Dear The Internet, This Is Why You Can't Have Anything Nice

[redqueen]

Anita Sarkeesian's project to expose stereotypes in video games attracts a maelstrom of hate.

By Helen Lewis Published 12 June 2012 11:34

(snip)

A Californian blogger, Anita Sarkeesian, launched a Kickstarter project to make a web video series about "tropes vs women in videogames". Following on from her similar series on films, it aimed to look at women as background decoration, Damsels in Distress, the Sexy Sidekick and so on. Her pitch is here:

Sarkeesian was after $6,000 to cover the cost of researching the topic, playing all kinds of awful games, and producing the videos. Seems reasonable, doesn't it? Even if you don't like the idea - or don't believe that women are poorly represented in games (in which case, you would be wrong) - then isn't it fine for other people to give money to something they believe in?

Except some kind of Bastard Klaxon went off somewhere in the dank, moist depths of the internet. An angry misogynist Bat Signal, if you will. (It looks like those charming chaps at 4Chan [2] might have had something to do it.)

In Sarkeesian's own words:

The intimidation and harassment effort has included a torrent of misogyny and hate speech on my YouTube video, repeated vandalizing of the Wikipedia page about me, organized efforts to flag my YouTube videos as "terrorism", as well as many threatening messages sent through Twitter, Facebook, Kickstarter, email and my own website. These messages and comments have included everything from the typical sandwich and kitchen "jokes" to threats of violence, death, sexual assault and rape. All that plus an organized attempt to report this project to Kickstarter and get it banned or defunded.

...

I like her Feminist Frequency videos. Don't always agree of course but she does good work.

It's a shame that the anti-feminist dregs of society are given such free rein.

[seabeyond]

1. this is what people defend on du. tell us there is not an underlying issue

As the pixellated pinkness might suggest, that's what tabloids call a "sex act" happening in the top corner. There are also references to Sarkeesian being "of Jewish descent", an "entitled nigger" and having a "masters degree in Whining" (because why stick to one prejudice, when you can have them all?) More than a dozen IP addresses contributed to this vandalism before the page was locked.

Meanwhile, her YouTube video attracted more than 5,000 comments, the majority of them of a, shall we say, unsupportive nature. The c-word got a lot of exercise, as did comments about her personal appearance, and a liberal sprinkling of threats of violence.

Sarkeesian archived a picture of the abuse, and you can find it here. I'm sorry to subject you to it, but I think it's important that you see the kind of stuff you can get called for the crime of Being A Woman On The Internet. Shall we play sexism bingo? Here goes:

Tits or GTFO

You're a bolshevik feminist Jewess

LESBIANS: THE GAME is all this bitch wants

Why do you put on make-up, if everything is sexism? ... You are a hypocrite fucking slut.

Would be better if she filmed this in the kitchen.

I'll donate $50 if you make me a sandwich
... and so it goes on. The only light relief is this one, because I don't think this is quite the threat this chap thinks it is:


________________________

i listened to her video. good for her. i a gonna check out her website. thanks. does my heart so good right now seeing a young woman using her brain

[redqueen]

2. It'd be comforting to think it was all a bunch of preteen idiots...

unfortunately we've seen too many middle aged and even older people engaging in this game of 'shut the wimmenz up afore they takes away ALL TEH BOOBIEEEEES!'.

[truedelphi]

37. Are these indie women trying to take my BOOBIEEEES!!?!

Oh noes, just when I thought it was safe to come out of my bedroom.






And I thought hiding 'em under my Bat Girl Costume would keep 'em safe!

[ManyShadesOf]

42. !

omg I didn't even understand the connection til like yesterday. Of COURSE we can't talk about images or objectification! That MUST mean we aim to depornify them!!!!!11 Holy shit.

[Indydem]

3. FYI 4Chan = Anonymous

They are cut from the exact same cloth.

[redqueen]

4. Not sure what point you're trying to make...

the writer supposes that that crew was responsible for the Bastard Klaxon call but that hardly excuses all the crap like this that goes on all over the net, anytime a woman dares to step outside the 'male-approved-feminism' guidelines.

