Never be part of a club that would want you to be a member.
I feel like rejecting the word âgamerâ reinforces the notion that playing games is something to be ashamed of. Instead I go with it and try to be a good person, while rejecting the bad actions of a few.
-Wes
like others here I feel a disconnect from the broader community, in what I play and in my attitude. Iâd like to say the urge to distinguish myself is simply because I cant relate, but underlining it is a stronger personal hangup. the label itself is obnoxious. it reflects my own prejudice: to me it implies a confidence in an activity which on some level I mustnt be entirely comfortable with, by âthat sort of personâ I look down on.
hey, smelly fat ugly man with shitty opinions whoâs content with mediocrity, youâre declaring all the former with pride? disgusting!
Iâm finding the older I get, the less energy I allocate towards reining in thoughts like that. oh well.
I realized over the holidays how much I love gratuitous multicolored lights, so maybe I am a gamer after all?
If thatâs so, let me tell you the good word about building your own gaming PCâŚ
Itâs an annoying term because it implies that taking this hobby overwhelms your entire identity. Nobody calls themselves a movier, or a booker.
There are a few people who self-identify as hardcore cinephiles or whatever, Quentin Tarantino types, and theyâre just as annoying. Whatâs irritating isnât people who play games, but nerds.
no. iâm more concerned with the appreciation of art, whatever itâs form.
itâs not something i ever felt fully comfortable identifying as.
similar interests are not necessarily equal to having a common ground.
I really respect Wesâs stance. What really pissed off #gobblegat was that article about how the majority of people who play video games are cats beyond the classic demographic. Iâm for interpreting âgamerâ as the basic dictionary definition of one who plays games if only to bum out the pre-teen lady-fearing Call of Dootiers, the chan posting Dark Soulja Boys, and the like. Up the Simpsons Tapped Out playing moms, the Minecraft home schoolers, the cool adults who found their old copy of Katamari in the closet, and the TWINE autobiographers.
so are we the cool ones then or what
Statements in first person are always from the cool ones.
Iâve always understood âgamerâ to be short for âcore gamer,â which is a pretty specific demographic.
Iâm pretty sure the gamer gate kept me out.
Does anybody call themself a reader, a movie buff, or a cinephile? Yes! If you think of those words as the equivalent to âgamerâ (because they actually are) whatâs the difference?
-Wes
The group that you are equivocating yourself with. Without contextual implications, it basically means what theyâre going to talk about or bring up examples/metaphors in are probably going to come from the media theyâve said they consume. I find that eventually I get bored of that focus and prefer variety of perspective. That also comes from myself believing that very few friends of mine want to talk video games so I donât bring it up much. I donât talk games here all that often either! I own media, Iâm not consumed by it.
With contextual implications, you have what culture perceives are the stereotypes of that group and the biases that will come out of that. Readers are out of touch introverts, cinephiles are hipsters, movie buffs are obsessed with pop culture (ie. shallow). Gamers also share in those sorts of negative connotations: bros drinking dew and eating doritos and playing COD:BLOPS multiplayer; nostalgia-ridden 30 year olds; or core gamer as @Ronnoc pointed out (which shuts out a majority of people who play games).
If you donât mind being categorized, then there is no difference to what label you have. And in a teasing parting blow, you donât since you still sign your posts. 
Donât you think youâll be categorized anyway, regardless of your intent? Might be better to own a category you want in a declarative fashion rather than one assigned without your consent. After all, categories arenât really for us, theyâre for others.
They should be equivalent, but in practice theyâre not. The gamer identity that has been so meticulously cultivated by marketers functions differently from hobbyist labels that have evolved more or less organically. I mean, can you imagine Reader Fuel being sold with a straight face? Or âCinephile Editionâ Blu-ray players?
UhhâŚ
Anyway, the tag of âgamerâ is far more encompassing. Which is the problem with it, since itâs such a simplistic title that it captures everyone who enjoys themselves a game.
the difference is gamers are preternaturally obsessed with these classifications and the anxieties they inevitably produce, whereas there is no such thing as a discussion around just how unfair the âreaderâ tag is, or just how much I, as a person who reads, fucking hate those âreaders.â
I donât think you get to pick what you call yourself. you are what you do and what those around you take from that. I find people who trumpet gamer-dom and those who outwardly reject it equally tiring. the gamergate backlash lost its vibrancy the second it started reading like a salon op-ed, ie exactly when people like leigh alexander gave it a reason to exist by playing scrabble with personal politics as a quick out.
This has some truth to it, but stated flatly is facile. You have input into how youâre seen, through your actions but also your words (which are, of course, actions), and other people are variously free to ignore your input; your identity is created in the complex of all these interactions - indeed, it is different between each pair of interactions. To deny the label, to vociferously take it up, to shrug and allow people to apply it if they want: each of these possibilities changes how other people see you, even if the actual amount of videogames you play is equal in each scenario.
I find people who insist that they find any person who has an opinion strong enough to have an opposite tiring tiring.