The Big Picture: With Great Power

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 . . . 17 NEXT
 

I am dismayed but not surprised that the general response to a video arguing, "Hey, how about we exercise some social responsibility and try to make things better," is met mostly with responses of, "You're an asshole." There haven't really even been many counterarguments to anything Mr. Chipman said; mostly just ad hominem attacks that try to get around the question of whether there are genuine social problems within our power to improve out of a preference for name-calling.

Guys, seriously, we can all be better than this.

JimB:
I am dismayed but not surprised that the general response to a video arguing, "Hey, how about we exercise some social responsibility and try to make things better," is met mostly with responses of, "You're an asshole." There haven't really even been many counterarguments to anything Mr. Chipman said; mostly just ad hominem attacks that try to get around the question of whether there are genuine social problems within our power to improve out of a preference for name-calling.

Guys, seriously, we can all be better than this.

Whats this "we" stuff ke-mo sah-bee?

I think that is the biggest problem with the entire video and the majority of the responses in agreement with it.

I'd hesitate to say "geek culture" went mainstream so much as geek hobbies did. A geek was once defined to me as someone that takes to extremes what someone else does in moderation, and in that regard, we're still marginalized. We happily research our hobbies while others see looking up wikipedia as too much work. WE like a movie based on something, we try the source material, while the Dark Knight didn't move Batman comics to new readers. We get weird looks for devoting time into a video game to 100% it. Heck, several of my family openly state they won't read a book longer than 300 pages (the crap I read gives them a heart attack. I haven't read a book that short not first published in Japan in years). We watched the subtitles. We modded the game. We enjoyed something before ti was popular. When some of that gets practiced by more people I'll surrender we won, but for now, people only like things like the Avengers if they can be consumed in small sedentary bites. One of these geek movies will flop if it hinges on something even as simple as having to go in having read a free online comic.

Moreover there's something to consider. Most of our persecution was that call to conformity, and we didn't just get it from bullies. Parents, teachers, even friends all tried to move us into paths they thought we should take with differing levels of success. While there's always an online pissing contest about what is better than what, most of the time in public we were well behaved and accepting that we all like differing things, and that the world can actually get along without having to try and invalidate someone else's likes. I have to believe at our core that is a geek philosophy, or else we'd have seen a blood bath at some convention over a Star Wars versus Star Trek debate.

Then the activists get involved.

I honestly have little to no trouble if harassment was what these guys dominantly went after, but it seems that more and more they're attacking content for not being 100 percent sanitary to their beliefs. Hey, a game is coming out with character with impossible breasts, I must squash it because I apparently can't just let it be. I have to condemn it for not appealing to me and make anyone that isn't similarly offended or *gasp* likes it is shamed into my line of thinking. The realm of geekdom is limited by our imaginations and willingness to look outside the mainstream outlets, so I reallly do wonder why some people feel that things they don't like seem to have so little allowance to exist. I get they can be overdone, but no one seems to put numbers on these things to prove that this is the case, nor are they adding new plot ideas or characterizations to the table. I know many mean well, but somethings I flash back to high school endlessly being told I'm not allowed to like what I like, I must like what someone else does.

And that's not getting into oversensitivity. There in many ways is how geekdom hasn't spread out. We had to let a lot of harassment and insults roll off our back. We never liked them, but crying to the principal never seemed to do much. Over time, we started wearing the insults of nerd, geek, or otaku as a badge of honor and it didn't seem to hurt us. Today guys get fired over a bad joke about a dongle. You can't criticize any of these ism groups without somehow being against everything they stand for. The wrong word or phrase can net you nothing but trouble. And why? Because some believe that people should never be treated poorly ever. If one bad joke might lead to some hurt feelings it must be killed and the one that made it be made an example out of, and unlike us, they get away with it. I won't deny some bitterness about that, but I think, again, long term geeks have to come to terms about not having the right to not be offended. A lot of our favorite works, from the Dark Knight Returns, to something like Mystery Science Theater wouldn't exist with concern for hurt feelings, and the recent PC police will just further stifle creativity as people afraid for their jobs keep everything safe.

I'm not saying we can't do better, but the people that seem to complain we're excluding them only seem to say so because we aren't bending over backwards to their vision of the world. Treating people with respect is one thing, and big problems in that area need to be addressed. But if people act like everything should be tailor made and sanatized for their protection, you can't be surprised when those people aren't welcomed with open arms. at best it sends us back to the days of being told what we must like. At worst, it's a sign of laziness that in the world where creativity is fairly easy (thanks to the internet) you'd rather complain and make others do the work instead of building on your own.

Both are signs that many of the things that made us geeks didn't cross over.

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

Facts vs. Women was stupid as heck.

She also destroyed a lot of the horrible points that thunderf00t made in her second video.
What is most pathetic in this world, is that what Anita Sarkeesian should mostly be seen as doing, is stating the obvious.

Just the reaction to Anita Sarkeesian proves how necessary feminism is. Even if she were are horrible as many people LIE Anita Sarkeesian out to be. The reaction to her and her videos would still be unwarranted. It is absolutely sad that this planet is so sad, that people reaction so viciously to someone stating such obvious truths.

Oh, and every time anything like this is brought up people are like "oh, stop talking about sexism. Oh, stop talking about sexism. I'm tired of hearing about it."
People will stop talking about it when, every time it is brought up, people prove how good of an idea talking about sexism is.

If people want people talking about sexism less, maybe they should stop be a part of the problem.

McMarbles:

Dangit2019:

Silk_Sk:
Geek 3.0 = bronies.

Oh God, and then we're back at square one.

Come to the dark side. We have cupcakes.

I'm already a brony, I'm just saying that with the level of the stigma towards them, geek culture goes back to where it began.

