Media Responses
I get mentioned in media a lot. Whether it's by name or not, it happens. Turns out that I'm actually a super-secret superhero. But let's go with when I'm named or sighted (or cited!)

By the way— before you ask, yes, it is super difficult being this famous.

It hurts, guys. It really does hurt to be this famous.

It hurts so good.

Ooh, I'm touchin' myself!

Oh, by the way: if you came here because you're a member of the press trying to contact me, contact details will be put up fairly soon. Until then, you can just DM on Twitter or some shit— I don't fucking know. Do whatever.

LET'S GO


Here are all the places I've been mentioned, shitlords!


📰


Breitbart Alright, alright, alright. I know.

I KNOW.

I know it's Breitbart, the armpit of journalism. The site that makes Fox News look fair and balanced. But this article is pretty much the majority of the e-mail I sent to Noah Dulis, and, where I'm quoted?

Shit yeah I agree with my own words. Also, Mr. Dulis was exceptionally ethical in his dealings with me.

You can read the article here, if you want. It's a pretty good time capsule of around (just before, actually) the CRAZIEST point of GamerGate.


VICE You ever just send an e-mail to someone and you have no fucking idea what happened?

That.

This.

I'm not talking shit about the author of it. I'm just saying, every time I try to read this, I don't understand it.

I haven't been able to read it all the way through even once. And part of it is because it seems cobbled together. It's a good retrospective, and it brings a lot of the major players together, but it also tries to say that I was Anti-GamerGate, which isn't correct in any part of the timeline.

Overall, it's pretty good. If you can tell which are the words I said, have fun with it. I myself have trouble.

[site] [archive]


Wikipedia I was in the Wikipedia article for GamerGate [archive], until one day, somebody removed me. Why?

Well: [archive]

Removing this and moving source to leading sentence of paragraph- not sure twitter user '@_icze4r' is a notable individual, nor does there appear to be coverage elsewhere than this source
Here's what I take from that: this dipshit removed not only references to the death and rape threats I received, but also removed my defense of people harassing other people in GamerGate...

... because he thinks I was the only person defending GamerGate in this way at the time, and because he thinks he can throw away documented evidence of others being harassed.

Because, apparently, in the mind of a Wikipedia editor, you have to be notable and you have to have people corroborate that people are vulnerable. Otherwise, NUKE THAT SHIT BITCH

Personally, I don't give a single shit about being threatened or documentation of it being dismissed like he did. But if I were to speak to him personally: you're a pretty despicable little bitch, to just shove all the other people's suffering under the rug.

You disgust me, boy.

The problem here is not me. The problem here is you swept the abuse of innocent people under the rug. Does somebody have to be 'notable' in order to report the abuse of others?

Are random people who report abuse considered 'notable'?

I mean, it could be argued that you're doing this from the perspective of, everything in Wikipedia has to be corroborated. Okay— considering that this isn't the only news article that says that, isn't that corroborated?

See, this is the thing about Wikipedia: it's all bullshit. Notability has been used like this a lot, to remove things that run counter to what they want the article to read.

Such bullshit. Just like when a bunch of your editors tried to 'normalize' pedophilia by mass-editing a bunch of articles about it.


Crime and Federalism I don't know what this thing is. I think it's Mike Cernovich's blog. It looks pretty nice but it says something about me so I feel the need to respond to it.

By the way— don't ask me about Mike. I don't know what's goin' on, either. I don't dislike him, by the way. He was pretty nice and kind to me.

(That was like 2 years ago, though.)

So what'd Mike say?

You'll see quickly that #GamerGate opposes actual threats against women. There is even an actual #GamerGate anti-harassment patrol led by a courageous woman named Margaret Gel. [site] [archive]

The actions of one person cannot be used to say that the whole of the group are like that one person. I've talked about this before— not on this website— but, the idea that I'm an example of a good person, and so my presence means that everybody around me is good, is fucking bullshit.

GamerGate was filled with assholes. There was even at least one dedicated stalker in it— the guy who stalked Dodger.

There was also an actual rapist and a guy who hosted revenge porn.

Now, notice something: I say it was filled with assholes, but that wasn't just it. And the people who were terrible, they were few and far between— but, the main thing that made GamerGate shit was the people who wanted to shove all that under the rug, and didn't care that these horrible people were helping them. (This is, interestingly, the reason why GamerGate became such shit: people who refused to stand with creeps like this, they left, and the crazy and desperate core that eventually resulted was filled with only real cretins.)

