More reasons for a magazine for gaming women
I love it when folks write blog posts so I don’t have to, especially when men are calling other men on their sexist shit. Example: Kotaku Commenters Prove the Necessity of a Women’s Gaming Magazine on the blog Molten Boron. See, Kotaku linked the first issue of Cerise and the comments are among some of the most hateful things I’ve ever read. Zach calls them on their shit:
There aren’t a lot of defenders for Cerise in those comments, as of this writing, which isn’t at all surprising. Kotaku’s commenting environment is utterly toxic, as demonstrated in part by this very thread. Feminists and others who don’t believe that Women Need to Shut Up are quickly shouted down when they voice an opinion not in line with that of the average Kotaku commenter. Thus, Kotaku has become a place where everyone is free to comment, provided they don’t think that women need their own space to discuss video games. The dissonance is delightful. If you express feminist opinions at Kotaku, you are told to shut up and take your arguments elsewhere. If you build your own site to have those arguments, Kotaku links to the site and commenters tell you that you don’t need your own site and if you want to stop being second-class citizens you should be commenting at Kotaku. If you are a feminist, then, Kotaku commenters are not particularly pleased with you expressing your opinion anywhere. Which, I suppose, is the whole point of the endeavor.
Well put, eh?
The first comment on Kotaku is awful: “I’d mash.. with a paper bag over her head..” I hope that the Cerise cover model never stumbles upon the verbal rape waged against her. Talk about punishment for a woman daring to be nonwhite and un-skinny and allowing her picture to be on the internet.
Kotaku commenter IlliniJen does make a lovely point, however. I’ll post it here so you don’t have to wade through the misogyny (although I don’t care for the word douchebag ’cause I don’t think vaginas are dirty).
People wonder why some women may want a gaming mag for women. Most gaming mags/sites are targeted towards male readership, despite not being labeled as such. It’s just an industry habit, because it is their largest demographic.While it would be great to get a site that gave all perspectives, without gender segmentation, women often have to put up with small-minded individuals who make gender a differentiating factor because of their insults and disrespect.
I suspect that most women would be happy to frag people in Halo, Counterstrike, et al. without being called out for being a girl as soon as they talk on the mic. But unfortunately the questions, harassment and insults usually start flying because of the untoward attention GIVEN TO THEM by members of the opposite sex.
So, if you don’t want women to separate themselves and feel the need for their own mags and sites, stop treating them like they’re different or that you have a right to harass them ingame.
Guys that LIKE playing games with girls and have an enlightened point of view: next time some douchebag makes a girl gamer’s ingame life hell, let him have it. The more guys like you who stand up to douchebags…whether said douchebags are sexist, racist or whatever…the bigger effect you can have on making games more fun for EVERYBODY.
Guys can call other guys on their shit so women will want to be around. Not a bad idea, eh?
And there you have it, folks, a few reasons that a magazine for gaming women is a worthwhile pursuit.
I don’t know. It sounds strange to me.
Why care what a guy says? Why react to the negativity? Why create a validation for them?
It seems like reacting to it would simply give them more ammunition to use and make their perspective more agreeable. That does seem to be how Brian Crecente is taking credit for the foundation of the Iris Network. But surely the opinions of a few do not sway the less than impressionable minds of everyone.
Comment by Nic (1) — May 10, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
I think there is value in responding to what those guys say. If no one said that what they were doing was objectionable, they would get it into their heads that no one had a problem with it. The tone of the response matters, of course. If the response is mature, well-reasoned, and doesn’t stoop to their level it gives it more credibility.
Comment by Brinstar (26 comments) — May 11, 2007 @ 9:53 am
Because, you know, it’s all about them, right?
Your line of questioning proves exactly why we need to do this shit: no one thinks about about the women in this scenario. Women are told so often that we’re wrong, oversensitive, overreacting, that we don’t need these things (etc), and if that’s all we see then eventually we start believing that it is us with the problem and not the ones who are actually causing the problem.
Women need to see others sticking up for us — both within our community and without. We need to know that we aren’t alone, and that there are places for us to go where we are welcomed instead of fetishized, ridiculed, and threatened.
And if that means that some asshole guys who don’t give a shit about women (or, really, the facts at all) find “validation” in our response, then so be it. Because It’s. Not. About. Teh. Mens. It’s about networking and safety and creating a non-toxic gaming environment.
Comment by tekanji (32 comments) — May 11, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
But again, why bother?
I’m not prompting this out of a disrespect. I have a genuine need to understand. While I realize that I may never come to fully understand it, much like I do not understand how or why people in America are suddenly favoring a political king or emperor instead of the traditional “rule of law”, I would be remiss if I did not at least attempt to understand this. I’m truly trying to get to the heart of the matter as to why some think that there is a general perspective of inequality between genders.
Aside from the clamor and the voiced perspective that there exists some form of inequality, I honestly do not see it.
I’ve read various comments that seem to inflame others on the subject matter, but it just seems like an inability to come to terms with what others think. It is as though, people take it personally. It is treated as though the unfavorable opinions of a few shape the world views for the rest.
