The death of the "gamers" and the women who "killed" them
Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian prove points a certain gamer-type refuses to hear.
Casey Johnston - Aug 29, 2014 12:00 am UTC
A screenshot of a domestic abuse scene from Watch Dogs used as an example in Anita Sarkeesian's "Women vs. Tropes in Video Games" series.
"Oh, Anita, you're so beautiful and sexy, you know that?" was the nicest terrible thing a random Twitter user said to Anita Sarkeesian, creator of the Tropes vs.Women in Video Games series, as he peppered her with threats of rape, death, and the address of her home and that of her parents following the posting of her latest video on Monday. The video, which would be right at home on PBS in tone if not content, suggested that many mainstream games represent women as accessories and shorthand rather than as humans, a viewpoint that generated swift and unrelenting rage.
The attack on Sarkeesian was among a number of incidents in the last few weeks that exposed some of the ugly (yet familiar) attitudes and prejudices that remain deeply ingrained in the gaming culture. This time, those sentiments have gotten tied up in ethical arguments in an attempt to highlight the toxic behavior.
A lie gets halfway around the world
The tide of abuse first surged over Zoe Quinn, creator of the game Depression Quest, who got a deluge of negative attention, abuse, threats, and harassment over a blog post written about her by an ex-boyfriend that was published August 16. The post, composed of narcissistic analysis mixed in with screenshots of several online conversations, exposed many personal details about Quinn irrelevant to her profession or professional conduct.
Details from the post were quickly spun into a conspiracy. Based on the lone fact of Quinn's relationship with one Kotaku writer, Nathan Grayson, who quoted her once in an article and never covered or reviewed her game, rumors circulated that Quinn had "alleged affairs with video game journalists" which influenced coverage of her game. There is no evidence to support this assertion, and the only fact that it's based on—that Quinn began a relationship with Grayson some time after he quoted her in an article and never published anything about her again—disproves it. The other two people named in the post are a sound designer and Quinn's boss, who do not work in gaming journalism.
Yet the accusations went on, along with doxxing and hacking of Quinn's information and accounts. The onslaught continued with assertions that Quinn made up the harassment, that she used devious womanly wiles to get her (free) game some coverage, and that she portrayed herself as a victim to receive donations. Around August 17, Phil Fish, the creator of Fez, tried to step in and defend Quinn. After he received pushback, Fish threatened to cancel unnamed projects.
Fish then said he had his Twitter and Dropbox accounts hacked and e-mail accounts, passwords, and banking information published in response to his defense. Fish shamed those who were attacking Quinn on his Twitter account: "All you people attacking Zoe are cowards. Attacking a woman the easiest way you can. Despicable cowards, all of you." Fish followed by announcing his Fez IP was for sale because he "want[ed] out" of the gaming industry.
Women as background decoration
Then came the vicious attacks on Sarkeesian and her video series, which looks at how women are portrayed and used in everything from AAA titles to indies. Sarkeesian published an installment Monday that was the second of two parts studying "women as background decoration" in games. The video includes examples from games like Watch Dogs, where the main character watches multiple instances of violent domestic abuse and, rather than take even a second look at the woman who suffers it, is required to amble off and track down the man who did it.
Women as Background Decoration: Part 2 - Tropes vs Women in Video Games.
Sarkeesian's videos, which are extremely well-researched and insightful, always draw a measure of harassment and abuse from the stereotypical gamers, who are typically vitriolic toward issues of diversity. This time, the video reached all the way to the likes of Joss Whedon and Tim Schafer. The amplified message earned Sarkeesian an avalanche of threats, including rape, death, and harm to her family. Sarkeesian ultimately left her home and reported the threats to the police. "I'm safe. Authorities have been notified. Staying with friends tonight," she wrote on Twitter early Wednesday.
Enough outlets have, by now, highlighted the profound irony that one woman who dared point out some of the misogyny in video games was so deluged by misogynistic threats over how there is no misogyny in video games that she was driven into hiding. Quinn's story lacked entirely in irony; instead it was just a good old-fashioned example of a woman's personal life used to inflict professional damage, despite the fact that those two things are not related at all.
Many of the people slagging off Sarkeesian and Quinn bind their arguments up in bigger issues, saying that Quinn's situation shines light on ethical quandaries in games and gaming journalism, and Sarkeesian's illuminates crowd-funded "scams" where "social justice warriors" "cherry-pick" evidence to undermine the massive business and culture of video games, rightfully owned by a particular kind of white man.
All of the tertiary accusations against Quinn (that she invented attacks or abuse) are aimed to discredit her. The same goes for Sarkeesian: the structure and content of her videos are extremely common to critical analysis, as the New Statesman points out. But when that style of criticism gets applied to video games, it feels like a threat to a certain insular, and extremely vocal, community for whom, as Leigh Alexander writes for Gamasutra, their "identity depends on the aging cultural signposts of a rapidly-evolving, increasingly broad and complex medium."
For gaming to be taken seriously as an art form, it needs to be able to stand up to cultural critiques, and gamers need to be able to separate a developer's personal life from her work. But it especially holds the medium back when these situations not only fail to play out in a civilized way, but become opportunistic embroiling of women in the "problems" of gaming culture, creation, and coverage.
It is, on a sad meta level, a real-life version of what Sarkeesian discusses in "Women As Background Decoration Part 2": women being treated as less-than, harassed and harangued out of the conversation, in service to a different, "bigger" problem. And every time it happens, it advances the goals of the most poisonous "gamers," while regressing everything else.
Casey Johnston Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics.
