What is with the backlash against feminism?

[Smote]

Somebody earlier in the thread mentioned Anita Sarkeesian, so let's use her as an example here. Nobody (at least nobody who isn't trolling) criticizes Anita for being a feminist. The reason so many gamers have a problem with her isn't the fact that she's a woman, it's not even the fact that she's a feminist. It's because she deliberately misrepresents games and says things that are blatantly untrue about them to push her ideological agenda. Then, when people accuse her of doing that, she tries to shut down the conversation by saying that they're persecuting her for her gender. You see it time and again, any and every criticism leveled against her, no matter how valid is labelled as misogyny, if not by her, then by her legion of defenders. I think being against that kind of behavior is very valid.

This is not the real reason she has legions of defenders. The real reason is sympathy against the extreme behavior of her critics.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...Makes-Players-Beat-Up-Tropes-vs-Women-Creator

http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/27/6...n-says-she-was-driven-out-of-house-by-threats

http://kotaku.com/bomb-threat-targeted-anita-sarkeesian-gaming-awards-la-1636032301

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...h-after-school-shooting-threat-at-utah-state/

This is countered by increasing the hate against her, via pages like this:

http://www.returnofkings.com/42602/did-anita-sarkeesian-fake-death-threats-against-herself

This sympathy of Anita and fear of Gamergate is summarized by Felicia Day's response:

http://thisfeliciaday.tumblr.com/post/100700417809/the-only-thing-i-have-to-say-about-gamer-gate

Which was of course followed by attacks on her (and she might be my favorite female internet celebrity )

http://gawker.com/felicia-day-says-shes-afraid-of-gamergate-immediately-1649790900

http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2014/10/23/3583347/felicia-day-gamergate/

This post displays the goals of Gamergate, which are quite attractive on the face of it:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.860762-GamerGate-Discussion-Debate-and-Resources

or posts about why individuals join, like this

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/for...Gate-Discussion-Debate-and-Resources?page=873

But how can pursuing journalistic integrity by means of terrifying women possibly be a good thing? Even if they find flaws, how many people are they willing to terrify in the process? Their de facto censorship of opponents via terror threats undercuts any possible message of problematic journalism, and is a far greater issue than the one they are attempting to solve.

Back to feminism backlash though, let's consider the effect of practice on the mind.
When we practice sports, or debate, or mathematics, or Civilization, we are in fact training our minds to be able to undertake such activities more easily. It takes less decision-making because we have already made such decisions in the past, and we can immediately recognize a new problem as an old problem repeated, and take the same steps. We actually have to think less, and the solutions are ingrained inside our heads to solve new problems that are similar to old problems.

I claim that these Gamergate trolls have practiced woman-hating, and use this same process vs any female critic that they find online.

 

[JollyRoger]

http://www.somethingawful.com/news/gorean-mra-kajira/

 

[warpus]

Back to feminism backlash though, let's consider the effect of practice on the mind.
When we practice sports, or debate, or mathematics, or Civilization, we are in fact training our minds to be able to undertake such activities more easily. It takes less decision-making because we have already made such decisions in the past, and we can immediately recognize a new problem as an old problem repeated, and take the same steps. We actually have to think less, and the solutions are ingrained inside our heads to solve new problems that are similar to old problems.

Didn't you just basically describe the way the human brain learns (anything)? (by doing things over and over, synapses firing, creating links, becoming stronger with practice, etc.)

If so, yes, I think you are right that people who engage in negative behaviour repeatedly might eventually start "living it". Or any other sort of behaviour. It's how I figured out how to dance and not feel incredibly self conscious about it.

But if someone is already "practicing" woman hating on a regular basis, isn't that basically "living it" already? If someone logs onto a message board every day and writes: "I hate Chinese people and everything they represent" and related ethnic slurs.. Isn't that already a racist, and not a racist in training? (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding exactly who these gamergate trolls are and what they've been up to)

 

[JollyRoger]

If someone logs onto a message board every day and writes: "I hate Chinese people and everything they represent" and related ethnic slurs.. Isn't that already a racist, and not a racist in training?