Anyway— what Mike said? Those are flattering words, but just like a certain journal article that claims I was "one of the key contributors or influencers via Twitter to the [GamerGate] debate", it's not exactly correct. There's a kernel of truth there, but that's like saying a shit is a corn cob. It's not.

And not to belittle Mike's writing— he's a fabulous writer.

It's just, you know, not the story from my side of it.

GamerGate was a lot of things. I will probably one day write something extensive about just what it was, according to my perspective. Today is not that day. It wouldn't be ready for the time that I want to first publish this. But, one of the things that it wasn't, was my own dog and pony show. At no time did I fully control it— although I did possess the means to steer it wherever I wanted to, I didn't.

One thing that's been eating at me is, they always say I was the leader.

I wasn't. I was the one with the most followers, the most visible person, who ever had anything to do with it. And I posted like 800 times a day then, so everybody thought I was running the show. I wasn't. I was the person who could get the word out, so people would come to me so I could signal boost tweets, and help with the overall effort. I found next to none of the people we were reporting.

In fact, one of my best friends did the most work, and they were never even paid attention to by the media. The media also neglected to point out the work that people who actively hated GamerGate did to protect people.

Nobody seems to remember that the Patrol was started as a result of everybody in the #GamerGate hashtag, anti- and pro-, trying to figure out a way to stop the abuse that the 'controversy' was drawing. We all knew that it was drawing trolls— but both sides wanted everyone to be safe, even if we disagreed with each other— even if we actively hated each other. (I didn't, but some did.)

What others also don't remember is that the first meeting trying to figure out how to stop it featured 3-4 GamerGate people and one person who claimed to be Anti-GamerGate.

I didn't come up with the name. Not to play the sexism card, but a nice lady came up with the name. It wasn't even brought up in the meeting— the meeting was absolutely worthless.

The only reason it was adopted was because it could be added to the hashtag, and everyone would see it and know what it was for. #GamerGate Harassment Patrol.

It was our bat signal.

The people who were prominent in that 'squad' are now gone. For the most part, when you start protecting innocent people, the people you're protecting them from... they tend to try to hurt the protectors. That is to say, that nearly all the people who were reported during the Patrol, they held a grudge. And most of the people who reported them had to either change their online names or just plain stop using the Internet because they were being hounded so much.

The people who actually helped in the Patrol were not partisan. Even if they hated GamerGate or Anti-GamerGate before, that hatred really didn't matter when we were all reporting child pornography on Twitter, together. A lot of people dropped out of the 'controversy', the 'conflict', after working together like this. I don't blame them.

The remaining people who are still on Twitter do not talk about the Patrol because what came after it was really embarrassing (GamerGate turned to liquid shit after the normies left), and, it's a real sore spot.

Also, again— there are also a lot of really fucked up people hunting down the members of the Patrol, even today. I get anonymized e-mails and messages about it all the time, asking me to name names.

As far as I'm concerned, all the key individuals in the Patrol never existed. I will not answer questions regarding them, and I do not actually remember the vast majority of their names at this point.


There are three incidents that I would like to note, to give you an idea of what the Patrol was about.

First and foremost, the attack on Anita Sarkeesian.

I don't like Anita Sarkeesian. Let's get that right out of the way. But, she is a person just like anyone else, and I will defend her if someone threatens her.

Far as I can tell, it happened on September 5th, 2014, around 8:30 P.M. You can do a search yourself to ascertain the exact timing. This account on Twitter, called "iamgroot10", began to post child pornography at @femfreq.

What followed was an unholy shitstorm of people trying to get iamgroot10's child pornography wiped off the face of the Internet. This was pretty much the first major 'outing' for the 'Patrol'— even if it wasn't named that yet.

One of my very closest friends and a bunch of strangers from both sides of the GamerGate debacle helped, and got iamgroot10 suspended.

During this, one of the people who helped me— was Andrew Dobson.

People always make fun of him, and he even has me blocked for some unknown reason now, but Andrew Dobson helped report a pedophile.

That makes him a good person in my book.


The second incident is too much of a clusterfuck to even deal with. You can read the Kotaku article on it (I know, I know: have an archive)


The third is a bit of a conundrum.