[Indydem]

10. My point?

Anonymous is a bunch of misogynistic douchebags.

Or just douchebags in general, I suppose.

[He loved Big Brother]

46. Agreed, they terrorized feminist bloggers in the beginning.

However, I think the bastion of intelligence and civility known as Reddit is also partially to blame.

I quite enjoy the Feminist Frequency videos, and the fact that she has raised over 100k puts a smile on my face. Not that it makes up for any of this atrocious horrid abuse of a woman simply for being a woman. When will abuse like this finally be called out as the hate speech it is? We don't tolerate intolerance against gay people, people of color, etc. Why do we tolerate it against women?

[redqueen]

49. "Why do we tolerate it against women?"

Mostly because women are constantly dehumanized.

Also because women's interests are *expected* to be second to anyone else's. It's our 'traditional' role, to do for others.

[redqueen]

5. Or wait no sorry, it's death threats and nasty wikipedia edits for feminism that men don't like....

But all a woman has to do is post a picture to get the sexist and misogynist abuse of varying degrees and types.

It's the feminists who don't cater to male privilege who get the most severe abuse, though.

[MadrasT]

6. And then they wonder why Manifestos are written.

What could women *possibly* be angry about?

[redqueen]

7. I left out the attempt to sabotage the kickstarter account...

We've come a long way, baby!

[DonCoquixote]

11. I see your point but

Be careful with the manifesto term. As some of remember from the valerie Solnas thread, we do not need the S.C.U.M types lumped in with the people who really are trying to make serious points.

[seabeyond]

12. i think that whole argument with scum is intellectually lazy and i am not going to allow some to

make us own it. no one was advocating violence or the acceptance or desire for. so to suggest that we were advocating violence simply reading the words that were written is lazy at best, though i imagine there was worse intentions with the "to do". i only perused the first half before i was bored and did not want to read more. so.... how embracing of the words was i? BUT... what i did read was a very clear statement of turning the table of what women have experienced from historically, beginning of time. we still get that bullshit in a daily manner thru a lot of the social media and male population. to say that one document written that switches the roles was so offensive it cannot be looked at as saying something relevant is beyond silly to me.

[DonCoquixote]

15. That was not the point

The reason I made mine is that when said person said "some people why we write manifestos", I knew, from being pulled face first into an eariler thread, the sort of twisted ugly stink fight that only DU nurtures so well, that it might attract the same mess. In said thread, I said that Solanas was a nut, and by no means a feminist. I am not only not trying to make you own it, I am bring along shovels and dirt to help you bury it, and if some fool tries to dig it up again, I will ask you if you wish my help pushing shoving said fool into the hole and burying him or her with their precious delusions so that the civilized men and women can continue our dialogue without the stench of BS in the air.

PS: if you want me to find said thread for you, I will get it, but part of me is going "aw no, it's buried, let it rest...because fools of both genders are chomping at the bit to dig it up again."

[seabeyond]

17. interesting. but, i dont see it like you do. as i said, women have lived in that stink forever and

still does today.

that very stink reversed the tables in one written form and the outrage, pulling out the shovels to cover it, to me is being intellectually lazy.

instead of saying, it is offensive. highly offensive. and what women have always live and live today. i better understand what is being said, cause as a man, this stink.... stinks.

[seabeyond]

18. hey... btw. i didnt come in here to argue with everything you said, just worked that way

but, i love having you in here for conversation....

so thanks.

easy enough for you and i, right?

[DonCoquixote]

20. I understand

I also think that if you got pulled into the tread, you might have seen things from my angle. There is pulling stuff to the light because we want itn to fade, and then, with burying, there is the sort of meme that does not allow for real discussion, because idiots from all sides, and all genders, just use it as fuel. Let me put it to you this way, part of the people feeding it were a "men's rights advocate" and a "feminist" that saw Solanas as a heroine.

Really, if you can make anything useful out of that discussion with that level of idiocy, then I suggest you make a Billion dollars doing something easier, like turning lead to gold

And as I told redqueen, I do not mind argument. A civilized argument is a high form of respect. The problem is, and it goes far beyond gender, is that people have no idea how to have civilized discourse; you might as well ask a Chimpanzee to play Mozart.