JimB:
I am dismayed but not surprised that the general response to a video arguing, "Hey, how about we exercise some social responsibility and try to make things better," is met mostly with responses of, "You're an asshole." There haven't really even been many counterarguments to anything Mr. Chipman said; mostly just ad hominem attacks that try to get around the question of whether there are genuine social problems within our power to improve out of a preference for name-calling.

Guys, seriously, we can all be better than this.

Bob can do better then this.

He says we should be less racist. That's pretty vague and pretty useless considering that people here usually don't agree on what's racist/sexist/too far.

He doesn't give any examples, nothing.

All he says is 'people say racist things on forums' which brings us back to
'racist by who's standards'?

All we're left with is the things he said in other videos where he praises the general idea of political correctness, and he defended a double standard against whites (race swapping fictional characters in adaptations if you were wondering).

As for sexist he talked about overreacting to Anita but again
he just leaves it at that. No examples of people who are overreacting, just vague some people were really overreacting to this. If he means the threats that most of her critics condemned then why not say that so we can beat the dead horse of whether they represent the whole culture yet again?

That and he also seemed to imply that we were are all just making wild mass guesses as to what she would say, which is crap because she's made a lot of other videos before.

That and groping at conventions. That's the only actual example he had that wasn't vague.

th3dark3rsh33p:
What's this "we" stuff, ke-mo sah-bee?

I think that is the biggest problem with the entire video and the majority of the responses in agreement with it.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make here (I don't know what "that" is referring to), so what follows is my best guess as to an appropriate response. If I've misunderstood you, please let me know how, and I'll try again.

"We" is a collective, first person pronoun. It refers to any group to which the speaker belongs. I did not attach any limiters or qualifiers indicating which group I'm claiming membership in because I am speaking of humanity in general: I believe that every human being can be better than ignoring the issues at hand for favor of swearing at someone, because it is, frankly, childish behavior.

I am not claiming or even advocating for uniformity or cohesion among the various subsets of geek. I am not saying that anyone's appreciation of comic books or sci-fi or video games of whatever instills with it a membership whose dues must be paid in the form of social service, or that your goals are or should be the same as mine. I am only saying that most of what I have read in this thread is the worst of what humanity has to offer, not because its evil is enormous and profound but because it's banal and reflexive; and that I think we can all aspire to be better than that.

Sorry Bob, as with shortsighted uninformed political choices, religion, racism, sexism, and other dogmatic forms of indoctrinated beliefs, the only cure is self-doubting critical thought. The real version, where even the things you think you know for sure are reexamined and called into question because that's where our most horrible aspects and biggest lies will hide.

And almost no one wants to do that. Because it's painful, but mostly because it takes too much effort.

Father Time:
Bob can do better than this. [various complaints about a lack of specificity]

If I understand you, then you are saying you won't follow his advice and attempt to advocate for a better, more inclusive environment because he did not hand you a checklist of evils to fight and morals to instill. Is that about right? If it is, then I think you're missing the point, because creating such a totalitarian morality instead of urging you to follow your own conscience as regards right and wrong would be even more exclusive than the culture already is, since any who disagree with the party line must be badgered into conforming to our opinions.

llagrok:
As soon as a sub-culture has reached a certain point of popularity it's normally subject to massive attempted cash-ins.

That's why "culture" sucks, and should be avoided as much as possible, whether it's a sub-culture, or a mainstream culture.

Of course, it's impossible for anybody to be free of all culture, but it should be resisted strongly. Culture tends to lead to war and other bad things.

AC10:
Subconsciously, I at least think if a person looks like they have the choice to have lots of sex, they probably aren't a nerd. Is that fair? No. But neither is being born attractive. At least let the nerds have something.

Um, no. I've lost 10 pounds in the last month and a half, and I plan to keep running 2-3 miles four times a week and doing crunches, pushups, and chair-dips on the days I don't run until I hit my desired weight (and pant size). I wasn't "born attractive," I've been overweight since I was seven. Watching the fat slowly drain away from my front is a little more than satisfying, I will admit.

In the meantime, I love video games, fantasy films and books, animation, and I plan on joining the friends I made while playing FF11 in FF14 when it relaunches in August. I check my email nearly hourly to see if I've been accepted into the beta yet, so I can join just a bit earlier. I'm chomping at the bit to see the new Doctor Who special in November, and have been satisfying myself with the Classic Who while I wait. Just earlier today I was practicing animation and drawing the human figure by rotoscoping a slow-motion video I downloaded from YouTube of Shaolin monks doing flips and kicks, while on my other monitor streaming Fullmetal Alchemist on Netflix. I've seen Brotherhood through to the end, so I was just wanting to watch the original series to see the differences between the two. I was wanting to get through D-Gray man, but for some reason in the second season Netflix only has the subbed version, and I can't exactly listen to subtitles while animating. And last week I was marathoning the Phantom of the Opera and Into the Woods because I rediscovered how much I love musicals.

Those are my interests, that's what makes me a "nerd." If I do continue to lose weight, what does that have to do with anything? Robin Williams named his daughter Zelda, because he loved the idea of naming his daughter after a beautiful and admirable princess. While he may not be the sexiest man in the world (though not totally repulsive, either) he is extremely charismatic, and looking at him the first thing you wouldn't think is "Oh, he's a nerd." And then look at Vin Diesel, probably the only video game nerd who's actually managed to pull off the self-insertion dream in both the forms of blockbuster movies and AAA video games.

Nerds are not defined by any physical characteristics. Just because you're physically attractive doesn't affect your ability to love games or fiction, and nor does being physically unattractive necessarily mean you are more likely to enjoy those things. We are bound together by our compulsive and sometimes indescribable love for our fandoms and fantasies. And I'll be damned if I let some little peon tell me that my getting into shape somehow jeopardizes any of my passions.

Helmholtz Watson:

xaszatm:

So...because it was always a cesspool, we should be proud of it? We should be proud that online gaming is full of misogynistic, racist, homophobic garbage? The fact that we are trying to get rid of this is a bad thing? Is really asking people to think before they open their mouths special treatment? To show common decency? To realize that other people are PEOPLE?

