Death threats drive Anita Sarkeesian from her home

I wouldn’t say it furthers sexism. It may be an assumption that they’re (mostly) men, but a pretty safe assumption. It may not be the reality we like, but sadly it pretty much is.

Fake Edit:
Wait, let me scratch the word ‘men’ and use ‘misogynistic assholes’ instead. Fits better.


I prefer “misogynistic compacted bowels”, as Assholes serve a useful function :wink:


It’s possible to disagree with her and not want her threatened (I should be able to go without explicitly saying so but I don’t want her or anyone else threatened with any kind of violence). What seems to be impossible is to disagree with her without being accused of supporting those who threaten her. Since when is it ok to classify a group based on their worst members?


In this case it’s unassailably true since she’s claiming there’s misogyny in gaming culture, a claim that so enrages some people within the realm of gaming culture that they have to respond with supreme acts of misogyny… It’s like jihadists sending death threats because someone suggested that theirs is not a religion of love and peace.


Man, it makes me really sad to read this from someone whom I respect ordinarily, especially on a thread in a larger topic with behavior as outrageous as it is. But the extreme evil of behavior of individuals on one side of a debate doesn’t excuse such wrongheadedness. And I think you’ll find it clear from what I write that nothing I’m saying can possibly justify the actions of the individuals who would engage in the threats that initiated this thread.

Individual men facing gender discrimination is sexism. It’s certainly true that the most common manifestation of sexism in our culture today is what is faced by women, but just because that’s the most common and pernicious version, dosn’t mean it’s the definition of the term, nor the only use of it. The most common form of racism today might arguably be against black people, but, that dosn’t mean that racism == discrimination against black people, and that anything that isn’t discriminating against black people isn’t really racism. I think it’s clear that would be an absurd assertion. Not only are there other races that are discriminated against, I’d contend All of them to one degree or another, and other races have a pretty good claim to the top spot historically, and perhaps even today. Antisemitism, for instance, is just one type of racism, and, there’s a REASON it has it’s own word.

Sexism is simply the systemic discrimination of people due to gender. In many ways, the difficulties of transgendered individuals falls under the umbrella of sexism, but, I’ll not delve too far into that, to try and stay remotely on point. Outside that though, because we’re used to thinking of gender in terms of a binary thing, we’re less used to considering that it might be applied to different groups in different ways, like we are with racism.

Is the sexism faced by men the same, in substance, magnitude or scope of that of women? Of course not. But, to insist that it cannot by definition exist toward men is insulting to every male who works as a nurse, or, the dwindling number of male teachers in primary education. Or men who feel trapped into particular gender associated actions who would otherwise not do so.

Sexism is a problem that affects BOTH genders, locks them into one way of thinking, and, is ultimately harmful to people on both sides of the transaction. Combatting it enriches all, and, to describe it as a “woman only” problem not only is wrong, but, does that cause a disservice. If it really was a zero sum game, then any winners would require an equal quantity of losers. And nobody wants to be in that role. But if it’s a change that improves everybody, then you just have to break people from the us vs them mentality, and it’s an easy sell, everyone’s life improves.


Well that’s awful.

I’m not even sure what the problem is. Game developers follow the money; if you like games that are hetero male power fantasies like I do, keep buying them.

There’s no need to be nasty, creepy, or outright threatening towards people pointing out that your favorite game has porn mixed in with the art.


Cory is using the social doctrine developed in the 70’s that what matters when considering prejudices, including racism, sexism, etc is the power disparity of each group in Society.

The ‘global’ ability of a sexist act is mediated by the dominant group, such that it really doesn’t affect a lot of men if any single individual behaves in a misandristic manner, because globally, that man can seek refuge in an unlimited number of places, and does not have the psychological weight of a global preconception about who they are.