It's merely racist in training until you cross over into making positive comments about affirmative action . . . then you become a racist.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Sarkeesian would have faded into obscurity if she hadn't been attacked in the way that she was. The reason why her kickstarter became so successful is because people wanted to raise the middle finger to the misogynists who attacked her.

I think the number of people who actually agree with everything she has to say is quite small. I personally think her criticism of sexism in videogames is mediocre. Sometimes I agree with her, while other times I think she's talking crap.

However, when she's attacked in the way that she has been, it creates a battle line between people are crazy misogynists and the rest of the human race.

I don't like her videos much or agree with her on most issues, but I feel nonetheless that I have to take her side over the mob that's attacking her. Civility, politeness and decency has to prevail. I would side with a person that I disagree with over a gang of feces-flinging chimpanzees any day.

 

[classical_hero]

Did some due diligence for Warpus. All posts in the entire forum with the word ******** within the last six calender months. Given the context of all of them, I am calling this myth busted, at least as far as recent usage is concerned. It's spoilered because it's long.

In fact there are only 65 usages of that word in the whole of the site, not including and times it was used as a plural. Hardly a word used often here.

 

[Smote]

But if someone is already "practicing" woman hating on a regular basis, isn't that basically "living it" already? If someone logs onto a message board every day and writes: "I hate Chinese people and everything they represent" and related ethnic slurs.. Isn't that already a racist, and not a racist in training? (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding exactly who these gamergate trolls are and what they've been up to)

Sure, but the context matters. For many of them, its OK to act in a hostile way towards Anita because "she deserves it due to her work." And so they get used to being disparaging towards female critics like her, and thus, when introduced to an entirely different female critic (or feminist, which might remind one of a female critic) who is unrelated to Gamergate, can easily transition into a pattern of hate towards them based on associations.

They have these hate circuits that can get easily hijacked for something other than their original purpose.

 

[warpus]

Sure, but the context matters. For many of them, its OK to act in a hostile way towards Anita because "she deserves it due to her work." And so they get used to being disparaging towards female critics like her, and thus, when introduced to an entirely different female critic (or feminist, which might remind one of a female critic) who is unrelated to Gamergate, can easily transition into a pattern of hate towards them based on associations.

I don't really understand the jump from "due to her work" to "due to her gender". If someone is going to make a leap of logic like that, then they are probably already bigoted against women. Almost by definition, no? So they are "not in training no mo", they are a true woman hating man.

 

[Light Cleric]

This is almost completely unrelated but am I the only one who feels physical pain whenever they see something labeled -gate by the media?

 

[warpus]

I just don't know what they would do if there ever was a controversy involving an actual gate. So I want there to be one.

 

[Smote]

I don't really understand the jump from "due to her work" to "due to her gender". If someone is going to make a leap of logic like that, then they are probably already bigoted against women. Almost by definition, no? So they are "not in training no mo", they are a true woman hating man.

Well, they say its "due to her work" but insult her in common ways that they have learned to insult women in society, so it jumps from work to gender.

But the thing is, they necessarily don't hate *all* women. They hate "people with the wrong ideas." But they are also really practiced at insulting women, so a person can instantly get stereotyped into a "woman with the wrong ideas" and treated in an "anti-woman" fashion. They have a go-to method of insulting anyone in such a way that they will take offense, and will try to use any sort of identity against their victim, regardless of the validity of the insult. I think they are not simply anti-woman... its more of anti-minority approach to insulting in general, but the targets in these cases have been women.

These guys also will not listen to anyone they consider a SJW, or social justice warrior. They consider SJWs blinded by the liberal media.

 

[Smote]

I just don't know what they would do if there ever was a controversy involving an actual gate. So I want there to be one.

The gategate?

 

[Grisu]

I guess the main problem are too small but disproportionately vocal groups. On one side there's a few extreme feminists (who really make up a tiny fraction of feminists...I don't think I've ever met a feminist like that in real life). They see phallic symbols of oppression around every corner.