There was a guy who was threatening Anita Sarkeesian. Loving to fight, I got in the middle of it, and the guy threatening Anita basically said to me that he was going to kill and rape me. (I'm not sure that's the order he wanted those words in.)

oh wait i just found the screen capture of it from the VICE article


Well excuse the shit out of you, mister.

Far as I can tell, he's a video game journalist from another country. Everybody in the Patrol quickly got him suspended from Twitter, and that was that.

He occasionally pops up now and again, though, so who the fuck knows


The Daily Dot This one's pretty good, though I don't even know if it deserves a response. I was presenting evidence against the notion that the hashtag was dying at the time. On October 30th, 2014, it wasn't.

The exact line where I'm referenced is puzzling:

Gamergate itself has become an infamous symbol of Internet harassment in newspaper headlines and Twitter trends worldwide, but it still prides itself on getting "The Colbert Bump": [site] [archive]
And, if you click that link, you can clearly see I'm featured there.

For the record— and I actually have had this written down for over a year now, on an actual piece of paper—

I was mocking you, you idiot. What the hell did you think I meant? People are saying the hashtag is dying, and I had statistical evidence that it had gotten the Colbert bump.

This isn't rocket physics, Aja.

If that is your name.


The rest of the article seems to be the highest-quality of absolute shit:

Most media and bystander accounts of Gamergate reflect the fact that its ongoing harassment has overshadowed any actual criticism it had to offer about gaming journalism. When you're backed into a corner like this, any defense helps—if only to help assuage your wounded pride.
Which makes me ask this question: are you a journalist, or are you just writing an angry blog post? This is the sort of shit people write on the Internet to hurt people's feelings. This isn't journalism. This is Emotional Appeal— the Home Game.

Smarten up. I could be more professional calling you an imbecile than the entire article has made you look.


Moviepilot I don't know what Moviepilot is or what it does. I don't even know if it exists anymore. But I know that some idiot writing for it tried to defame me, and it's one of the only times I've actually felt genuine fury from something that happened to me online.

I wrote an entire online diary entry about it here. You can read that there— it's more informative than I'm going to be about it right here— but, I'll say a little something about it right here, too.

First, look at this photograph.


I will never forget the time
when I got accused of
trying to kill people by posting the suicide hotlines.

You know what, I'm pissed. Let's transcribe it, and go line by line.

Most recently, Gamergaters have turned to flooding gay and trans suicide hotlines, hoping to jam up the lines for someone at a low point, desperate to reach out.

While the main origin of these threats have come from 8chan, there is more than enough overlap between the two to understand they are not mutually exclusive.

Understanding the Gamergate hashtag has earned itself a negative connotation on Twitter, they've turned their attention to Tumblr with "Operation Firefly", dropping the hashtag in an attempt to spread the word on other platforms.

Of course, it has devolved into organized attacks targeted at Tumblr users who are gay, trans, and depressed, encouraging the user to commit suicide, piling on in the hopes that the person will snap and kill him- or herself. [archive]

And right after that, they posted my tweet where I listed two suicide hotlines.

Someone claiming to be the author of the piece contacted me on Twitter and they acted like a fucking asshole. I never checked if it was actually them, and I don't give a shit. If they were the author, they fucked it up completely, and in my heart, I will always despise them.

As someone who is trans who also struggles with depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts on pretty much a daily basis, it's an extra little "fuck you" that, when I actually try to help other people who are suffering like me, I'm made out to be a monster. This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last.

Shit, it isn't even the most recent example of this sort of bullshit.

Right after that, she wrote:

Make no mistake, what's pouring forth from pro-Gamergaters right now is the ugliest sort of human nature, the vilest thoughts being manifested into reality. [archive]
Yes. Yes indeed: sharing the suicide hotline is quite the ugliest sort of human nature the fuck are you talking about?


At some point, I think one has to assume that God is shitting them.

It's not even the best thing I could've done. Posting the suicide hotline is small potatoes— it isn't something to be thanked for, or anything. It's something that, if you do it, it's a nice thing.

But that's the thing— it's just a 'nice' thing to do.

You don't get asspats and cookies and fuckin' blowjobs for 'nice'. You're not a hero for 'nice'.

I'm shocked that this shit even happened.

Moviepilot taught me that you can be called a monster for sharing Suicide Hotline numbers in a tweet.

Fantastic.



GameProgress.net This is a great article to read if you want to see how fucking stupid GamerGate easily got. At one point, some idiot on the other side was braying that they got more harassment, just based on keyword queries.