This is a ‘social’ doctrine. Certainly, a psychological doctrine will recognize that any given individual in society can be sensitive to any given prejudice, but when we’re looking for social policies to offset and end prejudice, a psychological doctrine is not useful. We need, as a society, to recognize that a key ingrediant in these behaviors is power. And a male misogynist has more power than a female misandrist in any given situation.

These arguments are always muddled because of local vs global perceptions.


I don’t know. In the thread we’ve got an inflamed argument between people who agree with her about whether her closing line was a high form of expression or an awkward phrase that should have been avoided and meanwhile she is being forced out of her home.

On these boards I’ve rarely seen anyone get lumped in with violent idiots because they disagree with what she says, so I don’t think it’s a real concern. To me this has become a personal issue. Overnight I thought a lot about the video and why I think it is important for her to be more careful with her examples, but when I read this I just deleted the post. I can’t throw in with these guys, they’ve poisoned the whole discussion.


[quote=“djotaku, post:15, topic:39970, full:true”]I just can’t understand the threat-makers getting this worked up over bullshit. Because entertainment is bullshit. Where is everyone getting worked up over true injustice in this world? I can understand being a pratt on the net over this bullshit. The internet pays attention to those who bray the loudest. But to actually threaten people and make them unsafe? Over bullshit? WHAT THE FUCK!?! Seriously. [/quote]I might suggest that the threat-makers are sufficiently obsessed with their entertainment for one reason or another that they feel they are something of an authority on such matters. And that they lack the ability to articulate their points properly (or to recognize that attempting to engage in debate in this case is probably futile) such that they find issuing threats is the best way to get their point across.

I disagree that all this somehow “reflects a real-world misogyny rampant within the gaming world”. I suspect George Lucas has been the target of equally viscous vitriol, and he’s not even a woman.

I think it’s interesting and somewhat depressing that there’s a good portion of people that would benefit from engaging in a healthy discussion around the problems she brings up, but when they attempt to start a discussion about it, they get lumped into the group of assholes causing problems like this. I’ve seen a couple people in this thread mention the same thing: ‘you can’t argue about Sarkeesian without being lumped into the jerk group’, which is really unfortunate.

A few years ago I was mostly in the ‘who the fuck cares’ camp about stuff like mysogyny in video games/etc, but over time I had a couple discussions with people that really changed the way I feel about it. If those conversations had instead gone ‘hey it’s NOT MY JOB TO EDUCATE YOU, CIS SCUM’, I’d probably be much less inclined to have the viewpoints I do now.


And of course now there’s a bunch of whiny assholes saying this is all a front and that she’s doing this as a false flag to shut down her opposition. You just can’t win with assholes.


Seriously? This person was concerned enough to go into hiding, I’d say that’s credible enough for me since I’m not on the receiving end of these threats and cannot know what kind of fear this person is experiencing.

But yes, please tell us how these threats are not credible when they’re not directed at you or your family.


So, where precisely does the male teacher, or even prospective teacher, who’s concerned and dismayed about a base assumption that any man who wants to be a kindergarden teacher must be a pedophile, or otherwise unfit, seek refuge?

Perhaps he simply relies on the fact that all the people in power (not him, certainly, see how much actual power a 24 year old recently graduated teacher of ANY gender has, financially or politically) are all males? Oh, wait, they SHARE the sexist position, and are also on board with those presumptions. It’s a systemic bias about a limitation of the gender, and a corresponding suspicion when someone goes outside those gender norms.

In fact, it’s so persistant for males, that, for the most part, it’s generally unchallenged. We’ve at least reached the point where, for the more respectable parts of society anyway, women challenging gender norms are on average lauded, current incident notwithstanding. Men challenging gender norms are still WAY behind that point, viewed with dismissiveness, as evidenced by Mr Doctorow above, or with outright suspicion, requiring only a spark to instigate a mob.

I am not saying that the two causes are the same, or should be, or that we should abandon one pursuit in favor of the other. Simply that being upset about people’s bad actions toward one effort does not excuse the belittlement of even the existence of the complimenting effort.