Twitter @caseyjohnston
1825 Reader Comments
illuminerdi Smack-Fu Master, in training
reply Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:16 am
WorkingWomanPhys wrote:
To be clear, a man would get just as much flack for sleeping with people inside the industry as a woman
Are you going to tell me that in the 20+ year history of video games and games journalism there has never been an instance of a male developer sleeping with a female journalist? Bearing in mind the demographics of the situation being *heavily* weighted in favor of the female journalist.
Now, given that this having happened is all but a complete certainty, I would like you to detail the ensuing scandal that erupted as a result.
I would then like details of how the male game dev was harassed, threatened, and had his personal information posted online, as well as how the integrity of his work/ethos (and not the female journalist's) was questioned, and how goon squads of the opposite sex began personal and professional campaigns to discredit and defame him.
Bonus points if the incident that you describe all stems from an online post by an ex-girlfriend who is considered by the populace at large to be a credible source of information and not a "psycho ex".
54 posts | registered May 7, 2014
Kosiani Wise, Aged Ars Veteran et Subscriptor
Well, this shows that gaming as a medium has a loooong way to go.
The idea that a woman's sexual history should be made public and that "investigating" it is somehow a valid pastime simply beggars belief. To be so divorced from social norms and good taste as to think that this kind of prurience has value is just sad.
Then, you have a critic, doing what critics do, critiquing. Rather than accept that that's what critics do, we have people acting as though there's some objective truth to be found in art criticism.
There isn't, all there is, is opinion. You don't try and abuse a critic into changing ing their opinion until it fits some criteria that you have in your head. It was strange when directors and actors attacked critics, but at least they had a personal stake in their own work. For some random "fan" to do it, seems uncomfortably close to obsession or madness.
I really wonder what happens to make people turn out this way.
ken_valyi Ars Praefectus
Vampyre wrote:
This is the EXACT story Aurich said wasn't 'Ars material' a week ago.
Of course, it's also laid out exactly with the total lack of truth and facts as well that's been going through most gaming media.
Don't take their word for it; they don't even check their sources. Evidently, Ars Technica is no better that publications like The Escapist, which Aurich described as "some guy's blog" or Kotaku, where having sex with someone, then giving them positive press, putting them in your podcasts, and pushing for their game to get passed through greenlight after having previously failed, while not checking sources or facts, is considered 'journalism'.
Zoe Quinn didn't have a relationship with Grayson until after he wrote about her on Kotaku, and he never reviewed her game. While you claim to school Ms Johnston on researching facts, she did provided ample links in her article, you have none in your comment.
I'll never trust another Ars article again.
SudoShinji Ars Centurion
Bicentennial Douche wrote:
SudoShinji wrote:
wjousts wrote:
Sphynx wrote:
weathertop wrote:
Proof there is indeed a problem?
This thread.
(puts on helmet and enters bunker)
Whilst you're in that bunker consider this: Has anyone ever wondered that perhaps the reason for so much butt-hurt in this thread is because there is a kernel of legitmate frustration with a 'Piers Morgan' type individual such as Sarkeesian; harrassing a sector of the community that (for the majority) do not think in the way they are portrayed, do not equate cited titles with literal sexist behaviour, but rather take games for what they are and play for enjoyment alone rather than political spin, and therefore legitimately resent being consistantly attacked and demonised?
Kinda ironic isn't it.
Who's demonized? WTF are you talking about? She said "hey, all these damsel's in distress is a bit over done don't you think?" and suddenly everybody loses their shit. Get some fucking perspective. Are you really that fragile?
She's been doing this for a long time and there is a lot more backstory to this issue than one video, it's pretty ironic to tell someone to get perspective and not have any idea of what the issue at hand is or what's been happening with this.
OK, enlighten us. What is this feminist conspiracy that Sarkeesian masterminded? Is this some sort of pyramid scheme? Fraud? Satan worshipping? What? Whatever it is, it's apparently heinous enough to warrant threats of rape and murder, so I guess we are dealing with something pretty horrible.
Look you need to take a deep breath and try to think rationally, there are definitely sexist issues in the gaming community and lot's of respectable women with valid thoughts and blogs on the idea (I'm married to one in fact). The point is this is not one of them, this woman has been trolling the gaming community and making not only herself look bad but also anyone that points out said sexism. I had doubts years ago when she asked for free games from people to review and then took pictures of hundreds of free video games that people had sent her and then did reviews of those games and pointed out things that didn't even exist in them followed by a cash grab of selling them off, that for me was a red flag but then everything that has happened since then has made it abundantly clear that she isn't interested in having a debate that may help the community and women but rather she is interested in attention. If you had read even one page of comments you would've seen that there are plenty of people in here that take issue with sexism in here that have an issue with this troll which could have easily led you to do even the most simple of research to find out there is much more to this story than someone putting out a video of sexism in gaming (that happens literally daily and no one makes an issue of it). Not one person in this thread has said the threats weren't horrible, they are and if they are real that's too bad but that doesn't validate her in any way.
vartec Ars Praefectus
Also, before making it into false "conflict" between gamer community and women, it's worth getting your facts straight – nearly half of gamers are women.
Which was reported by Ars: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/08/r ... r-18-boys/
GenocideOwl Ars Tribunus Militum
I know I am very late to the "party". But I highly take offense to this line in the article.
Sarkeesian's videos, which are extremely well-researched and insightful
No. They really really are not.
In fact her ENTIRE premise can be proven moot with one counter point.
And excuse me for not taking the time to make this overly eloquent.
First. what is her premise?
That women are treated as second class citizens in gaming. That this influences us yadda yadda yadda.
but that comes back into something "we" have heard over and over again for MUCH longer.
violence in video games.
that's right. That thing we have heard about non-stop since the 90s
if her point is that these things grossly influence us. Then shouldn't the even more CORE parts of the game influence us EVEN more?
But wait according to VERY well tacked FBI statistics violence across the board(and especially among the video game playing youth) is on a 40+ year low and still trending down.