Are you seriously asking if advocating "to get rid of [dissenting opinions]" is a bad thing? I know this subject is generally discouraged from bringing up, but do you really want to go down that path? Ein Volk, ein Rich, ein Furher.
Now I realize that you may have good intentions, but the moment you start demanding that dissenting opinions should be completely silenced, you start to walk a very fine line between having good intentions and repeating the mistakes of the past.

As for how people should communicate to one another, its one thing to ask that a person not say something but its quiet another the demand or expect people to conform to your ideas and censor themselves, because it IS special treatment to be forced to give special consideration to the feelings of one group of people over that of another group of people.

xaszatm:

I literally cannot comprehend your thinking. Maybe I'm too naive, but I thought that the Cross Assault guy was wrong. That mean-spirited name calling WASN'T part of our culture and if it was, SHOULDN'T be. But here I'm seeing that it is something we should be proud of?!? And when anyone wants people to not to such a thing is "White Knighting?" "Giving Special Treatment?"

Again, you don't have to like that part of the culture, but the idea that things that you find offensive should be completely banned isn't going to sit well with most people-or as Steve Fry summarized it...

xaszatm:

1. Yes, someone can. Someone can use those words without hating homosexuals. However, it must also be said that words have consequences. Saying terms like fag and gay in such hateful manner can and will be taken in the same manner one says N***** and C*****.
2. Okay, so that is a good excuse for their behavior? The fact that they are afraid of what they might say might offend women? That speaks to a bigger social problem.
3. The reason people ask people to watch what they say is because of history. Stick and stones may break bones, but words can show underlining hatreds. Just look at America during the civil rights movement when words BECAME sticks and stones. Watch how watching a black person hang became like a family gathering. Watch the casual misogyny many senators make when restricting women's rights. The thing with words is, if you say it enough times, you start to believe its true, and that can take humanity to truly dark places.

1.First off the words are Nigger and Cracker(?), not N***** and C*****. Second off, I must repeat the question that Stephen Fry has proposed above, so what if a person finds those words offensive? They can just mute the person or say something back that is equally offensive.
2. True, the social problem is that people are overly concerned about the consequences of being demonized for voicing an dissenting thought/form of humor/ect.
3.Almost got it, but it goes "Sticks and Stones can break my bones, but WORDS CAN NEVER HURT ME", and while that may not always be the case, fortunately people can just mute those who they don't care to listen to. As for the rest of your comment, lol. You truly give Xboxlive more credit than it deserves if you seriously think that people trash talking on COD could ever amount to the passing of racist/misogynistic federal laws in the United States or any country for that matter.

Finally I'll leave you with this video, it's quiet relevant to the topic and its something that could really do you some good to match and consider...

You know, you countered my argument with the exact argument I was making? I wasn't saying we should BAN saying these words. I was saying that such attitudes SHOULDN'T be the normal thing. It shouldn't be normal for online game chat to dissolve into such a cesspool. And there is a difference between banning something and showing that we don't like something. You are free to say mean, rude, nasty things and I'm free to call you out on such behavior. Also, you really need to eat your own words. If you say that because I want to censor words (which I DIDN'T say, by the way), I will be leading to a slippery BAN EVERYTHING mantra but then in another response say that nothing will come from the cesspool of the internet, you leading a double standard. It's not a slippery slope here, but it is here thing.

Also, you seem to get the idea that such name calling should be normal because its on the internet. Well, what happens if ANYONE does the garbage they do in a public place like the mall? or at stores? They will be probably kicked out for "disturbing the peace." So, why is it when the internet does it, it's suddenly censorship? It's not.

Also, I censor words mainly because I do that in real life. It admittedly funny when I stub my toe as I will start sounding like a censor button during an televised R-rated movie.

Neesh? You mean niche?

leviadragon99:

Machine Man 1992:
Those "homophobic, sexist, trolls" you rail against are just that-- trolls. They aren't going away, ever, no matter how much mainstreaming is done.

So man the fuck up and deal with it.

And what do you care anyway? You, by your own admission, don't play games online, outsider.

He didn't say trolls, you did. Unless you're quoting someone else in this thread and forgot to actually quote them.

No, we shouldn't have to deal with that crap, and there are ways to disown the trolls, to let them know they're not welcome in the community, to refuse to play with them, to ban them from forums, they'll still exist, but they won't be among us if we just put a little freaking effort in to calling them out.

Oh, and nice job being open-minded there about people that don't play games online, wanker...

I'm used to posting on TVtropes. If I could, "outsider" would have been a link to "Joking Mode" but whatev's.

You do realize the only way to make trolls go away is to just ignore them right? It's kind of ironic that your solution to discrimination is MORE discrimination, when a FUCKING MUTE BUTTON EXISTS.

Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Why has it gotten to the point where individual initiative has taken a back seat to molly coddling thin-skinned whiners, who can't handle the fact that people say mean things on the internet?

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

B-BUT WE'RE CHALLENGING THE VERY ICON OF FEMINISM IN GAMING AND THAT'S BAAAAAAD...

Bob boils every person who speaks against Tropes vs Women as mindless "THEY BE HATIN' ON MY MASCULINE MAN-MEAT BRO" when really there have been multiple people who have made legitimate arguments against her videos. He's a man of bias, and once he gets one, it's damn hard to shake it. See: Avengers, Amazing Spider-Man, J.J. Abrams after he hated the Lost finale.

Yes, I do love self-reflection, self-improvement, but not if you're unwilling to listen to every side and thereby, refuse to gain a better, more well-rounded and matured view.

So we should be like Nerdfighters?

Or should we be like Love and Tolerate Bronies?

I think we should go the first route, but I'm cool for whatever man. It's your playground too, just don't forget to be awesome.
(I've just stared watching all of Brotherhood 2.0; I'm starting to like it. Plus I wonder what this discussion would be like in your pants...)

