Look, I’m not saying that’s not a problem, but seriously, what the fuck does it have to to with the subject in question?
Well, what else exactly are we going to talk about? Death/rape threats are unequivocally wrong and unjustified: there’s nothing to discuss there.
3 Likes
[quote=“bwv812, post:120, topic:39970”]I have never seen anyone threaten to kill George Lucas, his immediate family, and his parents. I certainly haven’t seen anyone post the addresses of these people in the context of these threats.[/quote]It may well be you haven’t seen such things. Any place where you’d find commentary of that nature is probably not a pleasant place for the public at large. And his address would be a matter of public knowledge. (For that matter, Ms. Sarkeesian can probably be located in the local telephone directory as easily as anyone else. Just sayin’.)
[quote]And I find it difficult to believe that George Lucas gets a lot of people graphically threatening to rape him and telling him how much they would enjoy it.[/quote]Well, I find the level of discourse achieved in such matters might well reach that point.
Yes, the problem is perhaps with her inflection, or her hair or make-up or wardrobe, or perhaps she should tone down her message so as not to upset anyone. If she was just less threatening, well, those misogynists would start listening to her, right ?
Seriously dude, WTF ?!
8 Likes
Misogyny is not an emotional problem. It is a THINKING problem, which is supported by a culture that demonstrates its misogynist underpinnings in many subtle and blatant ways(see: school textbooks, advertising, media, children’s clothing and toys, pressure to conform to femininity/masculinity, wages paid for equal work/education levels, etc.). But go ahead and blame it on “narcissistic mothers”, Freud.
5 Likes
I’m not sure what you think I’m talking about, or whether you read the post I was responding to at all. My point is that, whenever something like this comes up, you get people like the guy I was responding to trying to hijack the conversation with “But, there’s discrimination against MEN, too.” And that that is a, probably deliberate, distraction. It’s the same ass the people who, when confronted with something completely fucked up that our government is doing, instinctively respond with “but X government is WORSE,” as if that in any way detracts from the actual fucked-upedness of the subjects being discussed.
4 Likes
Don’t take me too seriously. I’m just saying the actual topic of the BB post is not available for discussion, so there’s no one topic the conversation should be about. Granted, discussing the misogynistic over-reaction of some male gamers is a much better proxy than what you were replying to.
Well, I tell my daughter to not date any guy that hates their mother. I let her have one bad experience before giving her that advice. I think that over the long run she will save a significant amount of money on self help books by following that simple rule.
BTW, I’m not dismissing that misogyny is real, it’s you who is being dismissive. And even even cultural misogyny and all misogynists disappeared tomorrow, there’d be another generation of boys that hate their mother and vice-versa coming along.
In a not-so-far-away thread, I’ve got some criticism in terms of addressing the sensitivities specifically in regards to people who give a shit about gaming and might be receptive to her message by making it clear she’s not Jack Thompson or just fabricating sexism on an open canvas. I mean, you don’t have to address those concerns, but if your critics call you “difficult to swallow” by your target audience, it’s not a bad topic to consider for an even stronger message…
But right, obviously, she could have just said “Fuck the patriarchy!” to a room full of feminists, and the gaming community outside that room would have been enlightened.
A lot of JAQ*ing off in here. A lot of “what about the menz”.
And here I am without my Feminist Says Something on the Internet Bingo card.
It’s [Lewis’s Law][1]. Every. Damn. Time. * sigh *
*Just Asking Questions (the Devil doesn’t need anymore advocates, thanks!)
[1]: https://twitter.com/helenlewis/status/233594800908169217
12 Likes
Reading through all 122 posts, most are about “what about the menz affected by secksim??”
I don’t see any examples of male game developers being threatened by women with violence (sexual or otherwise).
Yet in recent days there’ve been 3 (at least) high profile instances of prominent women in games threatened by men.
Many voices here are drowning out an anti-violence message with paeans to “equal treatment.”
( @bwv812 - your comments about Lucas are hitting the same point. also @Thebarton_Gamer, posting at the same time. )
13 Likes
Reminds me of Whedon’s response to the repeated question “So, why do you write these strong female characters?” “Because you’re still asking me that question.”
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/josswhedonequalitynow.htm
7 Likes
This touches on my “things I’d really like to chat about with some feminists” list.
There are some feminist issues which really are as simple as “stop doing that”. Equal pay for equal work- For fuck’s sake, there is no excuse for not settling that with a half page of legislation and a 10 minute vote. None. Equal representation across career fields? Don’t worry if it’s “for boys” or “girly”. If your kid likes monster trucks, buy them a tool kit. If they like playing dress up, teach them to sew. It’s pretty basic.