On the other side there's a small, but equally vocal group of men who feel threatenend by that, who tried to paint feminism as that fringe brand that the first group is about..they see penis envy in every debate with women.

Both of these groups (IMO) make up only a tiny fraction of the real population, but they usually make up a sizeable portioin of (anonymous) internet forums.

 

[Smote]

I think Gamergate has some actual momentum - it's not merely the far fringe that we are used to. It has seemed to attract some reasonable people, that are likewise annoyed by bad journalism. Though they don't contribute to the incessant hatred spawned by the far fringe, they don't vocally denounce them either. It's similar to moderate Muslims saying "I can see why they did that" after a jihadist blows something up. The fact that they aren't being attacked on all sides validates the fringe and spurs them on to higher heights. I bet they're loving their new-found power.

 

[Borachio]

I just don't know what they would do if there ever was a controversy involving an actual gate. So I want there to be one.

Your wish is the UK's metropolitan police command: Gategate, aka Plebgate.

Also involved a bicycle, and no doubt cycle clips.

I never understood it. Apparently the police were at fault for making up the statement about plebs, which I understood is not acceptable. (But come on, this is the metropolitan police, a force noted for its imagination generally.) But Mitchell swore (as in using at least the f word), which is apparently perfectly fine behaviour for an MP when confronted by a policeman at a gate. If I swore at a policeman, I'd expect to get arrested. And be fined, for damaging his truncheon with various tenderized parts of my anatomy.

 

[bathsheba666]

Your wish is the UK's metropolitan police command: Gategate, aka Plebgate.

Also involved a bicycle, and no doubt cycle clips.

I never understood it. Apparently the police were at fault for making up the statement about plebs, which I understood is not acceptable. (But come on, this is the metropolitan police, a force noted for its imagination generally.) But Mitchell swore (as in using at least the f word), which is apparently perfectly fine behaviour for an MP when confronted by a policeman at a gate. If I swore at a policeman, I'd expect to get arrested. And be fined, for damaging his truncheon with various tenderized parts of my anatomy.

Damn you, I was about to post that.

As I recall, he did not deny swearing, but he denied using the term 'pleb' realising what a fruity combo class war is in the UK.

Saying the police 'were at fault' is quite a generous term for what is a conspiracy to pervert justice, if allegations are true - with one policeman now in jail, and some police investigations into the matter having been found to be altered.

Let's play, find the decent apple in a rotten barrel, why don't we?

 

[Borachio]

Yeah. I agree.

I really don't know why the police bothered to fabricate evidence. (As if the p word is worse than the f word!) They could have had Mitchell bang to rights simply on what he did say.

I suspect someone decided to "have someone" fabricate evidence so that the case would collapse. But maybe that's giving them more credit than they deserve.

 

[Traitorfish]

I guess the main problem are too small but disproportionately vocal groups. On one side there's a few extreme feminists (who really make up a tiny fraction of feminists...I don't think I've ever met a feminist like that in real life). They see phallic symbols of oppression around every corner.

On the other side there's a small, but equally vocal group of men who feel threatenend by that, who tried to paint feminism as that fringe brand that the first group is about..they see penis envy in every debate with women.

Both of these groups (IMO) make up only a tiny fraction of the real population, but they usually make up a sizeable portioin of (anonymous) internet forums.

I'm not sure that the feminist side of these debates are even really that "extreme", if you look at what they're saying rather than how they say it. Strident, sure, aggressive, quite often, but their actual feminism is usually a soggy mass of identity politics and post-modernism. Even their terrifying proposals for totalitarian gynocracy always turn out to be something basically quite limp and liberal like "more female senators" and "less porn". We really shouldn't confuse tone for content.

 

[Smote]

Your wish is the UK's metropolitan police command: Gategate, aka Plebgate.

Hahaha, can't believe this is actually a thing.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I'm surprised this thread got as far as post #33 before the first openly twattish comment, but I'm not surprised at where it came from.