....kinda undermines her ENTIRE premise right there...
EDIT: I will not argue against the point that "gaming culture" has an anti-women problem; THAT it has in spades. but "games" have as much an anti-women problem as movies have an anti-minority lead problem.
Last edited by GenocideOwl on Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:25 am
Pantagruel Ars Scholae Palatinae
Thordane wrote:
Someone must have said it already in this huge thread, but I seriously doubt Quinn and Fish were hacked by 4chan, specially Fish. It was either a third party or... themselves.
No 4chan regular would ever write "/V/" and everyone knows that mods are global. "Anonymous" (the movement) is despised there.
Haha yeah, the "head mod of /V/" give me a break. It was clearly someone just passing the blame to 4chan because it's an easy target, and the uninformed won't question it.
If it was a 4channer then they probably would have signed that they were from 9gag or reddit.
What I really don't understand is that this should be relatively easy to verify or at least to confirm both victim's claims. Why did no one try to talk to CloudFlare, you know, like a journalist would?
Similarly, if Anita really "contacted the authorities", there should be official records. Showing them would shut up a lot of paranoid people.
Last edited by Pantagruel on Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:25 am
sitkal Seniorius Lurkius
Thanks to Casey and her one-sided biased article, I won't be reading Ars anymore. I completely disagree with those that are harassing both Anita and Zoe (if there are people that are indeed harassing them) but clearly lambasting those that are genuinely looking for fair journalism and painting them as the bad guy is terrible journalism - if anything, Casey is adding to the problem.
Suffice to say I'll be looking elsewhere for my tech news.
Next time you write an article Casey, try and present both sides of the argument and try and present the information in a non-biased way. Otherwise you are no better than those you so clearly support and no better than those that are undermining the integrity of journalism.
1 post | registered May 9, 2012
alcaron Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
404 wrote:
Cervus wrote:
As i already mentioned in another post. This kind of blanket statement by certain social justice crusaders is what i was speaking of in particular. A columnist just brought race into the picture and it seems everything believes this is somehow acceptable.
The entire irony about all of the conversations here is that, with all of this talk about mysogony, We just had a columnist spewing racially charged blanket statements. It appears Ars is far more interested in women than having a race-baiting columnist on their staff.
But clearly, Who am I? What do I know? According to Casey Johnston, I'm not 'White' enough to be a gamer in the first place.
You've read that paragraph wrong. Here it is in full:
Many of the people slagging on Sarkeesian and Quinn bind their arguments up in bigger issues, saying that Quinn's situation shines light on ethical quandaries in games and gaming journalism, and Sarkeesian's illuminates crowd-funded "scams" where "social justice warriors" "cherry-pick" evidence to undermine the massive business and culture of video games, rightfully owned by a particular kind of white man.
Emphasis added. The point she's making here is that the people who are attacking them are the ones who have that assumption about race. Not Casey Johnson herself.
I read nothing wrong. I am a Quinn critic. The irony of it all is, that i wasn't one until the gaming media immediately began to concede that Quinn was given stipends of money followed by some announcing that journalists are barred from doing that from this point on. That was enough to actually get me interested in the topic in the first place.
As i already said, it is a race baiting blanket statement. The irony of it all is that moderators have begun editing my posts. Yet, they clearly have no desire or any form of standards to look into Casey's race baiting and white privileged blanket statement on Quinn's critics. It's pure cowardice.
It really does not matter what you say in this thread, you should know that by now.
Don't let it get to you, a) downvotes don't matter, b) this is about pageviews. For a group of people who pride themselves on their social media prowess what did you think was going to happen to comments here that were critical? Someone said something about all the white men coming in here and crying and I replied it was sexist and racist and it is currently sitting at -10.
If that kind of comment is allowed we are no longer having a rational discussion, I think ars editors knew this going in.
Well good job ars, you got your page views, and my sub is cancelled. No one, and I mean NO ONE, would find the use of "black woman" in place of "white man" acceptable.
Nobody wants gender equality, it isn't human rights, it is womens rights. Everyone just wants the top spot.
But I tell you what, while downvoting me does literally nothing to me, the stifling behavior exhibited in these comment threads (or the attempt anyway, like I said, downvotes don't actually do anything here) has bred such ill will that I don't think they will ever really understand.
There is literally NO room for disagreeing with a SINGLE thing said in this article without being downvoted to hell. To a one every critical post is in the negative and every supportive post is in the positive.
Sorry ars, but I come here for news, not op-eds you can't even bother to tag as such.
Kin24 Ars Praefectus
How exactly do we know that the people making threats are actually gamers and not just assholes, trolls, and critics of hers?
skyroski Seniorius Lurkius
[redacted] pointless.
Last edited by skyroski on Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:56 am
16 posts | registered Nov 3, 2012
wjousts Ars Tribunus Militum
So please enlighten everybody. What is she doing that is so dangerous? All she did was TALK about video games.
Yeah, you need some perspective.
Vampyre Ars Legatus Legionis
I. Just. Don't. Get. It.
I can't even fathom the mentality that has this horrendously violent response just because a women decided to (gasp!) TALK ABOUT VIDEO GAMES.
I just don't get it. I don't understand. At all. How can anybody think that's an appropriate response? Threats or rape and death? All she did was talk about video games? What do you think will happen? Do you think video games are going to disappear because of it? Is she going to rip away your precious childhood memories? Are you afraid all future games will require a militant lesbian as protagonist? Because if you think any of those things, even a little bit, you are fucking insane.
I started watching the videos yesterday. And they are really, really good.
And no, nobody is taking away your precious games. Not even the "scary" Ms. Sarkeesian
You fucking idiots.
Here's what you don't get.
