical breaches involved. Which proved hollow when some of those same people openly admitted it.