Edit: and, by random happenstance, there is a French the Llama profile pic above me. I am without words

JimB:

th3dark3rsh33p:
What's this "we" stuff, ke-mo sah-bee?

I think that is the biggest problem with the entire video and the majority of the responses in agreement with it.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make here (I don't know what "that" is referring to), so what follows is my best guess as to an appropriate response. If I've misunderstood you, please let me know how, and I'll try again.

"We" is a collective, first person pronoun. It refers to any group to which the speaker belongs. I did not attach any limiters or qualifiers indicating which group I'm claiming membership in because I am speaking of humanity in general: I believe that every human being can be better than ignoring the issues at hand for favor of swearing at someone, because it is, frankly, childish behavior.

I am not claiming or even advocating for uniformity or cohesion among the various subsets of geek. I am not saying that anyone's appreciation of comic books or sci-fi or video games of whatever instills with it a membership whose dues must be paid in the form of social service, or that your goals are or should be the same as mine. I am only saying that most of what I have read in this thread is the worst of what humanity has to offer, not because its evil is enormous and profound but because it's banal and reflexive; and that I think we can all aspire to be better than that.

lol... the worst of what humanity has to offer. Right, lets just cut the hyperbole a bit before we try a real conversation.

The point of what's this we shit, is ultimately that this kind of thing is not a collective business and that the view that I, or other like minded individuals, must take responsibility for geek culture. I do not perpetrate anything Bob says is wrong, and I'd agree that said things are wrong, even though I might disagree on how they should be dealt with or to the degree with which they occur.

Whats this WE shit, is an an argument not about being apart of a group, but that being part of a very large very vague group does not leave me with responsibility for what it does or what some of its members do.

Zombie_Moogle:

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

While Thunderf00t's videos made rational counterpoints to Sarkeesian's videos, and that's a great start, we shouldn't forget the maelstrom of troll fire that arose after she announced her kickstarter

I'm not buying that...

I don't deny that it happened, but something acted as a trigger and IIRC, someone brought the Kickstarter to 4chan.

And spammed it to death in there. No one cared if she announced it, but why go and target the two largest communities that just want to enjoy good games or be left alone before trying to attack churches for lulz or other people?

Grenge Di Origin:

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

B-BUT WE'RE CHALLENGING THE VERY ICON OF FEMINISM IN GAMING AND THAT'S BAAAAAAD...

Bob boils every person who speaks against Tropes vs Women as mindless "THEY BE HATIN' ON MY MASCULINE MAN-MEAT BRO" when really there have been multiple people who have made legitimate arguments against her videos. He's a man of bias, and once he gets one, it's damn hard to shake it. See: Avengers, Amazing Spider-Man, J.J. Abrams after he hated the Lost finale.

Yes, I do love self-reflection, self-improvement, but not if you're unwilling to listen to every side and thereby, refuse to gain a better, more well-rounded and matured view.

MovieBob said nothing about the quality of Anita's videos, he was just referring to the insanely disproportionate level of vitriol she received for speaking her opinion. Why is this so hard for people to understand? You can comment on the people who swarmed her with rape and death threats and vandalized her site, and pointing out that her videos are subpar does absolutely nothing to refute that.

Here's a fun idea: the next time somebody starts a Kickstarter for something that doesn't look very good, just ignore them, or maybe list off the reasons you disapprove of their work. Nobody would be talking about Anita Sarkeesian right now if the first thing we all learned about her wasn't that some members of our community acted like a pack of fucking cavemen because she wanted some money for new AV equipment.

Lilani:

AC10:
Subconsciously, I at least think if a person looks like they have the choice to have lots of sex, they probably aren't a nerd. Is that fair? No. But neither is being born attractive. At least let the nerds have something.

Um, no. I've lost 10 pounds in the last month and a half, and I plan to keep running 2-3 miles four times a week and doing crunches, pushups, and chair-dips on the days I don't run until I hit my desired weight (and pant size). I wasn't "born attractive," I've been overweight since I was seven. Watching the fat slowly drain away from my front is a little more than satisfying, I will admit.

In the meantime, I love video games, fantasy films and books, animation, and I plan on joining the friends I made while playing FF11 in FF14 when it relaunches in August. I check my email nearly hourly to see if I've been accepted into the beta yet, so I can join just a bit earlier. I'm chomping at the bit to see the new Doctor Who special in November, and have been satisfying myself with the Classic Who while I wait. Just earlier today I was practicing animation and drawing the human figure by rotoscoping a slow-motion video I downloaded from YouTube of Shaolin monks doing flips and kicks, while on my other monitor streaming Fullmetal Alchemist on Netflix. I've seen Brotherhood through to the end, so I was just wanting to watch the original series to see the differences between the two. I was wanting to get through D-Gray man, but for some reason in the second season Netflix only has the subbed version, and I can't exactly listen to subtitles while animating. And last week I was marathoning the Phantom of the Opera and Into the Woods because I rediscovered how much I love musicals.

Those are my interests, that's what makes me a "nerd." If I do continue to lose weight, what does that have to do with anything? Robin Williams named his daughter Zelda, because he loved the idea of naming his daughter after a beautiful and admirable princess. While he may not be the sexiest man in the world (though not totally repulsive, either) he is extremely charismatic, and looking at him the first thing you wouldn't think is "Oh, he's a nerd." And then look at Vin Diesel, probably the only video game nerd who's actually managed to pull off the self-insertion dream in both the forms of blockbuster movies and AAA video games.

Nerds are not defined by any physical characteristics. Just because you're physically attractive doesn't affect your ability to love games or fiction, and nor does being physically unattractive necessarily mean you are more likely to enjoy those things. We are bound together by our compulsive and sometimes indescribable love for our fandoms and fantasies. And I'll be damned if I let some little peon tell me that my getting into shape somehow jeopardizes any of my passions.