I’m suggesting that you’re arguing past each other.

I get that in local situations a prejudice reverses itself.

Working with two different definitions, with two different objects, and two different goals, and thinking you’re going to find a solution or an agreement is absurd.

There are local cases where men are discriminated against, but when you weigh the # of choices a man has vs a female has to act in society to the same degree, you have a stark imbalance.


I feel bad if some one unfriends me on facebook. I can’t imagine what it must be like to receive actual threats.

1 Like

Erm, really? You start the paragraph saying that self censoring due to guilt by association isn’t an issue, then proceed to outline why you’re self censoring due to a desire not to want to have others inaccurately associate you with those who go way too far.

I can’t figure out if you’ve intentionally demonstrated the exact problem here, or, if it was just a stream of thought response that didn’t have enough time to get self reflection on what you were saying.

If your thought out responses to the video are withheld from the discussion due to not wanting to be associated with those who would commit bad acts, that IS the issue you were responding to as not being a “real concern”.


Maybe I’m reading too much into what Cory wrote that you were planning to take issue with at first.

In so doing, these men have ably demonstrated the point Sarkeesian sought to make all along: that gaming is riddled with misogynistic violence, and that this violence reflects a real-world misogyny rampant within the gaming world.

I interpreted that as Cory blaming the gaming community as a whole for the actions of a subset of its members. I may be interpreting that incorrectly.

Heh, well, that’s the trouble with definitions, isn’t it. Words are important, that that they mean something specific is important. If Cory wanted to say that “Misogyny against men is impossible”, I’d be fine with that.
But when you try to change the definition subtly or grossly, inadvertently or not, you invariably run into these sorts of conflicts.

And by defining something to entirely exclude a class, you not only exclude them from efforts to bring about change, but, you also alienate them from support of that change. Everyone loses.

Just as an FYI, here’s the Mirriam-Webster entry for Sexism. I know there’s other dictionaries and other subtly different definitions, but, I think the gist is more or less the same from most:

1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

And nothing in there is anything I’ve disagreed with, including the fact, acknowledged in both my posts and as noted in def 1, this is most commonly experienced by/toward women. But the implication in both 1 and especially 2 make clear that it is in no way restricted to it.


Most of the time it seems like it’s the government, its military arm, or the industries wagging the dog who pull this kind of shit. At least when it’s an institution, there can be some sense of accountability beyond the individual scapegoat. (it’s a possibility, anyway)

When lone gunmen try out this kind of logic, there’s no way to teach them not to do it. Pick off one crazy and put them away, you get another who can’t or won’t grasp that the rules apply to them as well.

My only hope for this version of the issue, is that Sarkeesian will not be such a stand out target, that enough other voices will join her so that there’s no perceived advantage in singling her out for retribution.


Cory could have been more specific, but to be honest, most of the time these discussions, whether purposeful or not, devolve into the type of blatant misunderstanding of what we’re trying to accomplish.

You’re also quite capable in understanding as i’ve described, that he’s speaking to the social context.

Most of these arguments are sustained by the conflagration of the ‘local’ vs ‘global’ phenomenon.

As you yourself started arguing a local phenomenon to justify your side of how his statement is wrong.

I jumped in to merely adjust the logical foundation, because I think it’s misguided to think that we can manage the situation on a local level (we can always argue about what is at the local level).

If this discussion is about finding a solution, then you have to look at the social doctrines. If this discussion is about identifying the guilty parties, feel free to look at the psychological doctrines.

As I stated previously, the normal behavior I observe is a short list of Mysoginists, a good deal of trolls, and an apathetic group. Taken together, there’s mysogny at work, but it’s split into active, malcontent and apathetic. You can argue all you want about those three subsets within the gamer, internet and society communities, and you can expand and contract, all you want.

But at the end of the day, if you’re not attempting to suggest a recourse that will reduce the flaming misogyny, i’m not really interested in the argument.

1 Like