Terrorists at Utah State force speaker to cancel

[downtown]

I think that's the correct term here.

An email sent to Utah State University officials threatens to terrorize the school with a deadly shooting over a talk to be delivered by feminist critic and Tropes vs. Women in Video Games creator Anita Sarkeesian, Polygon confirmed with the school's Center for Women and Gender Studies.

Sarkeesian is scheduled to speak at USU Oct. 15 for "Common Hour: Anita Sarkeesian." A member of the Center for Women and Gender Studies verified to Polygon that the email was sent to the center today, but could not offer more information. The school's Twitter account, meanwhile, added that the threat is being investigated with more details "to come soon."

...

"If you do not cancel her talk, a Montreal Massacre style attack will be carried out against the attendees, as well as students and staff at the nearby Women's Center," the message reads. "I have at my disposal a semi-automatic rifle, multiple pistols, and a collection of pipe bombs."

...

Update 2: Polygon spoke with USU executive director of public relations and marketing Tim Vitale, who confirmed that the email threat was sent to "five or six" members of the Center for Women and Gender Studies before being more broadly sent to PR, alumni and other campus offices. Vitale said that both employees at the university and police believe it is unlikely the threat was sent by a student.

"It didn't seem like a student to any of us who read it," Vitale told Polygon. "[The student claim] is kind of oddly placed in the email, and it's chunkily done.

"It didn't seem out of the norm for things she had received before. It was more in line with that than a student from our own institution."

Vitale added that prior to the threat, police officials were already making preparations to provide security to Sarkeesian due to the history of harassment.

"It is something they considered and take seriously," he said.

Sarkeesian canceled her talk after speaking to authorities. Utah cannot prevent those with a legal permit to conceal and carry from entering the building. Precautions taken would have included beefing up police presence, both with officers in uniform and undercover, and not allowing attendees to carry large bags or bookbags.

"The predicament there is that the state of Utah has a law that a person with a legal, concealed carry permit cannot be kept from entering any public building," Vitale said. "It's including universities ... that's the law. Our police just followed the law."

Full story at Polygon here. http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/14/6979071/utah-state-university-anita-sarkeesian-threats

What's to be done about this? Should the author have caved? Did Utah's laws fail? What can be done about these absolutely crazy threats and acts of terror?

 

[Kyriakos]

Eh...

Doesn't this seem a bit way too entirely on the side of making a vast mountain out of a Sarkeesian talk?

I am sure people have threatened anonymously to kill on account of any other talk of dubious or not variety. Likely the threat would not materialise (remember those FB threats against cool US politicians?), so why is this in the news other than an attempt to make this a huge issue of gun-holding hicks vs the supposed Malalalala of video game critique?

TLDR: likely a non-issue diversion, imo.

 

[bhsup]

I think that's the correct term here.

Yes, it is.

What's to be done about this?

Find and imprison and/or kill the terrorist.

Should the author have caved?

I wouldn't call common sense canceling based on the threat received as caving...

Did Utah's laws fail?

Unless it has laws that prevent law enforcement from investigating and prosecuting, then no Utah's laws did not fail. Do you really think the person would not enter if they had a law saying they couldn't bring firearms into the building? "Oh golly, that would be breaking the law, so I guess I won't go there with the intent to murder someone."

What can be done about these absolutely crazy threats and acts of terror?

Find and imprison and/or kill the terrorist.

 

[useless]

No you see this isn't misogyny because

 

[Timsup2nothin]

This screams of 'publicity stunt'. There is always a crazy sending an e-mail. Canceling the appearance, and making a big deal about canceling the appearance, is getting a thousand times the attention that the appearance would have.

 

[warpus]

Wait, feminist terrorists? Really? That's pretty nuts

However,

Utah cannot prevent those with a legal permit to conceal and carry from entering the building.

is pretty nuts too.

 

[useless]

This screams of 'publicity stunt'. There is always a crazy sending an e-mail. Canceling the appearance, and making a big deal about canceling the appearance, is getting a thousand times the attention that the appearance would have.

Threats have been made against her in the past, to kill, to harm and to rape her, so i wouldn't put it past these degenerates to do this, honestly.

 

[Kyriakos]

Threats have been made against her in the past, to kill, to harm and to rape her, so i wouldn't put it past these degenerates to do this, honestly.

She is posting videos of 'critique' of computer games, arguing they are sexualising women etc. Who possibly would care as much about her so as to risk ruining his own life by trying to kill her? Seems more probable that this is a stunt, even if the email with the threat was sent it likely amounted to only a very hypothetical threat (eg as in when a teen posts on social media that they will kill X politician etc).
Likely she used this to her advantage, for more of the lame media coverage of another pretty much non-issue.
Again, she is someone making videos arguing about use of the female form in computer games. Building a career on that can't get more boring/imbecilic.

 

[Tigranes]

Yes, it is.Find and imprison and/or kill the terrorist.

Kill? Over the silly threats? In the context of videogames? Let's apply brakes instead.

