It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Azaron_Nightblade I found the original article rather interesting, and almost commented on it until I got to the end of it and it turned into yet another bashing of pixel supermodels and jiggle physics - at which point I pretty much labeled Lisa as yet another feminist crusader. This article seems more balanced however, so I'll just state my original comment now: I honestly have never seen the behavior mentioned. I've seen plenty of stalkers, but never outright hostility and discrimination when they found out someone was female. The worst I've seen is probably "Get in the kitchen and fetch me a beer/sandwhich, woman!" jokes.
I keep seeing people labeled as feminists, as if this is some horrible thing to be.
Feminism is not about taking anything away from men, except maybe thier ability to be jerks and not get called on it.
The problem is that so many men don't want to think that they're being jerks, so they blame the people that call them on it, and since a lot of guys (no not all guys, just a really loud minority) seem to feel that threats and intimidation are valid forms of communication, a lot of people (men and women) just decide to duck and cover.
Unfortunately the anonymity of the internet makes a lot of people feel safe making threats. And whether you want to admit it or not sometimes those threats are real and have been carried out.
So if you think that women should be treated as mens equals (which is not the same as giving them special privlieges), congratulations, you're a feminist.
equality only exisits in fair treatment under the law, asides from that no one is equal nor should they be.
we have a right to be jerks, you have the right to not associate with us. that is as far as it goes.
While I take no issue with your articles at all, I do find your choice of topic interesting for your first 2 articles on this site.
One would posit that since the gaming audience is predominantly male, that your opening salvos definitely couldn't have been better targetted.
Discrimination, in general, is disgsuting... I don't think that this only applies to gender, but to race, size, and sexual orientation as well. Discrimination in those areas is, easily, just as pervasive as gender discrimination and just as poorly handled in the gaming community.
I completely agree with your initial article's musings on threats and harrassment used based on discrimination.
I completely disagree with you on your comments regarding "jiggle physics and giggle tracks". If a game has them and you find it offensive, don't play the game. Vote with your wallet.
To say that such is "offensive to women" presumes you took a poll.
I'd say you went back on your "Being Honest" commitment with that one, but the comment was made before the commitment.
Originally posted by krant Originally posted by Azaron_Nightblade I found the original article rather interesting, and almost commented on it until I got to the end of it and it turned into yet another bashing of pixel supermodels and jiggle physics - at which point I pretty much labeled Lisa as yet another feminist crusader. This article seems more balanced however, so I'll just state my original comment now: I honestly have never seen the behavior mentioned. I've seen plenty of stalkers, but never outright hostility and discrimination when they found out someone was female. The worst I've seen is probably "Get in the kitchen and fetch me a beer/sandwhich, woman!" jokes.
Someone interested in equality for all, without special privileges, would much more accurately be called an egalitarian.
Case in point: The artilcle isn't concerned with bad behavior in games. The way it is intentionally framed, it is only concerned about behavior that is offensive to women, and only damns the behavior of men. In doing so, it reinforces the biased and simplistic notion that women are the only victims that matter, and men are the only offenders requiring censure.
Continual references to violence aside, it's important to remember that the theme of the article is actually one of policing thought and speech. To that end, the author demands special privileges from society - that one gender be entitled to establish rules of behavior for the other, and that society be enlisted to enforce those unilaterally created, biased, and likely very nebulous rules. That's neither fair nor equal.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
To give feedback on moderation, contact email@example.com
The Deep Web is sca-ry.
Originally posted by Amana Please keep discussion on the articles and not on attacking the writers by utilizing outside sources. Also, while there are social issues being raised, let's not let this get away from the subjects discussed by the author and into the realm of general politics/ideology discussions.
As you wish, you are one of the mods, and this is a private forum. You have the freedom to make such determinations. But others have the freedom to not contribute their insight, experience and time in this forum as well.
"Another might be a variation on the successful, sexual assault awareness campaign run byEdmonton Canada: Don’t Be That Guy.
Why it‘s been successful is because, while women are frequently bombarded with hints, tips and suggestions for ensuring/protecting their own safety, men are rarely made aware of what is acceptable and what crosses the line. Sure, maybe a man can joke about raping another man, and maybe that second man is cool with it, likely never having had to worry about that as a potential reality. However, potential (and actual) rape is the reality for many women every day, so those “jokes” become something far more sinister.
Ultimately, it’s our perspectives that shape our choices and it’s our choices that define us. What are your thoughts?"
Generally speaking, stereotyping is offensive and damaging, no matter the rationale.
First of all, the ad campaign wasn't proven successful, at least not in Edmonton, in that reported rapes went up by about 14% from 2010 to 2011 in that city. No impartial study has confirmed its effectiveness. Ostensibly benign and infomative, it also has a more "sinister" side: it uniformly depicts men - all men, and only men - as potential rapists.
Oddly enough, concurrence for the damaging effects of such a damning portrayal come from this article itself, as the author states, "But I do believe that what we see affects how we think, and if what we see is predominantly geared toward the tastes of one particular group .... then that is what we will unconsciously start accepting as The Way It Is."
Most people seem to agree that the villification of a group of people - stereotyping, prejudice, profiling - is a bad thing. Given all of the above, why would overtly targetting only men as sexist or offensive be good in this case? Isn't that also sexist?
Worldwide, men are victims of violence at a far greater rate than women. They are also the victims of murder at a much higher rate than women (pages 6 and 7, WHO). As a result, threats of violence or murder can have a similarly "sinister" aspect for men that is being claimed as the sole province of women by the article, and is therefore just as "real".
Again, it's important to keep in mind that what's actually being talked about here is the control of thought and speech - and not just threats of violence, mind you. Hurtful comments about appearance, weight, status, sexual advances, etc, are lumped in there. In that it ascribes such negative behavior only to men, the article claims special, superior status for women, stating they are the only victims that matter or exist, and demanding they are entitled to control the other gender based on one-sided emotional appeals and stereotyping. There's no question that both sides engage in negative behavior, and both suffer from it, albiet usually in different ways.
People interested in equality and fairness should be concerned for all that suffer, and condemn all that abuse, regardless of gender or self-interest.
I have not even commented on this thread, but if you go anywhere and raise a flag of crusading zeal don’t by surprised if posters use “outside sources” or comment on the wider social issues that your column writer is bringing up in relation to gaming.
You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy? :P