Suppose there were a few hundred, or even a few thousand such 'threats'. No one deserves those for any reason, and while they don't fall into the standard where a 'reasonable person' would actually feel threatened individually, in total, I understand why they feel so threatening.
But here's the problem. "Gamers' number in the tens or hundreds of MILLIONS. How reasonable is it to label "gamers' misogynist based on a few hundred or thousand completely unreasonable threats made by completely anonymous people (most likely young men)? It's about as reasonable as labeling every Muslim a terrorist because there are some muslim terrorists.
Oh, but those muslims should stand up and tell the terrorists to stop! How effective do you think that is? How effective do you think non-misogynist gamers talking to random anonymous internet people and telling them to stop doing that would be?
As a self-describing 'gamer', I don't identify with people who threaten others. I don't seek out the personal details of other people's lives in order to harass, objectify, or censor their speech. I don't have a problem with talking with or listening to people with whom I disagree, so long as they're willing to extend me the same courtesy.
Gamers want to play games. Some of them may also be internet trolls, but even if an internet troll is also a gamer, that doesn't make all gamers into internet trolls.
And just because no one is trying to 'take our games', doesn't make someone who describers herself as a gamer, but plays no games and has never claimed to do so, less than the fraud she was PROVEN to be. You know, with things like facts. Someone found a video disproving her claim she played games since childhood, where she says she never played games or plays them. There are many reasons to distrust what she has to say because she's actively LYING in other parts of her videos and speeches.
And because you assume that Casey Johnston actually did fact checking and checked her sources, you BELIEVE that message, even though it's a lie, because you assume you're being told the truth as verified, but what's really going on is that the propaganda is more important than the truth.
Last week, this 'story' wasn't good enough for Ars, per Aurich. Now that there's been time to smooth over all the information that makes the propaganda look bad, it's a story worthy of Ars Technica?
I smell something rotten, but it's not Denmark.
syntaks Ars Centurion
Are people being forced to buy these games?
Games are an art form. Art forms sometimes do things to make us uncomfortable. Art sometimes touches on things that make us queesy. That's what makes them Art. They are not commandments on how to live your life -- they are art forms designed to get an emotional response. You see it in film, fiction, etc.
That doesn't mean what the art portrays is morally right. Sometimes what it portrays is morally wrong. That's the entire point. To trigger an emotional response. What is so hard to understand about this?
I don't want my fiction, or my art, that I enjoy, to be watered down because some person doesn't agree with it. If you don't agree with it, don't partake in it -- it's not being forced down your throat.
also anybody who thinks Anita Sarkeesian is "well researched and insightful" should just watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuRSaLZidWI
daemonios Ars Tribunus Militum
Gryphonboy wrote:
What are you talking about? Even Quinn's ex boyfriend says she wasn't sleeping around. Quinn hooked up with a reviewer who never reviewed her game.
Why are you spreading rumors that she was?
Zoe Quinn herself has admitted to the infidelity as well as raping her boyfriend. Don't let the facts escape you.[/quote]
Still not relevant to the discussion about their expressed opinions of women in video games. Can we bury the discussion about what she does or doesn't do in the sack? I, for one, couldn't care less.
The only thing relevant here is that women who express opinions online get (usually sexual) insults, rape and death threats in much larger numbers than men. As much as men want to whine about how thye're not those guys, this perfectly illustrates the pervasive misogyny and rape culture. This isn't new. Here is a story from The Guardian in 2011 discussing this very issue, and a more recent story in Pacific Standard, from which I'd like to quote this:
Here's just a sampling of the noxious online commentary directed at other women in recent years. To Alyssa Royse, a sex and relationships blogger, for saying that she hated The Dark Knight: "you are clearly retarded, i hope someone shoots then rapes you." To Kathy Sierra, a technology writer, for blogging about software, coding, and design: "i hope someone slits your throat and cums down your gob." To Lindy West, a writer at the women's website Jezebel, for critiquing a comedian's rape joke: "I just want to rape her with a traffic cone." To Rebecca Watson, an atheist commentator, for blogging about sexism in the skeptic community: "If I lived in Boston I'd put a bullet in your brain." To Catherine Mayer, a journalist at Time magazine, for no particular reason: "A BOMB HAS BEEN PLACED OUTSIDE YOUR HOME. IT WILL GO OFF AT EXACTLY 10:47 PM ON A TIMER AND TRIGGER DESTROYING EVERYTHING."
I may be wrong, but I don't recall EVER seeing this kind of sexual violence directed at male bloggers/journalists.
404 Ars Praetorian
Kosiani wrote:
As it stands, there is a strong element of racism and sexism in "nerd culture" as a whole. I genuinely don't see what the problem is in going from the specific to the general. These two women are undergoing X. X springs from the fact that this particular subculture skews in a particular direction.
I'm a black man and I've played video games since I was a very little kid. I love playing video games, but I kinda hate gamers. That may sound harsh, but there are reasons why I don't play online with people I don't know. Why should I pay money to endure the same insults that my great grandfather did when he was growing up?
So yeah, not all gamers are white or male, but the author never said or implied that they were. She's talking about the attitudes of those within the gaming community. The desire to prevent the concerns of others, with regard to issues of race or gender, from being heard.
I do not quite agree with this but I know why you would feel this way. This is much like any political issues. The most visible set of population will always be the most vocal one and it will represent the group whether they are the majority or the minority.
At least one this article, I felt that the author made very emotive and negative connotation towards anyone who disagreed. I've seen some of these ladies' video and while some are true, they do make quite a but of conjectures without really backing them up. When some people point that out, they are branded as misogynist. That is neither helpful or warranted.
Of course, people who threatens rape, violence and make random suggestions themselves are helping either.
Basically both sides need to calm the f down and stop resorting to rhetoric and hearsay.