Knowing fully well how they were arguing, I comically thought: hey, can I prove I'm more harassed, just by keywords?

And I did.

They are still mad about it.

This is great simply because this statistic appears in an actual video game journalism news article:


[site] [archive]


BBC News Radio Oh, boy.

I didn't even fucking listen to this until two years later.


I hate this man.

So, what's wrong with it? Hell if I know— I can't stand this asshole. But he got interviewed by the BBC, and, my name was mentioned:

... and it features someone called 'Margaret Gel,' G-E-L, who runs something called— the GamerGate Harassment Patrol, on Twitter; where they, specifically, ask people to show them instances of harassment, that may have been coming from GamerGate, so they can report the accounts.
I did not run it.

My focus was not that it would come from GamerGate, because there were so few people in GamerGate sending threats that it wasn't a problem.

My focus was I wanted to report people who sent death threats and rape threats, because I thought it was fun.

There was never any intention of keeping harassment from GamerGate in check— there was only a search for any sort of harassment that came from trolls and other losers who had been drawn to the shitstorm that was GamerGate itself.

It was a general policing effort, not specific.


One Angry Gamer This is gonna be short and sweet.

I'm mentioned here:

The tool basically blocks followers for some of the prominent figures of the #GamerGate consumer revolt; this includes people like Margaret Gel, one of the individuals who helps with the #GamerGate Harassment Patrol,
And that is correct.

I helped.

In the same way that children help their parents make cookies.


Journal of the Association for Journalism Education Ever get in such a huge fucking shitstorm fighting shitty Journalism™ that you get mentioned in a publication designed to teach people how to not do journalism?

I have.


Those sure are a lot of words to say how awesome I am!

I haven't read the rest of it, but for the part that I'm mentioned?

This is some damned good journalism.

You can get a copy of it here.


A Collection of Shitty Articles Responding to Tweets You know I just gotta make this section, because otherwise, it's going to get out of hand!

I used to regularly delete my tweets because everybody and their mother's brother was looking to get me suspended for stupid shit, but, as of recently, I've stopped deleting tweets, and now I can get retweets and favorites in the thousands.

It's neat.


The original tweet's been deleted but holy shit did this one make the rounds anyways.

This tweet I deleted specifically because I was worried that I'd get suspended for it. Even as innocuous as it was, you really don't wanna lose 22,000 followers for talking to Hillary Clinton.

It's been making the rounds around Imgur, Reddit, and other meme-loving fucksites.
NEXT

In my own personal stereotypical drunken fashion, I blurted something out that was extremely funny just by virtue of being blunt.

It happened simply enough. I came home from work one day and found that a hashtag called #Calexit was trending. Because Trump had won the election, some idiot Californians had been talking about seceding from the union.

I made one tweet about it, and then launched into something that made me genuinely laugh.

It was a condensation of everything that I had thought about in the first five seconds of understanding the context of the hashtag.

It pissed off every Californian ever.

To be perfectly honest with you, I didn't write it to insult Californians. I wrote it because I had just said a version of it to a person offline, and I wanted to make people laugh online, like they had laughed in real life.

Lots of people were laughing. Mostly Trump supporters, of which I am not, and was not then either.

The Californians all told me that I would miss avocados and strawberries and shit but that's not important, let's go over the news articles that mentioned this.

Liberal America stated stated I "express[ed] [my] ridicule". Which it wasn't even, really: it was a joke. I did not intend for it to make you feel bad. Imagine if I were a comedian on a stage— that's how it was meant to be taken. It was said in a boisterous tone, not one where I actually wanted to argue with and hurt the feelings of anybody.

It's like making jokes about how corrupt Illinois is.

We know.

I am also apparently a "Preview of Trump's America", according to WIRED.

Which is funny, considering that WiReD hasn't been a preview of anything relevant since before my testicles descended.

NEXT wait we're still doing these articles

Some weird fuckin' website thinks I'm perfectly happy with California leaving the Union.

No, you fucking morons!

These are jokes!

THESE ARE JOKES do you fucking take me seriously when i talk about my dick escaping too

man the Huffington Post is a piece of shit


ABC News


Oh, what's that? You didn't catch it?

I did.

And it took me so by surprise that I burst out laughing.


fuck my ass


CBC News


Did you really have to put my face RIGHT THERE the minute you said the line "the online harassment of female gamers?

Was that EVEN FUCKING NECESSARY i give up


fuck my ass again