 

[useless]

She is posting videos of 'critique' of computer games, arguing they are sexualising women etc. Who possibly would care as much about her so as to risk ruining his own life by trying to kill her? Seems more probable that this is a stunt, even if the email with the threat was sent it likely amounted to only a very hypothetical threat (eg as in when a teen posts on social media that they will kill X politician etc).
Likely she used this to her advantage, for more of the lame media coverage of another pretty much non-issue.
Again, she is someone making videos arguing about use of the female form in computer games. Building a career on that can't get more boring/imbecilic.

I guess threats to kill or to rape or to harm her family don't matter that much because vidya games.

Congrats on minimizing it, i guess you really do know better than the people recieving said threats

 

[bhsup]

Kill? Over the silly threats? In the context of videogames? Let's apply brakes instead.

Attempt to capture to imprison, but I don't expect law enforcement to stupidly try to capture alive at the risk of their own lives. So yes, kill if he/she resists and holes up in some defensive position, etc.

And btw, I don't really think threatening to murder someone is a silly threat. This isn't someone just venting, "I'm gonna kill you" in a moment of anger. This was a calculated threat put forward.

 

[useless]

Remember people, this is all because she said negative things about games

 

[brennan]

It's because she said stupid things about games and offensive things about gamers and game designers and has resorted to censorship and mud slinging to silence her critics. None of which has anything to do with her gender, no matter how much she and her defenders try to say it is.

 

[bhsup]

Why is there any focus at all on the person that was to give the speech? That should be a total non-issue. There has been a threat made and that should be the sole focus. Who cares who the person is that was going to give a speech? Whether she is part of the gaming industry, or is a neurosurgeon giving a radical speech about breakthrough techniques that traditionalist neurosurgeons find offensive (yeah, I know, I know) or whatever, it's irrelevant.

 

[useless]

It's because she said stupid things about games and offensive things about gamers and game designers and has resorted to censorship and mud slinging to silence her critics. None of which has anything to do with her gender, no matter how much she and her defenders try to say it is.

Maybe you and all the other people offended by her critical feminist analysis of video games should get over the fact they're being subjected to the same analysis that films, tv programmes, books etc are.

I often hear gamers wanting their hobby/interest to be taken seriously, well here was a chance and they blew it.

NOTHING Anita has said justifies the response she has gotten, and if you seriously think it has, you need to take a good long look at yourself and think "do people deserve death and rape threats, or threats of committing violence because they have a different opinion on games"

 

[downtown]

Why is there any focus at all on the person that was to give the speech? That should be a total non-issue.

I totally agree. Nothing that this person said (and she's talking about VIDEO GAMES for God's sake) justifies this sort of response. The merit or validity of her ideas ought to be a complete non-issue.

 

[useless]

I totally agree. Nothing that this person said (and she's talking about VIDEO GAMES for God's sake) justifies this sort of response. The merit or validity of her ideas ought to be a complete non-issue.

No but you see she offended gamers by analyzing games

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why is there any focus at all on the person that was to give the speech? That should be a total non-issue. There has been a threat made and that should be the sole focus. Who cares who the person is that was going to give a speech? Whether she is part of the gaming industry, or is a neurosurgeon giving a radical speech about breakthrough techniques that traditionalist neurosurgeons find offensive (yeah, I know, I know) or whatever, it's irrelevant.

I don't think there's any reason to put any focus on her at all, since I think she is a total non-issue. There is always a nut job sending an e-mail, just like there's always a nut job touring America making speeches. If the NFL cancelled every game that was threatened by a nut job e-mail there would be no games this weekend. They don't, because they get far more out of having the games than they get out of promoting and publicizing a cancellation. This ranter that hardly anyone cares about gets far more from the cancellation than she would have gotten from ranting to a near empty house in Utah.

The choice to turn this particular nut job e-mail into a publicity stunt was made, so the attention derived, both positive and negative, is her 'just reward'. In my opinion everyone should pay exactly as much attention to the cancellation as they would have paid to her speech had she made it...ie none.

 

[PhroX]

Maybe you and all the other people offended by her critical feminist analysis of video games should get over the fact they're being subjected to the same analysis that films, tv programmes, books etc are.

I often hear gamers wanting their hobby/interest to be taken seriously, well here was a chance and they blew it.

NOTHING Anita has said justifies the response she has gotten, and if you seriously think it has, you need to take a good long look at yourself and think "do people deserve death and rape threats, or threats of committing violence because they have a different opinion on games"

While I'm no fan of Anita's, considering her to be an attention seeker that includes the odd relevant point in the midst of a pile of BS, I do agree with that last paragraph. The behaviour of people towards her has been abhoerent, inexcusable and needs to stop, and indeed if the source of these threats is found, they should be punished, preferably with jail.

 

[downtown]

The choice to turn this particular nut job e-mail into a publicity stunt was made, so the attention derived, both positive and negative, is her 'just reward'. I.

I'm not sure why this became a publicity stunt? The decision to cancel was made in consultation with Utah State University. And as for whether this sort of thing is a regular occurrence, again, from the article:

University authorities contacted the FBI Cyber Terrorism Task Force, who are now involved in the investigation. Vitale said that the university took the threat "extremely seriously," and that the level of threat presented is rare.

"I can't say never, but I've been here 17 years in the public relations office and I've never seen anything like this."

Doesn't seem like an attention grab to me.