Let's just go ahead and use their own rationale to prove just how ridiculous not only their misogynist-baiting agenda is in this case but also Johnston's tin foil hat racial Illuminati agenda, by using their own tactics here. Here is my hypothetical blunt, crude and offensive letter using the same hyperbole that both Quinn and Johnston used. A hypothetical letter to the gaming press about me as a minority 'game developer' expect from them as fair press.
I'm making a game about how African Americans are negatively portrayed in video games. This is what I demand from you, the press.
1. kickstarter coverage of my game. We need to spread the word that every gamer is a racist. Except of course, white women gamers.
2. a monthly stipend of money. To support minorities in game development of course
3. Have sex with me. Everyone has sexual needs right? And it's none of the public's business who I have sex with
If you don't do all of the above then I will expose you as a racist that wants white men in control of the gaming industry.
Quinn and Johnston supporters should not be offended by this AT ALL. After all, Quinn has literally used the same logic while Johnston seem to be overwhelmingly supportive of some bizarre notion that anyone who does not support the Quinn's agenda secretly wishes that some imaginary white men have complete control of the gaming industry.
Apparently a few on twitter have also caught onto this. This isn't going to just go away now.
Tijger Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius et Subscriptor
Nihlathak wrote:
Tijger wrote:
And what IS the other side? Sexism is ok, harassment is ok? Oh no, its "men make games for real men and none of that feminist crap and fuck the faggots too!". So basically, the status quo.
As you sow you shall reap? Interesting point, so can we apply that to the ones who make death threats and the other vile crap they put out under the cloak of anonimity because those real men you fight so hard for generally do not have the balls to do what she does....use their own name.
No, the other side respectfully disagreeing with the "productions" of Anita. You don't have to endorse harassment to see why many of her points are wrong. Also, strawmen gets you nowhere. Many men create games how they want them, nowhere did I imply that other games are "less" in that extent, only that there are different tastes for different people (and maybe more so from gender to gender). If you don't like a game, shut it off and don't play it.
Do you want to complain at a hotrod-magazine created by a staff of passionate men, calling them sexist because there is a lack of content catering to your alledged "female" needs? Maybe if they had a similarly passionate female enthusiast on board they'd get a different spin on it, but if there are none then they'll provide worse content because they have to try as best they can to "mimic" what others are telling them what females would prefer.
When the ignorant and intentionally inflammatory behavior of Anita subsides, the gruesome threats will too. These trolls are flinging shit of the kind Anita is giving attention to. When she cherry-picks her threats at the most appropriate of times of course the trolls will give her more in kind because that's the only thing that sticks and one of the few things that seem to create what is an approximation to an emotional response. Not endorsing this at all, but simple psychology is all you need to understand what is happening. (Of course with the added benefit of an objective stance, not "all men are sexist because men")
Her basic point is that there's widespread sexism in the gaming industry and among gamers, do you honestly want to say that this isnt true?
Ah, why bother, a paragraph later you basically condone the threaths and all the poo being flung out her, you know, you sound just like one of those people complaining about uppity black people who need to know their place in a white mans world.
Deamon Ars Centurion
Itsbiggs wrote:
The only thing 'dead' in our world is journalistic integrity.
And your career.
Thanks for the opinion piece, this type of article has no place on ars.
-Signed,
A woman doing something for how women are perceived instead of playing the victim card like Miss Johnston
Yeah... You don't get it, and her career is probably far from being over.
Of course her career will be fine. As Ms. Sarkeesian amply demonstrates, throwing integrity out the window can be quite lucrative.
thiago_pc wrote:
So, a woman is harassed, threatened, has her personal address revealed to the world, but you say she's PLAYING THE VICTIM?
I'll say, bigotry has reached a new level in these foruns.
Given she intentionally provoked the abuse herself to drum up donations, yes, that about sums it up. Or mayby professional victim would be more fitting.
aquasub Ars Scholae Palatinae
Based on how negative points some comments have, I'm guessing the SJWs are out in force today.
She's lying when she talks about it, and she's lying so she can continue to take well-meaning people's money.
She doesn't deserve rape or death threats, but she knows she'll get them and she uses them to persuade well-meaning people into giving her money while she lies to them and tells them they are bad people, because some other anonymous people did bad things and they might be associated in some non-descript random way.
We call this propaganda. This is a poltical message for which the truth is unimportant. It undermines the entire message, and upon discovery of the lies, discredits the entire message.
There may be truth to the message, but so long as those supporting it do so with lies and half-truths spun to be misleading, a reasonable skeptic will assume the rest of the message is a lie as well.
So what is she doing that's so bad? She's lying, stealing (or defrauding if you prefer), and destroying any real chance for change, all the while manipulating blind support in her favor to continue her money making enterprise, presumably at your expense.
Don't trust me? Do the research yourself. You don't have to rely on what might be a biased actor telling you something; you can find the proof she's doing all of what I say above simply by doing some research and checking some of her real criticism. If you don't find it, then you weren't mislead by me, because I'm encouraging you to do some research and make up your own mind. When you do find it, you'll know you're being mislead by Ars Technica.
So let me ask you in return, that if you assume what I posted above is true, do you not see what's being done as wrong, and something worthy of being criticized? Because the above is my perspective AFTER looking into it myself.
Frankly, I feel betrayed, because I trusted Ars Technica and many other new media sources to want to be above trash journalism and actually present facts, and over and over, they've slapped me around and abused that trust with propaganda like this article. I expected better, but I never will again.
Bicentennial Douche Ars Legatus Legionis et Subscriptor
Look you need to take a deep breath and try to think rationally
I am. I'm asking for tangible examples how there is more to this issue than there seems. And in doing that I'm not "thinking rationally"? You know who are not thinking rationally? People who threaten with rape and murder because some woman said something about video games they disagree with.