[seabeyond]

21. i am done with those don. i just wont do the ugly anymore.

for so many reasons.

nope.

" people have no idea how to have civilized discourse"

[Berlin Expat]

23. The problem lies in the

inherent anonymity of the internet. When a person pecks away on their keyboard knowing full well that their identity is more-or-less secure, there's a group of folks out there who use this as the opportunity to hurl vile abuse, or express the most disgusting sentiments humanly possible.

There are some who do it to get someone's goat, or to play devils advocate, but there are some who are frankly little more than cyber-terrorists.

For instance, there's a fellow on a major U.K. newspaper site who routinely comments on the stories of the day, usually economically. One day, he pointed out something in a comment I'd written, and I could tell by his (or her) writing style that even though he (or she) was making a legitimate critique, which is fine by me, he (or she) was also being tongue-in-cheek about it. So in my response, I employed a similar method, and as he (or she) likes to pose as an ultra-rich, typical British conservative, I pointed out something to the effect of "one can't be expected to eat chicken every day" to which he (or she) responded that they only eat swan. I started laughing, and this led to a conversation between us regarding the consumption of various endangered species, and the best method for preparing them. This particular individual has a good sense of slightly absurdist humor, which I can appreciate, and as time has passed, I've come to enjoy reading his (or hers) absurdist comments.

I've only once encountered a truly demented individual, and I did what any responsible person would do. I reported them for abuse. And they got banned, and rightly so.

[seabeyond]

24. interesting story. but, yes, that is the fun of it, too.

hands down, i have fun experiences as opposed to nasty. but then, my issues are highly combustible so i also get a lot of ugly for ugly sake.

[ManyShadesOf]

43. it seems

you both are right. The association even with the word manifesto might get a reaction ... unwelcome and hostile. AND we don't have to own others' misunderstandings or be censored from understanding history.

[MadrasT]

25. I chose the term quite deliberately and intentionally. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

8. They're even trolling the comments at the NS site...

[redqueen]

9. They're everywhere.

About the only place you can avoid such scum (online) is on strictly moderated boards, or the internet equivalent of holes in the wall where the hordes of raving misogynists can't find your feminist discussions / pictures of yourself with books / whatever else they feel like pissing all over to rub your nose in the fact that society is really more on their side than yours, ladies.

[DonCoquixote]

13. Strictly moderated boards

While I can see the need for the occasional Oasis, I would add that the main reason these creepyboys (and I will not call them men) prosper is because they know they can chase people into the warrens. Until a bully gets his beating from the person they thought was "prey" they do nto stop, so I say to people like in the OP, keep going for the fight, because sooner or later, you will win, if for not other reason than Bullies tend to be lazy as well, and they will get tired, and then you can know the joy or gutting their underbelly and using their bowels for confetti.

Now, I will lay my cards on the table, I am a gamer. I also think that the gaming world is changing, in part because more women are gamers now. Yes you still have the Lara Croft Tomb Raiders, and the grand Theft Autos, but now you also have games like " Star Wars: the Old republic" where women (and I do mean women, not dolls, not cheesecake) are very much people of substance, story heroines that give orders, do heroics, make the epic dialogues and monologues you know by heart:they make you feel motions and think heavy thoughts if you listen. Yes, there is a bit too much of the fanboy in gaming, but it, like the macho culture it came from, is dying out, despite the best efforts of the powers that be to save it.

[seabeyond]

16. the bully does not stop if everyone around them says nothing. nt

[DonCoquixote]

19. True enough

That's why, I try to do my part, saying something is BS when it is BS. I also do not subscribe to the "He or she is a Bully, but they are MY Bully" meme, because we have learned time and time again that a bully will turn on you at best, betray you at worst. (and that is a segue into some sarcasm)

(Hey Bill Clinton, thanks for the support in attacking Bain Capitol and for advocating the water poisoning pipeline. Thanks for also keeping your Big Mouth so open that you talked your wife out of the Oval Office, and made people wonder what she got for standing by you.)

[seabeyond]

22. interesting....

i saw a little of that myself with him.

