Censorship and Shame: A response to #gamergate

	After weeks of controversy, Mavel has announced the cancelation of the controversial  Milo Manara cover for an upcoming Spider-Woman comic book.  This optional cover, which featured the heroine in a pose that was used frequently by Peter Parker of Spider Man fame, sparked a firestorm of shaming and cries for removal that raged across the blogosphere.  Places like Vox ran pieces declaring "No one liked Marvel's porny Spider-Woman", proudly justifying their campaign to remove a piece of artwork from existence.  Scores of bloggers and journalists have taken to their podiums and platforms to preach at us over these past few weeks, holding up this disgusting piece of art (created by a man with an Eisner Award, and a member of the Jack Kirby Hall of Fame) as a clear example of the misogyny running rampant in the comic book industry.  And if you disagreed with that narrative, you were branded a sexist, a misogynist, a piece of filth who supports violence and harassment against women.
	There has been a great deal of hate flying around lately.  You might not be aware of it, but it has spread about on twitter if you would care to look.  This opinion piece isn't  about that hatred, however.  This is about censorship and shaming, which we have seen spring up from all across the internet, from websites and magazines and even from journalists.  This type of behavior isn't okay, and I would like to try to defend my viewpoints here.
	First, I would like to just remind everyone what these two terms represent.  Censorship, as most of you are aware of, is the suppression of speech, public communication, or any other information that is deemed objectionable by a particular entity or entities.  Shaming might be a bit more unfamiliar a term.  Shaming is the act of making a person feel ashamed; it's a pretty simple one to understand and remember.
	How do these terms relate to each other?  Simple; because, over a period of several weeks, we've seen multiple instances and examples of shaming to try and validate censorship, and this has been a long-time issue in the video game industry.
	That is not to imply it is only video games that face the threat of shaming content or individuals to validate suppression of certain freedoms; I realize that there is a world of horrible happenings out there, and I understand that this is a minor issue compared to other awful situations.  That shouldn't even need to be a necessary validation.  Yet, if you were to hop on Twitter and voice similar ideas, you may face some vitriol and hatred simply for voicing support towards an idea.  These people are trying to shame others for wanting to pursue a topic of ethics, of transparency, of a genuine quality journalism, and yet they are generalized as sexists, misogynists, pieces of filth, and other horrendous things.  The birth of the #notyourshield tag was a response from individuals who were tired of being branded with disparaging titles and having their integrity and motives doubted, and being accused of advocating horrible things.  This is a positive tag in several ways, but one of the main reasons why I value it is that the tag helps show people that they are not alone, that they should not feel like garbage, or like a gender traitor for supporting a campaign fighting for ethics and transparency.
	This sort of casual shaming has long been an unfortunate staple in gaming journalism, and one that has been on display all over the internet, and that is not even bringing in what has been happening around the #gamergate tag.  One only has to look at review sites like Polygon or Kotaku to see how accepted this attitude is; on websites that receive millions of visitors every month, journalists run articles with headlines such as "Game Developers Really Need To Stop Letting Teenage Boys Design Their Characters" and "The Real Problem With That Controversial, Sexy Video Game Sorceress", both penned by Jason Schrier.  Schrier wrote, "I’m not saying this particular piece of art should not exist, but I have no qualms about saying I think it can hurt this game and gaming as a whole.” This shows a fantastic example of shaming at work.  He isn't arguing that it doesn't deserve to exist, you see.  He just wants you to understand how this fictional female character (from which two female voice actors gained work and money through voicing) is a threat towards the culture of an entire medium.  He just wants you to know that, if you want this art to exist, you advocate those problems.
	This is a dangerous line of thinking, because it not only promotes the idea that we can justify why certain pieces of information or art don't deserve to exist, but it encourages a culture of accusations and fear, and where that information and art needs to be changed if it is to stay.  An example of this sort of behavior can be seen in the situation surrounding Kingdom Come.
	Kingdom Come: Deliverance is an upcoming histrionic role-playing game.  Developed and published by Warhouse Games and helmed by industry professional Daniel Vavra, the title looks to be an exciting and thoroughly researched look at nth Century medieval Central Europe.
	Reading that, you might be surprised to learn that Mr. Vavra has been harassed and attacked online hundreds of times due to Kingdom Come lacking characters of color and female playable characters.  In an interview with techraptor, the designer had this to say:
	"And then we are called racist because there are no people of color in our medieval Bohemia world, because there are biblical illuminations in our country with Queen of Sheba (who happened to live in Africa 2000 years before our game). And on top of that we were called sexist, because we had a stretch goal to add playable female character into our game. As if it was costless to write and implement a whole new questline into the game. All this when the game is in an early stage of development, and they don’t have a clue about the actual story. Do you think that anyone would want to be involved in such absurd discussions during a campaign on which his existence as a studio depends?"
	What does this have to do with censorship?  It shows that, in their rush to shame, people seem to forget that innocent human beings are being hurt and having their lively hoods threatened, all in the interest in protecting lines of code.  It shows that the justifications for these actions fall by the wayside when you actually take a moment to realize that these campaigns and articles are harming real men and women while at the same time throwing some horrendous hatred and generalizations.
	#gamergate discussion has been censored at websites such as reddit and 4chan.  Long-time bastions of free speech have made clear that talking about this subject is akin to advocating harassment, hatred, and threats of violence against women.  Sites like The Escapist, which dared to allow discussion on the topic, faced pressure from gaming journalists like Polygon writer Ben Kuchera, who urged the site's Editor-in-Chief to stop all discussion.  "This is the question: People are using your platform to harass a developer.  Are you comfortable with that?"  Kuchera would later add, "Yeah, I'm really confused and saddened that this is even a conversation."  The Escapist would also later face a DDoS attack specifically targeting the area for #gamergate discussion.
	This type of behavior is not okay.  Many will argue that this isn't censorship, and they would be mostly right.  Behavior like Kuchera demonstrates isn't really censorship, its just using pathos to justify the repression of discussion, of free and equally exchanging ideas and information.  Kuchera, a journalist, is confused why people should even be allowed to have a conversation, and this attitude is really saddening.  It shows the same dismissive and accusatory logic that helped lead to the #notyourshield tag's necessity.  More than that, it shows that validation for censorship is a dangerously slippery slope.
	 Attitudes like this helped encourage the cancelation of titles such as Six Days in Fallujah, which was decried as offensive and sick for daring to portray the horrors of war.  Some people seem to hold the belief that by allowing discussion of a topic or exploring an idea, you somehow advocate and condone every aspect of said topic or idea.  Journalists and bloggers are clinging to the narrative that the #gamergate campaign has and will always be tied to harassment and a hatred of women, and this isn't okay as it paints every person in the tag with a broad, generalized brush.
	Art is one of the most universal ways that human beings can connect and relate to each other.  Art can inspire and invigorate, move and motivate, and yes, even entertain.  Art doesn't harm or hurt.  By shaming and wanting to change or direct or methods of expression, our rights as individuals and as a society are both limited by the whims of others.  Censorship should not be acceptable, and campaigns of shame should be viewed as what they truly are - an attack on the rights of an individual to create and express ideas.

Sources:
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/-NotYourShield-Hashtag-Shows-Multi-Cultural-Support-GamerGate-67119.html
http://gamebabble.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/dragons-crown-fiasco-kotaku-really-needs-to-stop-letting-teenage-boys-write-their-articles/
http://techraptor.net/2014/09/12/interview-daniel-vavra/
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/18/The-emails-that-prove-video-games-journalism-must-be-reformed
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/09/20/the-escapist-forums-brought-down-in-ddos-attack/