But then there are issues that really warrant some deep discussion about what we actually mean by “equal” and “fair”- because like it or not, there are differences between genders. Women take twice as long in the bathroom as men- should building/health codes require an equal number of men’s and women’s restrooms, or provide for half as many stalls on the men’s side? You can argue either position as fair, and it changes what we mean by equal. Toilets are maybe a silly example, but when we start talking about maternity vs paternity leave, or how much upper body strength a firefighter needs to have, we start to move into serious territory.
Finally, there are things that are just plain the result of 3 billion years of evolution- Men like to look at naked women more than women like to look at naked men. We have an instinct to hunt and fight to provide for our tribe and ensure their safety. We need to have a healthy and satisfying sex life, in the same way we need time alone, a fulfilling career, or parental approval- No, we’re not going to die without it, but we’re also not going to be happy, healthy, well-adjusted people without it either.
I kind of feel like there’s a lot of lumping things together as the fault of the patriarchy, and a lot of confusion over what we can and can’t just wake up and do differently one day. I think it would really benefit everyone if we could have a meaningful discussion about what changes we think would be the most realistic, or the most effective, or should be taken on first.
This also has the advantage of addressing the frustrations behind the MRAs without allowing them to derail the conversation- Like it or not, they do have some legitimate concerns, and more importantly, have valid feelings about things which may or may not be themselves valid. When someone raises a point they feel strongly about, it’s a hell of a lot more effective to say “well, let’s look at how that ties in with what I’m saying…” than it is to just dismiss them, which only breeds resentment.
Actually, I think the reason she gets this much hate is because she’s not a histrionic crank. She’s calm and well spoken, and jokes rather than get angry. She doesn’t seem to hate men. She’s even reasonably attractive and as far as I know, isn’t a lesbian.
In other words, there’s nothing you can really just latch onto to turn her into a caricature and dismiss her completely.
You know that thing I just said about dismissiveness being ineffective and breeding resentment? Yeah- why do you think it is that so many feminists have been angry man-haters? It’s because they raised legitimate, serious issues and were blown off. Yes, I think it’s important not for feminists to do the same thing to men that men did to women- But Sarkeesian is not one of the people doing that. She’s just making some rather honest observations, and that’s what pissing people off.
4 Likes
I’d imagine the thread would be even longer and off topic if someone said in response to an off-topic comment mentioning the religion of a troll (who is actually a terrorist), that unlike the societal effects of sexism against women, anti-semitism can only be experienced individually. Then commentary could have been derailed into whether Hitler was a fabrication and the privileges of banking over the working class.
Well, since I was responding to a comment by Mr Doctorow, the person who started this thread with the article, who first broached the subject of if sexism was even a possibility for men, I’m kind of scratching my head on how it’s on me that this is a derailment, assuming in fact that it is.
Someone up-thread said it pretty succinctly. Not a lot to discuss on the threat front, they’re bad. And a separate conversation kind of hit on why it’s a bit tasteless to discuss the content of Ms Sarkeesian’s videos while she’s facing such threats.
So, do tell, what SHOULD we be talking about? Because the thread I’ve been reading and commenting on has been a conversation about how folks who might not share a similar direction but possibly might agree on principles might work together. Seems an interesting discussion to me, and, Since the discussion focuses on Sexism, rather apropos of what started the thread. Or would you rather a nearly literal echo chamber?
I think her “Hitman” example (as illustrated in the too angry video above) is actually dishonest, and that also pisses people off. I would really like her to respond to that.
She’s obviously an impressive and intelligent person, but I find the reactions her commentary has created, the rational discussions along with the irrational threats, to be much more interesting than the commentary itself.
1 Like
The only backward spin might be where kids are ignorant of ideas which go against the Bizzaro man-world, therefore have no significant routes for dissenting. Freudian speculations are a kind of religious determinism which are fifty years out of date. In the last half of the 20th century, the mass religious rally and the megachurch have been much more influential in forming a different set of psychosexual outlets. Generally to do with the words "hur-hur* and making fun of “fat” feminists. So mommie issues have become more tied up with how evangelical supermoms see their role, and how their kids handle exposure to the real world.
We should be talking about
a) how to support people who receive threats of violence intended to terrify them into silence and
b) how to create fewer people in the world who cause or enable (a).
10 Likes
Wow. What a truly bizarre thing to say.
-
Howabout this: I am articulating my point of view on how her arguments are invalid. Nobody is forcing a gun to any reader’s heads forcing them to read and accept my views.
-
Or howabout this: I would argue that if Sarkeesian doesn’t like the games she sees - she should ignore them. Nobody’s forcing a gun to her head making her play all these foul products of patriarchal oppression.
My question to you is “what are you afraid of”?
Her arguments can either stand up to scrutiny or they can’t. And if they can’t, they’re not worth the pixels that they occupy.
As i said, there are such things as genuinely bad, harmful and destructive ideas. I’m doing my part in internet meme hygiene.
You’re welcome.
I’m just going to hang a sign right here:
That is all.
3 Likes