[redqueen]

26. Women have been fighting for centuries.

And the occasional oasis is a necessity. You've seen how rarely anyone speaks up, even here on our Brogressive DU. Surely you've noticed the vitriol and abuse, the mockery and ridicule, the seething hostility which is aimed at any woman who dares step outside the bounds of bro-approved feminism. It isn't just a gang of teenagers, its not just 4 Chan, and its not just anonymous.

This shit is so pervasive that its hard for most to see it at all due to its ubiquitousness. About the only time it is widely noted is when rape and death threats are involved.

It's easy to fool yourself into believing women have made such great strides. Voting, owning property, controlling our own bodies (sort of).... these are the very basics. For the most part society views women as things. These oases are of vital importance.

[seabeyond]

27. +1. nt

[DonCoquixote]

28. I understand that

And I have no problem with them, all groups need places of refuge. The only problem with oasi is that a vigil has to be kept, to make sure that under the flag of "good intentions" they do not become turned into prisons or fortresses. Unfortunstely, every group produces people who will want to focus so much on us vs them that we lose sight of ourselves

And no rq, I harbor no illusions that we are in any sort of post racial, post gender wprld. Truth be told, in all areas of the spectrum, and yes, this rainbow analogy is not avcidental, we are nowhere near where we should be. The only reason I see hope is because, as opposed to the speed history normallytravels at,we are finally moving at a fairly decent clip. Hoever, I have no illusions about the fact that many wamt to roll things back. Progress is not linear, it has cycles where ther is hope, and dark ages, I just want to make sure that in the time we have a chance, we make the most of it, because if we let the throwbacks win, they may have humanity down for the count this time.

[seabeyond]

29. cycles where ther is hope, and dark ages

i like this. i was talking to the boys last night. i told them in my time i had never seen this onslaught against women. the we actually felt we were going forward. progressing. it certainly feels like a dark time now.

[DonCoquixote]

31. Thanks

W.B. Yeats made the more elaborate term "gyre", based on Celtic Helixes. He used it in his poem "The second coming", an oft-quoted warhorse of a poem that gave us "what rough beast slouches towards Bethlehem to be born."

The idea is the same, there are cycles where progress is made, and ones of flat out descent, and sadly, we may be coming near a dark age, but only because those that progress was about to shake off (the right wing) learned how to buy the media.

[redqueen]

30. We are definitely in the dark ages now.

Not sure how any of these groups could become prisons, but they kind of have to become fortresses. If any constructive, relatively enjoyable (given the subject matter) discussions are to take place, they simply have to block out those who would come in and disrupt, derail, and basically waste everyone's time demanding to be educated on feminism 101, all the while denying that any of it is in any way valid or real.

As for us vs. them, IMO it helps to know who the opposition is. For too long certain types have been ignored and thereby allowed to flourish. Now, finally, the SPLC has stepped in and called these people out. Finally people are noticing that this most recent pushback is not just some people who stand in opposition to progress, they are actual hate groups.

[DonCoquixote]

32. like any war

It depends on if the army is defensive, or has dreams of empire. Everywhere there is power of any sort, there will be those that seek it and will twist it. As far as prisons go, I remember an article by Susan Faludi, called "matricide." In the article, it talked about the , if I may dare use a male analogy, "pissing contest" there was between "third way feminists" and older feminists. It gave examples of people from both camps that meant well, and both sides that had hot malice.

The prison analogy comes in when, in the article, the older feminist castigates a younger one for wearing high heels. Now, High heels did mean a sort of mad men bondage to older feminists, who remember when the crap in "Mad Men" was common. To some younger ones, high heels are used to stand taller than men, or to remind them that they can stomp holes in their feet with their nice Titanium heels. Now, I say that one person's bad memory of the "Mad Men" era can be another girl's "I dominate the idiots at work" shoe. The idea should be that women, or for that matter, all human beings, should be able to wear a shoe that fits them. But, sadly, because of silly details like that, people that should be fighting for each other fight with each other.