This is far from the truth.
The uncultured, unseasoned and uneducated are prone to generalizations, phobias and bigotry bred from their ignorance. They will talk without thinking, and they will say things that are not true. Some of them may later regret it, but others may be so deep-seated in their beliefs that it is the only truth for them.
Why bother trying to convince them otherwise when you could better spend your energy living and creating the world that you want? Why react to the negativity, which will beget more negativity, when you can have inspiration become the motivation instead of a revenge to get back at those that think differently?
That’s what it seems like to me. It feels like the purpose and the methods have become a pendulum doomed to swing toward extremes rather than remain at the cool centre.
Being told that you are wrong, oversensitive, and overreacting is a human thing. I am a guy and I have been accused of each several times. But where is the male voice saying “it’s ok”? There is none, but I don’t need external justifications for my feelings and neither should anyone. At no point should we ask the world if we are “ok” for exhibiting facets of the human condition.
Do you think that women are so weak that they cannot stand for themselves? I stood up for myself. Everyone should. Where we get this idea that others have more power over us than we do, I do not know. There are plenty of examples of women standing up today. Where do you perceive this as lacking?
If women are fetishized, ridiculed, or threatened, it is because they tolerate or welcome it. No self-respecting woman that I know would stand for being threatened or ridiculed. Being a fetish however, has a different connotation as I know several women that love to have this power of seduction over men. That is an aspect where women are at odds with each other and over varying degrees of its use. Some love to exploit that, where others are jealous or disdainful of it.
In negative reaction to much of this, I have seen people wanting to change the way others think. They want everyone to act the same in a certain aspect, to treat everyone with the same level of respect. They want to force that concept of equality upon me. But my level of respect, my concept of equality, will be vastly different from anyone else’s.
You cannot fight those ideas. You cannot change the values of another.
People do that for themselves of their own accord but never at the behest of someone else.
I don’t see these “toxins” that you speak of. I think you already have what you want. You have just as much voice as anyone else. You can sink to the level of other men that speak ill of “women” and in turn generalize and slander the gender of men if you want. The opportunities are the same, and simply propagating the idea that they are not, only gets more people motivated to fight a storm that is always coming but never arrives. Freedom of speech is not a hindrance to equality.
You aren’t alone. Men have the same problems but on a completely different level. It is not that we are so different. It is not that there is a pervasive concept amongst men that they are better than women, but that men and women react in different ways. Some can deal with it, and some cannot. Instead of understanding each other, it seems that people are oft too quick to seek power over each other… or distance ourselves and generalize.
So I must ask…
Do you think that the world you want has already arrived?
Do you think that the opinions and voices of others, no matter how degrading and slanderous they may seem, should be respected?
Do you think that you are exaggerating the importance of one of the greatest challenges of humanity?
And the most important question. Why?
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 16, 2007 @ 9:24 am
Hi Nic,
Wow. All kinds of issues brought up with this comment. Maybe this will help: what you’re asking of me would take me hours to explain if I’m to engage academically with all the points you raised. You’re asking me, as the figurative minority, to take hours of my time to educate you one on one to validate or prove that I indeed experience an inequality based on my gender that you as a man don’t have to see.
Comment by Lake Desire (195 comments) — May 16, 2007 @ 11:03 am
“Why bother trying to convince them otherwise when you could better spend your energy living and creating the world that you want? Why react to the negativity, which will beget more negativity, when you can have inspiration become the motivation instead of a revenge to get back at those that think differently?”
You imply that convincing the knuckleheads is the purpose, though. It’s not. At least not always.
Marignalized groups (and in the gaming community, there is no doubt that women are marginalized) need to speak out in the major platforms merely to affirm that they exist. Simply ignoring neanderthals or pretending that they aren’t there gives the impression that this mode of thinking can’t be engaged with.
It’s not about persuading those who think women, homosexuals or minorities (who, trust me, see things that white men do not. Ye olde invisible backpack and all that.) as much as it as about staking a claim to belonging and showing those on the fence that there is merit to the claim. It isn’t about you respect the claim, but whether you can prevent others from doing so.
Can an ascriptive group “over-react”? Sure. But the answer isn’t to not react at all.
Comment by Troy Goodfellow (10 comments) — May 17, 2007 @ 9:05 am
Really? Honestly? Because if that’s the case, and you aren’t just being a concern troll like it really looks like, then fucking listen to what has already been said.
Should I say it again to make sure you hear it this time?
Maybe it’s the sentence form that’s tripping you up. Here, it’s chopped into easy understand words:
Has it been presented simply enough for you to grasp yet, or are you going to go on another diatribe where you ask why Iris/Cerise is a “react[ing] to the negativity” when it has already been stated several times that that THAT PREMISE IS FALSE.
Men like you, who feel the need to talk over us and not listen to us, are exactly why we need a separate space in order to get our voices heard. If there were less people like you, then maybe we would see a better representation of women in “mainstream” gaming communities.