I had doubts years ago when she asked for free games from people to review and then took pictures of hundreds of free video games that people had sent her and then did reviews of those games and pointed out things that didn't even exist in them followed by a cash grab of selling them off
In the above scenario, you might have an issue if she made claims that are not true. Rest: I'm not seeing the issue. Was she not allowed to sell those games?
that for me was a red flag but then everything that has happened since then has made it abundantly clear that she isn't interested in having a debate that may help the community and women but rather she is interested in attention.
How should she be having that debate? I haven't really followed her, but it seems that she does public speaking and the like. Isn't that basically part of the debate?
If you had read even one page of comments you would've seen that there are plenty of people in here that take issue with sexism in here that have an issue with this troll which could have easily led you to do even the most simple of research to find out there is much more to this story than someone putting out a video of sexism in gaming
Ok, what is that "much more" you are referring to? She asked for free games, wrote about them and then sold them off?
Not one person in this thread has said the threats weren't horrible, they are and if they are real that's too bad but that doesn't validate her in any way.
What I have seen here is people basically saying "yeah, the abuse she has received is bad, but....". They are basically blaming the victim. People condemning the abuse are few and far between. What we basically have is people who acknowledge the abuse, but then proceed that the abuse would stop if she changed her behavior. Basic victim-blaming.
flunk Ars Praefectus et Subscriptor
This entire thing is getting out of hand. It's been all over the gaming sites for quite a while and now it's so bad it's spilling over on to Ars. I'm not a fan of Anita Sarkeesian's Youtube channel because I find the videos only really "expose" things that are obvious and have already been done elsewhere better. They're also long and repetitive and I don't think her totally flat delivery is very interesting. However, I don't actually disagree with the main point.
The current "gaming culture", if that's what it is, is completely disgusting in the way it's very exclusive and works to violently insult and belittle anyone who doesn't fit into the majority. I've heard plenty of sexist, racist, homophobic and otherwise bigoted talk taken as normal on all sorts of game servers. We need to be as inclusive as possible, why are we trying to drive people away? What does that achieve? I'd rather that women (and everyone else) where able to play these games harassed even totally disregarding the human rights issue. More women playing video games means a greater possibility of finding a partner who shares a love of gaming. As for the human rights issue, it's totally disgusting what's happening and it just needs to stop.
Grow up or at least shut up.
Something smells rotten and it's your bullshit. Nowhere did she claim "all gamers are misogynists". Nowhere. So that's a strawman. She doesn't even talk about gamers, she talks about GAMES.
As for her status as a "gamer" first, it's bullshit. But second, it's COMPLETELY irrelevant. It isn't even important. Why would it be necessary to play whatever number of games you think is necessary to be a "real" gamer before you could call out the obvious repetition of tropes that is glaringly obvious?
As I said. I don't get it. I don't understand why YOU have taken this as such a terrible and deep attack on some core belief of yours. I really want to understand why, if you don't like what she says, you don't just ignore it and carry on enjoying your games. Please tell me. I want to understand.
I've been a gamer for more than thirty years and I don't feel even a little bit threatened here.
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd downvoted. You irrational monster you.
Because it is literally IMPOSSIBLE to think that maybe she courts the trolls for the upside it grants her. Yeah I know, why would anyone do that, I mean they threaten to rape and kill her!
First of all, these fringe actors are usually HEAVILY on the younger side of the spectrum, but more importantly, threats like those are literally a dime a dozen, you don't even have to be trying, I mean shit look at the author who killed off Chewie...a certain segment of people are just fucking crazy, the rest of that segment are 12 and think it's ok.
But what she does is say "AH HA! SEE! I'M RIGHT!" I constantly goad these jerkoffs and they act like jerkoffs, and they play games so gamers are all jerkoffs.
And Ars is actually poorly edited enough these days to post a big "f**k you!" to their readers, and no I don't mean gamers, I mean people who come here for news and the odd tab at journalism.
Honestly I used to be a gamer, but, I'm in my 30's now and, just got stuff to do, I also have 4 sisters, a g/f I adore and if you don't understand how having sisters impacts your view on women, you should try it sometime, I grew up in a household where my dad beat my mom, I then saw my single mother enter the workforce, I literally spent my formative years seeing the uglier side of things.
But that isn't me, I didn't do those things, I don't condone them and I'm not a part of them. And I completely and utterly disagree that depicting something always reinforces that thing. I've played Red Dead, I've played GTAV (and somehow managed to never kill a hooker in either, shit I'm not even sure I SAW a hooker in GTAV, then again I didn't have an axe to grind and a point to prove) and in case you weren't paying attention, the main characters were, in RDR a guy who had apparently been just shy of a monster in his past, and in GTAV, a thug, a thief and a fucking psycho.
So why don't you answer this, why is it that men never get any roles that don't portray them as monsters, animals, abusive bastards, psychopaths, or complete sniveling morons who can't do anything on their own?
I'm really tired of people acting like if you are white, and male (in your own f**king article no less, shame, ars, just shame) life is perfect and only women and black people get crapped on.
God cancelling my sub felt good.
Spaghetti Midwestern wrote:
Sarkeesian just got paid 150k to take out of context clips of videogames and talk about feminism. I only dislike her because I'm jealous I didn't think of that particular get rich quick scheme first.
You do realize your phrasing on that is, frankly, terrible and insulting, right?
Sarkeesian "got paid 150k" - no, she received *donations*. The internet keeps thinking that a Kickstarter ist he same as a pre-order, but it's not. A kickstarter is much closer to a donation where you get a "gift" for your donation, if possible.