I didn't claim it "jeopardizes your passions" in any way. Being attractive doesn't mean you can't be a nerd, it means people are automatically going to be more skeptical about it. It's not fair, but it's life.

I go to the gym 3 - 5 times a week and I'm a computer programmer.

There is a marked difference between a geek and a nerd IMO. Liking comics, anime, etc. is one thing, but you're not a nerd. You're a geek. Maybe I have the terms flipped around? To me a nerd, in definition, lies solely in terms of computers, physics, math or other pursuits; it's a byproduct of losing yourself in what you do, often at the expense of a lot of things. Often friends, family, romance... sometimes hygiene (anyone who has done 4 - 5 years in Computer Science knows how some people smell). There is nothing glamorous about it and you don't do it because you want to, you do it because you have to.

I know this has nothing to do with bob's video.

xaszatm:

You know, you countered my argument with the exact argument I was making? I wasn't saying we should BAN saying these words. I was saying that such attitudes SHOULDN'T be the normal thing.

Really? Because when I read this...

xaszatm:

So...because it was always a cesspool, we should be proud of it? We should be proud that online gaming is full of misogynistic, racist, homophobic garbage? The fact that we are trying to get rid of this is a bad thing? Is really asking people to think before they open their mouths special treatment? To show common decency? To realize that other people are PEOPLE?

...you come off as if you were advocating that certain attitudes/comments/ect. should be censored or that "we [should] tr[y] to get rid of th[ese]" kinds of things, i.e. ban them from being expressed online.

xaszatm:
It shouldn't be normal for online game chat to dissolve into such a cesspool. And there is a difference between banning something and showing that we don't like something.

First off, who are you to decide that everybody else should conform to your sense of decency? Second off, who is this "we" because while I might not like what is sometimes said online, I'm not about to advocate that a person shouldn't be allowed to say it.

xaszatm:
You are free to say mean, rude, nasty things and I'm free to call you out on such behavior.

I agree.

xaszatm:
Also, you really need to eat your own words. If you say that because I want to censor words (which I DIDN'T say, by the way), I will be leading to a slippery BAN EVERYTHING mantra but then in another response say that nothing will come from the cesspool of the internet, you leading a double standard.

What are you even talking about? How is it a double standard for me to say that what your advocating is censorship and that XboxLive conversations won't result into Federal Laws on minority rights? The first thing is just an observation and commentary on your idea of how XboxLive should operate and the second response is where I pointed out that you were bringing up red herrings because XboxLive chat won't result into federal laws for Minority rights.

xaszatm:
It's not a slippery slope here, but it is here thing.

Huh? I think you might want to go back and reread that last part because, "but it is here thing" doesn't make sense as a sentence.

xaszatm:

Also, you seem to get the idea that such name calling should be normal because its on the internet. Well, what happens if ANYONE does the garbage they do in a public place like the mall? or at stores? They will be probably kicked out for "disturbing the peace." So, why is it when the internet does it, it's suddenly censorship? It's not.

What? Are you not aware of groups like the WBC, Neo-Nazi marches, EDL, Canadian "feminist"[1], political protest, and the various other forms of communication that people express in public spaces?

As for your comment about the internet and real life, the difference is also while I might not be able to say whatever I want in a mall, I most certainly can go in my backyard and express whatever opinion I like. The same can not be said about limiting what people can say on Xboxlive, because its not as if your saying that Xbox should create certain channels for kids where in which there would be rules on language, but you are stating that ALL of the Xboxlive channels/groups/parties/whatever should be subject to having their language monitored.

I can understand if for example you wanted to make it that games rated E should have "cesspool" free XboxLive communication do to the rating of the games and the likelihood that children will play them, but you seem to want to not just stop there, but also target games that are rated T, M, or even A as well and treat those people the same way you would treat children. The last thing people need is for you to play parent to groups of people that are old enough to buy the game in the first place[2]

[1] I'm not saying that they represent all feminist in Canada, though this video is what I imagine a lot of youtube arguments would look like in real life.
[2] Before it is brought up, it falls upon to buy age appropriate games for their kids and to not just ignorantly buy games rated M for kids that are 8 years old. Video games are not a substitute nanny.

Machine Man 1992:
Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Aren't you advocating willful blindness as a solution to the problem?

th3dark3rsh33p:
"The worst of what humanity has to offer." Right, let's just cut the hyperbole a bit before we try a real conversation.

That's not hyperbole on my part. I am less horrified by the enormous evils (I provided an example here that I just deleted because I don't want to change the subject) than I am by the small meanness I've seen in this thread because that sort of rottenness is so pervasive and self-perpetuating, especially here on the internet, where cynicism is all but synonymous with credibility and three out of four conversations are a rush to see who can insult the other guy more. It's not the foulness that happens in extraordinary circumstances that concerns me as much as the foulness we commit in ordinary circumstances and tolerate as being normal. That enormous, torpid weight of social apathy is the worst of humanity I can imagine.

th3dark3rsh33p:
The point of what's this we shit, is ultimately that this kind of thing is not a collective business and that the view that I, or other like minded individuals, must take responsibility for geek culture.

If you accept the label "geek," then yes, you do take responsibility for the culture. You're a part and a participant, and everything that happens in the name of the geek happens with your enthusiastic support, with your silent support, or because you didn't do enough to stop it from happening. This is the responsibility all of us bear, not in the geek culture but in every culture.

th3dark3rsh33p:

canadamus_prime:
The thing is Bob, we AREN'T better. We're just as bad if not worse than those who always looked down on and persecuted us for so long.

Whats the 'we' stuff ke-mo sah-bee? This is what I don't understand. I understand fighting for your personal beliefs and when you actively include yourself in a group to try and oppose certain behaviors. I get this. However, geek culture is now a broad mainstream force which will develop on its own, in its own way. I am not to blame for it's current or past direction. I am not to blame for the actions of thousands of people who all claim to be under the same nebulous term 'geek'. I will not impose myself on others with the pretense of being 'progressive' a term so overly stated by people convinced in their own self righteousness.