And as far as us vs them, we often get fixed on who us and them are, and do not update that definition. Yes, the feminist has to fight patriarchy, however, patriarchy is not just a matter of gender, it is a matter of power. The people who take advantage of this difference are Sarah Palin, Laura Ingraham. Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter and other Right Wing Valkyries. They get to live the dream of being people that are listened to, respected, read, and then say "see my sister, I am what a real woman is, at the very least, you must admire me, if not submit to the right wing politics that did after all, empower me."

Now, I know that folks like you, seabeyond, and your average DU feminist will NOT fall for that crap. I repeat, I know you do not buy this crap, because you know these people are puppets of the patriarchs. However, as we found out in Wisconsin, the DU reader is a bit smarter than the masses. There will be people who think the enemy of feminism will always be a male, and they might see these people parading around in their blazers and go "wait a minute, they are like me, if they command such respect, maybe they have a point." And then the Fortress walls come crumbling down from within, as many people accept these Trojan Horse feminists. I say this as a Latino that remembers when W. worked hard to cultivate Latino votes, until the folks from Arizona could not hold their breath and demanded a war on immigration. This from a party that gained Florida, and the nation, because of Cuban Immigrants, and their progeny, like our would be veep Marco Rubio.

Again, my goal is not to slam your points, or deny the validity. I just bring up details that I think arrant addressing, because, well, let's be honest, the right did not get to where they are because they are smart, they got there because there was always a detail or two we overlooked, and they crawled in. The Walls of Troy resisted the Greeks, but the trojans made the mistake of thinking the Greeks would be good honorable losers.

[redqueen]

33. Someone could find examples of such pissing contests among groups of liberals,

conservatives, greens, etc... but it's apparently some kind of crisis and a cause for obsessive concern where feminists are concerned. The scrutiny aimed at feminists is outrageous, but it's perceived as normal simply because it's so commonplace.

If some individual casitgates another, whether it's those feminists who are less tolerant of the unexamined adherence to patriarchal beauty standards (as opposed to "old" ... there's the patriarchy's propaganda oozing in) criticizing feminists who think such beauty nonsense is empowering... or whether it's those feminists who are pro-prostitution, pro-objectification, etc. criticizing feminists who think such traditions are damaging (and yes, some of the feminists who defend porn and prostitution are also old, just to further counter the propaganda)... these things are disagreements that people in all kinds of movements have.

Right wing women are subjected to sexist attacks, and any feminist would object to such treatment. They also support anti-woman legislation and attitudes, and as such any feminist would criticize them for it. The fact that some women choose to support right-wing women thinking they're feminists is not something which we can blame on feminists having safe places to avoid being swamped by bullying misogynists.

[DonCoquixote]

35. Of course

And just as Faludi wrote about feminists, somebody will write about Greens, and somebody will write about conservatives, if there is a movement, it will be written about, even if it is about as trivial and non political as Cubs versus White Sox. I do not discount feminists because they, like every human group, have disagreements, frankly, if they did not, I would wonder how much actual debate goes on, and therefore thought. We know the GOP is not genuine because a lot of these people that hate Mitt Romney will fall into lockstep goosestep and vote for him, so all this Tea Party steam is not that sincere when they support a man they claim to hate.

However, if you want someone to examine whether or not high heels are evil, that's one thing. In the article, the person spoke from an ego point of view "I walked so you would not have to wear heels!"

Why not ask the young woman why she wore heels, then educate her, and if, it turns out she wears them because -->she<-- likes them, let her be. I have met women that wear them for reason feminists might not like (beauty) and women who use them as the counter attack to male dominance as they stand over Males. Everyone is different.

PS: I know this thread has gone on, and if it seems I have replied a bit, it's only because I think we stepped onto something that, if nothing else, made great discussion.