Here's an analogy: when you pledge money to a telethon or public radio station, you sometimes get a gift if you pledge enough. This is a gift - the social and legal rules governing a "purchase" do no apply here, you do not have an expectation of the right to seek most forms of remediation if your "gift" does not fulfill you. When was the last time you (or someone you know) donated money to a telethon and then called to ask for the donation back because the t-shirt they sent you didn't look good once you tried it on?
People voluntarily gave her money to fund a project whose goals she clearly and comprehensively laid out ahead of time, and has delivered on (and continues to do so).
Furthermore, she made a series of videos that strongly resembles the videos she's been making for years about other aspects of culture such as films and television. So she had an existing body of work that people could evaluate beforehand to decide whether or not they liked her style and methods before donating - anyone who donated to her Kickstarted that claims ignorance or displeasure with the resultant Tropes vs Women in Games video series *clearly* didn't bother to spend ANY time researching her previous videos, which were all publicly available online, for free.
As for your comments about the "out of context" clips, congratulations, you've just won the irony-of-the-year award! You do know that one of the things Anita discusses at length in her videos is that women, the female body, and sex (with women) is OFTEN presented in these media without context (so it's bad when SHE uses the clips out of context, but totally ok when game developers use women as a whole without context?). Which is it gonna be, sparky, you gonna have the cake or eat it?
When you pick up a health pack in a game to refill your health meter, you don't read the labels on it, right? You don't know the brand name of the health pack, do you? You don't learn about it, what it contains, or where it came from, right? Because you don't need to - it's an object. It exists to serve a function, which is to refill your health.
When a women in a game exists in a similar capacity (to arouse you or to drive the plot in a fashion that is irrelevant to her as a human being) as a nameless, detail-less "thing", she ceases to be a woman and instead becomes an object, like that health pack. When this happens to you daily, in many games that you play, you start to automatically ignore the women in games, and give them the same amount of mental effort that you give to health packs.
Hell, in the GTA series, there were women who WERE health packs.
But ultimately, what drives me nuts here is that people don't seem to realize something that Anita has said time and time again, even at the beginning of every one of her videos: just because you criticize something doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. Nobody goes to a movie like The Expendables 3 thinking they're going to get some great cinematic masterpiece - they know it's a "popcorn flick", they are AWARE that it's shallow and mindless fun. It's ok to play games (sometimes) that don't have amazing/realistic depictions of women, but you should know, much like you do with cheesy action movies, that it's happening, so that you can consciously make an effort to not let it influence you, rather than allowing it to subconsciously change your perception of women from "people" to "objects".
Last edited by illuminerdi on Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:48 am
Knobby Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
Pretty sure nobody will read this all the way on the 14th page, but for what it's worth:
Obviously I'm not condoning these, quite frankly insane, reactions to somebody exercising free speech in an articulate and thought-out manner. However, having watched her video's before, and some equally articulate and thought-out refutations, I really cannot take the kind of remarks in the quote below seriously.
[...] Sarkeesian discusses in "Women As Background Decoration Part 2": women being treated as less-than, harassed and harangued out of the conversation, in service to a different, "bigger" problem. [...]
Seriously, this is EXACTLY what she does herself!
Almost literally saying: 'You are male, so you cannot comment or argue on these feminist issues.'
And that's about men trying to actually have a normal discussion, you know, with arguments and counter-arguments. A debate.
I'm not talking about persons who by their own sheer idiocy or offensiveness disqualify themselves from any kind of polite discussion, but normal well-spoken interlocutors who just happen to both disagree with her blanket assertions and are male.
Case in point from last year, Sarkeesian's 'damsel' video's and responses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfkS9YS_T0k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25o0EZiogw0
FreeRadical* Ars Legatus Legionis et Subscriptor
Jousle wrote:
How many threats those women received before playing the victim , victimizing women and vilificating men ?
They even manage to make some males to hate themselves just because they are males. Sorry guys, the feminist boot is just on your necks.
They even manage to make some women feel victims because Mario constantly risks and loses his own life trying to rescue a woman who was a victim of kidnaping by a powerful monster that throws balls of fire from his mouth . The mission was quite difficult and dangerous , and this is misogyny .
And this is the modern feminist diatribe , this is the kind of issues that keep "oppressing" and somehow "raping" women in the west . I guess.
These women are masters of manipulation , so don't just dismiss and take them for granted . They can be powerful , so be careful .
You are responding from inside a world created by people. Those people are the ones who created a world where a woman is held captive and a man has to risk his life to rescue her. Your complaint about feminism as you see it is from within that world, not from outside it where we all live.
Feminism isn't about making women feel like victims. It is partly about how people who feel trapped by actions of others can free themselves, kind of like a game guide like Wowhead but for real life. That game guide doesn't create the challenges in the game, but rather informs you how others have dealt with it.
Kilgaine Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Excellent article. Well written, clear and interesting all the way through. I always enjoy your articles. You should write more on this subject, as it's clearly an important issue these days, and there need to be more strong, level-headed voices out there like your own. Keep it up!
Bullshit. People condemning the abuse are everywhere. Death threats can be wrong in the same universe as being a lying stealing, con-artist is wrong. They are not mutually exclusive.
Receiving death threats does not in any way put someone - anyone - above criticism. That is playing the victim card, and is every bit as disgusting.
Black Frost Ars Centurion
Greenwizard88 wrote:
So really there's 4 different topics here, Sarkeesian and her viewpoints and reactions to them, and ZQ and how she's allegedly slept with members of the "gaming press" creating a conflict of interest, and used her influence to destroy an event.
The only connection I can see between the two people is that they're girls.
One story is the questioning of journalistic integrity RE:ZQ (I think that is a completely fair story).
One story is whether or not ZQ used her influence to kill an event (has anyone legitimately researched it?)
Bolded for emphasis. That's all you got between them.