I am a gay woman, and a geek. I've seen baseless exclusion and hate. I've been apart of this culture for most of my life. However, I cannot make the culture better but I can choose my friends, and my groups. I choose to be around people who don't support stupid and irrational behaviors. That is all you have at the end of the day. A choice. In what you do, and who you associate with. You can't control the actions of others and the more you go down the path the more of an oppressor you'll be regardless of your intentions. To give an equally trite saying in response to Bob's "The path to hell is paved with good intentions."

So... that was a bit of my personal opinion in counter to Bob's call for a collective opposition to the cultural direction. In a similar grandstanding fashion.

By 'we' I mean the geek community at large as represented by the morons who sent Anita Sarkesian Death and/or rape threats. The kind that get up in arms whenever anyone dares to even suggest that gaming might have problems withing it's community. The kind like that fat fuck a while back who belittled a girl he was coaching in a fighting game tournament in a very sexist way and tried to claim that sexism was part of the 'culture'.
And while I've never done any of those things, I'm not arrogant to presume I'm better than the rest of the community or not capable of them.

AC10:

Lilani:

AC10:
Subconsciously, I at least think if a person looks like they have the choice to have lots of sex, they probably aren't a nerd. Is that fair? No. But neither is being born attractive. At least let the nerds have something.

Um, no. I've lost 10 pounds in the last month and a half, and I plan to keep running 2-3 miles four times a week and doing crunches, pushups, and chair-dips on the days I don't run until I hit my desired weight (and pant size). I wasn't "born attractive," I've been overweight since I was seven. Watching the fat slowly drain away from my front is a little more than satisfying, I will admit.

In the meantime, I love video games, fantasy films and books, animation, and I plan on joining the friends I made while playing FF11 in FF14 when it relaunches in August. I check my email nearly hourly to see if I've been accepted into the beta yet, so I can join just a bit earlier. I'm chomping at the bit to see the new Doctor Who special in November, and have been satisfying myself with the Classic Who while I wait. Just earlier today I was practicing animation and drawing the human figure by rotoscoping a slow-motion video I downloaded from YouTube of Shaolin monks doing flips and kicks, while on my other monitor streaming Fullmetal Alchemist on Netflix. I've seen Brotherhood through to the end, so I was just wanting to watch the original series to see the differences between the two. I was wanting to get through D-Gray man, but for some reason in the second season Netflix only has the subbed version, and I can't exactly listen to subtitles while animating. And last week I was marathoning the Phantom of the Opera and Into the Woods because I rediscovered how much I love musicals.

Those are my interests, that's what makes me a "nerd." If I do continue to lose weight, what does that have to do with anything? Robin Williams named his daughter Zelda, because he loved the idea of naming his daughter after a beautiful and admirable princess. While he may not be the sexiest man in the world (though not totally repulsive, either) he is extremely charismatic, and looking at him the first thing you wouldn't think is "Oh, he's a nerd." And then look at Vin Diesel, probably the only video game nerd who's actually managed to pull off the self-insertion dream in both the forms of blockbuster movies and AAA video games.

Nerds are not defined by any physical characteristics. Just because you're physically attractive doesn't affect your ability to love games or fiction, and nor does being physically unattractive necessarily mean you are more likely to enjoy those things. We are bound together by our compulsive and sometimes indescribable love for our fandoms and fantasies. And I'll be damned if I let some little peon tell me that my getting into shape somehow jeopardizes any of my passions.

I didn't claim it "jeopardizes your passions" in any way. Being attractive doesn't mean you can't be a nerd, it means people are automatically going to be more skeptical about it. It's not fair, but it's life.

I go to the gym 3 - 5 times a week and I'm a computer programmer.

There is a marked difference between a geek and a nerd IMO. Liking comics, anime, etc. is one thing, but you're not a nerd. You're a geek. Maybe I have the terms flipped around? To me a nerd, in definition, lies solely in terms of computers, physics, math or other pursuits; it's a byproduct of losing yourself in what you do, often at the expense of a lot of things. Often friends, family, romance... sometimes hygiene (anyone who has done 4 - 5 years in Computer Science knows how some people smell). There is nothing glamorous about it and you don't do it because you want to, you do it because you have to.

I know this has nothing to do with bob's video.

Been reading a lot of Maddox there bud? You're practically quoting him there.

I don't feel like we have the power, it's just we are a demographic that can be targeted. If geeks really had the power then we'd get a fan friendly version of the Transformers movies, instead it's fans be damn lets blow up crap for the heck of and leave people wondering which robot was which character.

Sure occasionally a geek makes it to the top like Peter Jackson but I don't think it's because Hollywood has embraced the geeks just that Hollywood has learned it's easier to target geeks than Joe Average. Joe Average might not be buying movie tickets like he used to but you put out enough nerd bait and they will line up to get in.

I will totally agree that as geeks we should be a friendlier group. Sure I might know anime from back when you had to find sub-titled bootleg copies at a convention, but that's no reason not to welcome in the people who are just learning about the great stuff anime has to offer.

AstaresPanda:
you have really lost me siding with that women/pop culture critic and feminist. Sorry but if you really do buy into all her crap. Im not not falling into that trap. the double standards are amazing.

I actually think comments like this are part of the problem, it's basically saying that due to one person badly arguing a point that it is inherently wrong. Anita's videos are terrible for a myriad of reasons, but there is an underlying issue of anti-women culture in videogames and only by educating others will it have a chance at being resolved. Now she isn't educating people directly, the way she tries to get her point across is terribly confusing. But the hatred associated with her as a woman gamer talking about feminism, even before most people had even seen the videos highlights the inability of male gamers to deal with women as gamers with their own opinions.

She takes the stories of games so horribly out of context that it's questionable that she's a gamer. She uses so many buzzwords, that it's beyond ridiculous. She based an entire narrative out of her own conclusion that no one can discuss save her followers and everyone has a secret meaning for these words and what she said or didn't say.