Comment by tekanji (32 comments) — May 17, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
I don’t feel the need to talk over anyone. If anything, this is a need to know. But I think I’ve learned enough.
Thank you all.
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 18, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
Nic, I hope that you don\’t feel like you\’re done learning about women\’s issues. Judging from your first comment, you do have a long way to come to see where we\’re coming from, and I appreciate that you\’re trying to learn even if I disagree that we should have to take one on one time to teach you. I can recommend some books and websites, starting with Finally, a Feminism 101 Blog.
Comment by Lake Desire (195 comments) — May 18, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
Because I have to listen to it in the first place? And how is calling them on their shit more validation than letting it slide?
Yeah…because that’s how all the (partially) successful equality movements have worked - people just kept their mouths shut when crap happened…and it all just sort of disappeared…….
I mean, if Ceaser Chavez had rallied the immigrant workers, people might have dared to take credit for his work!
>>>>>>>
off-topic, but re: “douchebag” - as I remember Pandagon defended the use of douchebag (and godbag, etc.) on the grounds that while vaginas are not icky, washing them out with bleach is. I think it depends on context, and not sure that particular audience would have interpreted it that way, I mostly just found the argument to be amusing.
Comment by Mickle (1) — May 19, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
No. I’m not done reading about it.
In short, and whether it makes sense or not, I agree with the purpose but I cannot support such a movement. They are two separate and distinct entities in my mind.
I probably shouldn’t say much more than that.
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 22, 2007 @ 9:42 am
Rather than banging my head against the wall about everything that could be addressed with a simple reading of the feminism 101 post, there’s one thing in particular that I’d like to highlight in case people actually didn’t notice it:
Say it with me: she was asking for it!
Comment by Darth Sidhe (1) — May 24, 2007 @ 10:13 am
If you had included the next statement, the intent would be much more clearer to the reader. This isn’t about blame. Let me help clarify the misinformation.
By and large, putting up with issues that stem from social interaction is a choice. Peer pressure, nagging parents, or self-guilt from putting off that fishing trip with Uncle Bill to whom you always say “Maybe next time.” You can put it down the moment you encounter it, or you can let it bother you.
But there are of course things in life that you just… can’t avoid. Aneurysms, car accidents, American Idol, and corrupt plutocrats. The idea there is to keep living and to not let it pull you down. Because when you do… well, that’s when you really stop living.
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 24, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Look, I’m the first to give people new to feminism the benefit of the doubt, but this statement does not bode well. You forgot to mention the third option: some of us know that if the power to seduce men was any serious power at all, women would already be running the world. But that didn’t occur to you - instead, you went with the sterotypes: that some women get the men, and all those other girls are just jealous they don’t.
Some of us actually want power to do something meaningful. Like, blog about media and other issues that concern us. Which you object to. Because you think the world we seek is already here? A lot of people thought things were just fine during segregation, too.
Comment by BetaCandy (1) — May 24, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
Then give me more of the benefit of your doubts.
I was speaking solely on that aspect of women being “fetishized” and the disagreements in our conflicted “culture” I see played over and over again.
I agree that it is no real power over men because there is no consistence in physical attraction, but that doesn’t mean that one cannot use it to get what one wants. Humans always seek some ounce of personal, social or legal power over each other, but it takes agreement for it to work.
But I wouldn’t want any one particular person or gender running the world. Without varied perspectives, concerns, and a wisdom of all humanity, how could a single person act in everyone’s best interests?
Yes. I think that the world you seek is already here because I see that you have the power that you claim to not have. I see it every day, where I work, in my neighborhood, on television, media, everywhere.
I’m not opposed to any of that. If you can find one statement of mine that says that I object to your freedom, then I’ll buy your next home.
My only concern here (since all but two or three who commented, missed it) is how or why anyone gives value to what anyone at Kotaku says. And if such statements are so valued, why are they cited seemingly as the sole motivation for creating another space where others are more accepted?
It just smacks of the vengeful and negative attitudes of “We’ll show you” or “We’ll get them back”. Surely the foundation could be better and more inspirational than that.
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 30, 2007 @ 11:06 am
I agree that power is acknowledged, to an extent, but there are reasons that folks acknowledge the power of the dominant group. The oppressed often meet violence for ignoring it or refusing to conform to that power’s demands. It isn’t an equal or mutual relationship.
Comment by Lake Desire (195 comments) — May 30, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
True
I think it all depends on the power that’s being resisted, the type of oppression that groups are facing, type of culture and so on. Some just go along with it, and that brings in to question the definition and accepted tolerance of oppression.
Comment by Nic (8 comments) — May 31, 2007 @ 11:22 am
[…] But most guys in the gaming blogsphere, even some who position themselves as allies or openminded, are not content with that. Take, for example, this heated exchange between myself, some other women gamers, and a male commenter on a post on New Game Plus called More reasons for a magazine for gaming women. […]
Pingback by Official Shrub.com Blog » Blog Archive » Forcing all spaces to be privilege-oriented spaces — April 9, 2008 @ 5:12 pm