Quinn started that way. People moved away from the who she had sex with issue as 1) people generally agreed it didn't matter to the discussion, and 2) real other issues about her current activities came up - the attack on TFYC. Where in 44 tweets, which you can find proof are real yourself, had her rip up a game jam promoting women in gaming by actually having games by women. Within those tweets you had the sub issue around a site called Patreons, a sure you can donate money to, which she urged others to use instead to support developers directly. On this end the very real matter of conflict of interest came up and at least one site, Kotaku, went public with the idea of their journalists are actually journalists, not bloggers, and won't be using services like that with developers. Judging by her reaction - calling them journalists as late as 5h before their decision then calling them bloggers afterwards - there's something going on with regards to journalistic integrity (even if you believe there was none, a major site who believes there is acted on that belief).
As for TFYC, well, you can CTRL F my username over on page 6 for a giant wall of information and a couple other posts in this topic regarding them. Despite the massively horrible start, they got a strange ally in 4chan and have an awedome campaign worth checking out of you are about all people and the idea of everyone shutting up to play games (this is actually what the female character 4chan created is about).
Have already given evidence the facts but just in case:
The tweets: http://i.imgur.com/n8EvAsb.png
Kotaku changing positions: http://kotaku.com/a-brief-note-about-th ... 1627041269
FreeRadical* wrote:
The trash talk helps to trivialize the real threats that people like Quinn and Sorkeesian are subjected to.
Thanks to all the gamers who are willing to stand beside those who are harassed even if they don't necessarily agree with them.
Just focusing on these two things but:
1) Quinn is not Anita. They are different people and have different stories revolving around them. They are independent of one another and should not be lumped together.
2) Realize that harassment goes on BOTH angles. As does meaningful discussion. Yes, the side who generally defends Anita and those who are allied with Quinn (currently, some have publically apologized once they realized they were misled) have also attacked people on the other side, including those looking for the meaningful discussion you want. It's people being against people and wrong from both. Yes, Anita got it bad. It's awful. But others, like again, TFYC, have been insulted for getting 4chan - /v/ specifically - to agree with and throw most of $30,000+ towards 1) a feminist cause, 2) curing colon cancer, 3) adding multi layered females to gaming, and 4) supporting women in the industry - both historical and new (as the latter is at the base of the project, women making games). Even if it started as trolling the messages have been good in all ways.
And even if you don't agree with them for who knows why, if you believe gamers ought to support those four stated things then you ought to at the very least look in to them.
HonorableSoul Ars Tribunus Militum
I did read your article Casey, well written. Online bullying and harrassment are never justified.
In regards to comments on how women are portrayed in gaming - I think real life has it beat. Anyways, women aren't the only victims of domestic abuse and men are riduculed as such.
TLDR; Yeah Viconia or Jahiera or Cortana were just sideshows /sarcasm off.
One moment of carelessness a lifetime of regret
A lifetime of carelessness, a moment of regret. TABOTD
Anyways don't take this post as caring for this topic at all. There are just certain things that are too visceral to talk about abortion, and this topic. No regrets.
Joe Cursio Smack-Fu Master, in training
Rentatakilol wrote:
"She blatent [sic] ignores the MANY strong, independent female characters…"
and Jawn wrote:
"Show me all these amazing post-2006 games with fully fleshed out women characters."
Here's a list of strong characters: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/List ... ideo_Games, It contains 28 names, but that includes Ms. Pac Man and Zelda. Below that is another list where you're allowed to play the lead character as female. That list contains 17 items.
Considering there are thousands of games out there (http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/list-48 lists about 2,400 for just PC RPG games), these numbers don't seem like "MANY" to me. Are these lists incomplete? Can we add to them?
1 post | registered Aug 29, 2014
She doesn't deserve rape or death threats, but she knows she'll get them
And that's obviously more bad than... oh, I dunno, threatening someone with rape and murder?
and she uses them to persuade well-meaning people into giving her money while she lies to them and tells them they are bad people, because some other anonymous people did bad things and they might be associated in some non-descript random way.
Do you have any examples of this?
She makes the claim that there is sexism in games. She gets threats of rape and murder. So OBVIOUSLY her claims that there is sexism in games is total lie.
Serious accusations, you probably have proof of this lying and stealing?
Don't trust me? Do the research yourself.
I don't trust you, and no, I will not do the research. I have better things to do. So put up or shut up.
Criticized, sure. But that's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about threats of rape and murder.
Oh you are just breaking my heart.
Deamon wrote:
exactly. Sarkeesian is a hack who likes to play the victim. And ironically the only reason her video get half the attention they do is because of these morons who attack her.
Tweeg Seniorius Lurkius
The harassment Anita is getting is disgusting, and its sad that its the "normal" for people in the public eye to have to deal with this bs.
I doubt however the actions of a few crazy people will impact gaming being viewed as a serious art form. Its already there, its mainstream.
Its sad that these people are able to harass Anita and its even sadder that their quest for attention is being fueled by online media.
This is a story of a zealot televangelists getting harassed though, and her struggles against these lunatics shouldn't in turn valid her work.
Has Casey honestly done any research regarding Anita's articles ? How can you write her videos are "extremely well-researched" when she has a anti vac mentality when citing papers. Finds a single one thats published that reenforces her point while ignoring thousands contradicting it.
Shes trying to reenforce fallacies that have been brought up since the 80s and constantly disproven, IE video games make people more violet, sexist, lead to the occult, cut in line, etc.
Her work has even been called into question by her own community IE Kristin Bezio, etc.
So how can ARS ignore that talk about her contributions like they add something to the conversation of gaming?
They don't shes a snake oil salesmen, she thrives on controversy and sensationalism. And now shes sadly being harassed by crazies.