She doesn't represent woman gamers. She represents herself and got paid to play video games through deceit. No one cares if she's a female gamer. They care that she's horribly misrepresenting video games to push her own agenda.

Also... I dislike when people say "I know girls who play CoD", I think the potential for a more widespread and socially acceptable female gamer culture lies in games designed specifically for women. Of course this is based in my own experience and observations that your average woman will go towards the more calm and recreational type games as opposed to the more hardcore competitive style ones.

Yes, and there are girls who play Dark Souls. But if your first inclination is to tell the world that you're a "girl gamer", you're identifying yourself as nothing more than a child who wants to play a few games. Most people just like games and talking about the Portal or Chrono Trigger mythos. Your gender need not apply.

The Sims, it's a popular franchise among women, it up until this point has been a single player experience. EA had stated that it intends on making the Sims 4 an Online Game. Despite all the warnings up until this point... It may be a step in the right direction. Do you know the kind of crap women put up with to play The Sims 3? It was insane, tons and tons of expansions, DLC, glitches to the roof, and they still loved it. But making The Sims 4 online, adding a social MMO element to it, and possibly live fixes for errors...

Don't get me wrong EA are evil money grubbing so and so's, but it could be a decision that brings to light the potential behind the female gamer as a consumer. EA could make a good decision.

I'm sorry but... How do women in Sims 3 deal with a lot of crap? I'm aware that the Sims games have more women playing than some other games out there. And after the entire fiasco with DRM for the Sims... Why would you want EA to go and redo the mistake that caused them to win the Golden Poo twice in a row?

Proeliator:
So we should be like Nerdfighters?

Or should we be like Love and Tolerate Bronies?

I think we should go the first route, but I'm cool for whatever man. It's your playground too, just don't forget to be awesome.
(I've just stared watching all of Brotherhood 2.0; I'm starting to like it. Plus I wonder what this discussion would be like in your pants...)

Edit: and, by random happenstance, there is a French the Llama profile pic above me. I am without words

Or there was until I got a low content warning (oops)... I guess I should have put more than an "I agree with everything Movie Bob had to say" comment huh?

Anyway...

image

Yeah; Brotherhood 2.0 is awesome. Enjoy (and good luck) making your way through it.

As for the topic at hand, I think we need to be an amalgamation of Bronies, Nerd Fighters, Whovians - who (and yes that who is a pun) are known for their pretty open minded positions - and a lot of the other tolerant factions of geek culture/fandom. I don't know if it will happen, but I sure hope it does.

Does this mean I can finally post ponies as legitimate reaction pictures? No? Ok...

Helmholtz Watson:

xaszatm:

You know, you countered my argument with the exact argument I was making? I wasn't saying we should BAN saying these words. I was saying that such attitudes SHOULDN'T be the normal thing.

Really? Because when I read this...

xaszatm:

So...because it was always a cesspool, we should be proud of it? We should be proud that online gaming is full of misogynistic, racist, homophobic garbage? The fact that we are trying to get rid of this is a bad thing? Is really asking people to think before they open their mouths special treatment? To show common decency? To realize that other people are PEOPLE?

...you come off as if you were advocating that certain attitudes/comments/ect. should be censored or that "we [should] tr[y] to get rid of th[ese]" kinds of things, i.e. ban them from being expressed online.

xaszatm:
It shouldn't be normal for online game chat to dissolve into such a cesspool. And there is a difference between banning something and showing that we don't like something.

First off, who are you to decide that everybody else should conform to your sense of decency? Second off, who is this "we" because while I might not like what is sometimes said online, I'm not about to advocate that a person shouldn't be allowed to say it.

xaszatm:
You are free to say mean, rude, nasty things and I'm free to call you out on such behavior.

I agree.

xaszatm:
Also, you really need to eat your own words. If you say that because I want to censor words (which I DIDN'T say, by the way), I will be leading to a slippery BAN EVERYTHING mantra but then in another response say that nothing will come from the cesspool of the internet, you leading a double standard.

What are you even talking about? How is it a double standard for me to say that what your advocating is censorship and that XboxLive conversations won't result into Federal Laws on minority rights? The first thing is just an observation and commentary on your idea of how XboxLive should operate and the second response is where I pointed out that you were bringing up red herrings because XboxLive chat won't result into federal laws for Minority rights.

xaszatm:
It's not a slippery slope here, but it is here thing.

Huh? I think you might want to go back and reread that last part because, "but it is here thing" doesn't make sense as a sentence.

xaszatm:

Also, you seem to get the idea that such name calling should be normal because its on the internet. Well, what happens if ANYONE does the garbage they do in a public place like the mall? or at stores? They will be probably kicked out for "disturbing the peace." So, why is it when the internet does it, it's suddenly censorship? It's not.

What? Are you not aware of groups like the WBC, Neo-Nazi marches, EDL, Canadian "feminist"[1], political protest, and the various other forms of communication that people express in public spaces?

As for your comment about the internet and real life, the difference is also while I might not be able to say whatever I want in a mall, I most certainly can go in my backyard and express whatever opinion I like. The same can not be said about limiting what people can say on Xboxlive, because its not as if your saying that Xbox should create certain channels for kids where in which there would be rules on language, but you are stating that ALL of the Xboxlive channels/groups/parties/whatever should be subject to having their language monitored.

I can understand if for example you wanted to make it that games rated E should have "cesspool" free XboxLive communication do to the rating of the games and the likelihood that children will play them, but you seem to want to not just stop there, but also target games that are rated T, M, or even A as well and treat those people the same way you would treat children. The last thing people need is for you to play parent to groups of people that are old enough to buy the game in the first place[2]

Okay, can you not do the point by point thing? It's generally very distracting and makes not want to read your response. In any case...