[seabeyond]

36. good post. after study over the last couple months, i think you got some wrong. i think

the whole old woman/young woman is a ruse being used.

when we started hearing about the waves we were accused of being second. then we had to research the hell out of the shit. most of us were not old enough to be participants of the 2nd wave. most of us are of the age of the beginning of the 3rd wave.

now what?

it is a dead herring thrown out there to create battle.

my two nieces, 20 and 24 would be considered 2nd wave. many of the young feminist i read and quote would be considered 2nd wave. many of the women that started 3rd wave sees the fail of it and they are now 2nd wave.

do you see how that makes no sense but the obvious that an untrue battle was created for the feminist to participate in.

thru research i have found that these feminists are a SMALL group within the third wave and are called "lipstick" feminist. and this would be the feminist that is not about women as a whole, but individually, able to use their sexuality for their gain.

you know, a book, where it cheers a woman using all her sexuality to make gains in employment. that is what is being promoted. plastic surgery, ect....

that is not a feminist movement

whole different story than what was presented.

i love my high heel boots. this is the stupidest presentation of feminism using shoes. some women want their make up, others have issues. some want heels and all while wearing them, see the argument others make against. but, i am keeping my boots.

for others to work so hard putting women in a box, over this shit is the failure we allow. i wont do it.

[DonCoquixote]

39. actually, I agree with you.

But when Susan Faludi, someone calling herself a feminist, starts selling this stuff, well, does it really help? I personally wonder if there are some feminists reading "matricide" and going "Susan my dear, I politely say you are full of it."

By the way here is the article:
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/10/0083140

And the backlash:
http://bullybloggers.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/justifiable-matricide-backlashing-faludi-by-jack-halberstam/

http://feministing.com/2010/09/27/electras-talk-back-responses-to-susan-faludis-harpers-piece/

I especially like this quote from the second:

"I talked to my own mom as I was deciding how to respond to this article and she said this: “The way I see it, you have to stop listening to my voice at times, so you can learn to listen to your own.” I depend on both my own mother, and the larger feminist legacy, for wisdom, but I expect to be seen and heard accurately and compassionately in return. It’s time that we took this dialogue to a new level; instead we’re wallowing in finger-pointing and holier-than-thou judgment. There are real enemies out there, waiting for our good energy and savvy methodologies. Let’s not waste all of our time parodying one another."

Amen.

[seabeyond]

40. first article by Susan Faludi

the tell in that article was the total avoidance of the mention of patriarchy and how thru so many things in our life teach girls and boys their roles. the patriarchy defining, controlling, setting up the fail. it is not about the mom/daughter relationship. it is about the patriarchal control and then the girl growing up (just like the boys are conditioned and inevitably most of the men grow up) and there is more like thinking. she is creating and feeding the battle between women provided by the patriarchy.

also, with individual psychology, it is a norm for the young girls to get off moms hip and reject mom for a period of time to be able to do and figure out on their own. and with a healthy relationship and understanding there is a reuniting. the same happens with boys and their father. all healthy and normal.

also, for most women, i hope, we were raised in a time of sexual freedom. kids are doing nothing new. younger generations always think they are first, and we sit their and smile. that is ok too.

also, we can stop trying to define others into offensive stereotypes and that will take us a long way.

not too impressed with that article. gonna read the other two.

[seabeyond]

41. i really liked the second article. seemed the woman was much more on target.

thanks for the article. might use some for an OP if you dont mind.

[DonCoquixote]

45. go 4 it

by all means

[He loved Big Brother]

47. Great reply, seabeyond!

I've been giving the wave theories some close personal reflection for the first time in years and I believe they are not defined by dates and times in feminist history, but rather mindsets and ideology.

[seabeyond]

48. we got ambushed with the wave issue. study and thought and realization that 3rd is not solely define

is not solely defined by sex, age or women to the back of the bus for the good of the whole has made it clear what crap this all is.

lots of young women are fighting this definition. and it is more men pushing the definition of the sex positive. they just LOVE the sex positive meme. that should raise all womens eyebrows. it is interesting, and fascinating.

[Little Star]

50. +1

[ManyShadesOf]

44. +

"I would add that the main reason these creepyboys (and I will not call them men) prosper is because they know they can chase people into the warrens."

[DonCoquixote]

14. Anonymous

I know these folks got lauded because of OWS. Heck, I will give them their due, but it also does not erase the fact these were the same creeps that have been knows as the biggest bullies around. As events in the Mideast have proven, the old Arab proverb of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is a load of BS.

[SunSeeker]

34. K&R

[truedelphi]

38. Proud to be Rec number 23. n/t