Once again, there is a difference between BANNING something and saying something shouldn't be allowed. BANNING means I forcibly remove someone from the conversation. Saying "that is inappropriate and you should feel bad" is telling someone that that attitude shouldn't belong here. You are still there and you can respond in however way you want. In fact, I probably will move to another server where there isn't such nonsense. I'm trying to say the latter should be implemented more. This is NOT banning as the person who is saying the statement in the first place is not forcibly removed.

With that in mind, the double standard I'm talking about should be clearer. You were saying I was advocating censorship of the internet and that my ideas would eventually go there. The above paragraph should make what I was trying to say clearer. In the same response, you said that I was giving too much credit to internet trolls because I thought that they were going to pass misogynistic laws. Again, I'm never said that or was trying to say that. I was trying to say that there is usually an underlining connection between what people say and what people do. The double standard was saying that my ideas would lead to censorship laws while also stating that the cesspool (is there another word for this? I can't think of any and it's starting to get old) people state will have no affect on laws being made.

Which, in addition to being a double standard is wrong as America just recently and is currently facing many laws that have HUGE racist and sexist undertones. North Carolina is trying to pass an Anti-Islamic (I believe it's anti-Shari specifically but I'm not 100% sure). Is video game chat the cause? Of course not, but it is showing a symptom of the problem.

And yes, I'm aware of those forms of public communications. But that isn't a comparable to something akin to an internet video game chat. You do realize that such forms of public communications have rules and regulations to follow, right? And that they still have consequences. It might not be legal consequences but social ones, but consequences all the same. Compared to someone not being able to harass others. Note that I'm not saying that he was engaging in name calling, but harassment as I know that there is a difference.

I believe that's really all I have to state on the matter. Understand that I'm not stating I want to start grabbing a banhammer and go crazy when every cracks a joke or says a bad name. Also, I have a tendency to skip words when I'm typing so that explains any English mistakes in my posts.

For example, in the first sentence of this reply, I ask that you not reply to this post in a point by point format. I'm not saying that you can't do that. You are free to do it. I'm just asking.

[1] I'm not saying that they represent all feminist in Canada, though this video is what I imagine a lot of youtube arguments would look like in real life.
[2] Before it is brought up, it falls upon to buy age appropriate games for their kids and to not just ignorantly buy games rated M for kids that are 8 years old. Video games are not a substitute nanny.

well bob words of wisdom as usual, wish someone would actually listen to u...

Turning something trivial and fun into a political battleground is like turning an oasis into a wasteland and then calling it peace.

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

Dear God. I just wasted several minutes of my life watching Feminism vs. Facts, the supposed take-down of Ms. Sarkeesian's post, and Thunderf00t's either trolling or stupid, I can't tell which.

His main argument for the first part of the video is that those males going out to rescue the poor abused women is an expression of men's love, and that if she's against that, she's also against hospitals and police that also help save the poor and helpless.

He either can't understand the entire point of Ms. Sarkeesian's video, or he's deliberately chosen to miss the point. Either way, the point is that *games aren't reality* and he looks rather pathetic missing that central point. The authors of the game *choose* to make the women the victim, a point that Ms. Sarkeesian makes in the parts of the video he quotes! He basically ignores what she says, treats it as if the women are actually kidnapped, and now what are the game authors to do, have the men do nothing?

I'm sorry, but I couldn't take the level of stupid (perhaps because I suspect it's deliberate).

If it still isn't clear that deliberately choosing put women in peril in so many games reflects a problem, let me take another, slightly more amped up example (for emphasis).

If every single book by an author featured a child being raped, or in danger of rape or having to be rescued from rape, you'd probably consider the author pretty skeezy. After all, there's just something a little off about this *chosen* obsession, even if it fits the plot in each book. Even if the child knifes the would-be rapist in the end and even if there's any amount of in-book justification. Defenders can say that child-rape happens in real life. They can say that it helps the author sell more books. They can say the child even did in the bad guy herself in a book. They can say it helps add a level of tension as a child is in danger.

But it doesn't matter. I think we'd all recognize that what the author *chose* to put on the page reflects something in the author himself (that we'd prefer not see the light of day).

The pervasive abuse and victimization of women in many games is exactly the same, writ slightly smaller. It's a reflection of the the author's sensibilities that women are not agents in their own life. Or as she puts it, they're objects, not subjects.

In each game, you can justify it a hundred ways from Sunday, but it doesn't diminish the fact that having it so utterly widespread reflects a deep level of attitudes towards women both in the creators and consumers of games. I'm sorry, but there's not much way around it.

There may well be cogent criticism of Ms. Sarkeesian's work out there, but dear God, Feminism vs. Facts wasn't it.

EstrogenicMuscle:

Renegade-pizza:
In connection to the Tropes vs Women reference, I don't take Alisia Sarkeesian seriously.

Watch her episode, then Facts vs Women and you'll see why.

Facts vs. Women was stupid as heck.

She also destroyed a lot of the horrible points that thunderf00t made in her second video.
What is most pathetic in this world, is that what Anita Sarkeesian should mostly be seen as doing, is stating the obvious.

Just the reaction to Anita Sarkeesian proves how necessary feminism is. Even if she were are horrible as many people LIE Anita Sarkeesian out to be. The reaction to her and her videos would still be unwarranted. It is absolutely sad that this planet is so sad, that people reaction so viciously to someone stating such obvious truths.

Oh, and every time anything like this is brought up people are like "oh, stop talking about sexism. Oh, stop talking about sexism. I'm tired of hearing about it."
People will stop talking about it when, every time it is brought up, people prove how good of an idea talking about sexism is.

If people want people talking about sexism less, maybe they should stop be a part of the problem.

She heavily implied that video games have a connection with real world domestic abuse. Don't know about you but the rest of us don't buy into crap like that. And it is not obvious that these tropes cause harm in the real world.

She does not speak the obvious, she says things and then expects them to be taken as read just because she said them.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 . . . 17 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here