The wit and wisdom of the guy who created that “beat up Anita Sarkeesian” game
Yesterday I wrote about a vile online game in which players were invited to “beat up Anita Sarkeesian,” the feminist cultural critic who’s faced endless harassment because she had the temerity to ask for donations to fund a video project looking at sexist tropes in video games.
The game, which (happily) has been removed from Newgrounds.com, where it was originally posted, was put together by a young Canadian gamer named Bendilin Spurr. On the game’s page, he offered this explanation as to why he created the game:
Anita Sarkeesian has not only scammed thousands of people out of over $160,000, but also uses the excuse that she is a woman to get away with whatever she damn well pleases. Any form of constructive criticism, even from fellow women, is either ignored or labelled to be sexist against her.
She claims to want gender equality in video games, but in reality, she just wants to use the fact that she was born with a vagina to get free money and sympathy from everyone who crosses her path.
That doesn’t really explain much, as asking people for voluntary donations to a video project is a far cry from “scamming,” especially since she’d asked for far less, and that the misogynist backlash to her project began long before she’d collected anywhere near this amount.
It also doesn’t quite explain why Bendilin felt that a Sarkessian-punching game was the best format to make this, er, critique.
Last night, after learning from the comments here that young Bendilin had a profile on Steam and a Twitter account, I decided to peruse both to see if I could find more clues that might explain his foul game.
On his Steam profile, he’s set forth his basic philosophy of life, video games, and how much women suck:
I think it’s just adorable how absolutely no girls are any good at video games, just like how no woman has ever written a good novel. They are nothing but talk and no action, probably because girls are such emotional creatures and base everything they do on their current feelings and then try to rationalize their actions later. How pathetic.
You know what’s priceless? When a gamer girl posts a pic of herself looking as slutty as possible and then throws a fake fit when people talk to her like she’s a whore. What did you think was going to happen, you dumb broad? Lose thirty pounds.
Sadly, these aren’t terribly rare or original opinions for a young male gamer.
Over on Twitter, Bendilin has offered a number of conflicting explanations for why he felt so much hostility for Sarkeesian and her video project that he felt justified in creating a video game devoted to punching her in the face.
There’s the fiscal argument:
There’s the laziness argument:
There’s the rather strange argument that Sarkeesian is not taking the proper time to research the subject, although she has not yet started the project. (Also, one of the reasons she was asking for money was so that she could take the time to research the subject properly.)
The “nuh-uh you’re wrong” argument:
The “she won’t listen to me argument.” Part one: The Lego Incident
And Part 2, in which our hero explains that making a video game about punching someone in the face is a great way to open a dialogue with them:
Naturally, Bendilin, like most misogynists, fervently denies that he’s a misogynist:
Yep, that’s right. The guy whose Steam profile claims that “absolutely no girls are any good at video games” and that “no woman has ever written a good novel,” and who decided to express his criticism for a video project that hasn’t even started by making a video game in which players punch the woman behind it in the face, is angry that anyone might conclude that he hates women.
Well, Bendilin, if you wanted to defend video games and the gaming community at large from charges of sexism, you’ve done a bang-up job of it.
UPDATE: Bendilin is also an artist! Here, Virgil Texas takes a look at Bendilin’s erotically charged Sonic the Hedgehog art.
That last paragraph and the update contained
Posted on July 8, 2012, in antifeminism, bullying, harassment, irony alert, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, narcissism, oppressed men, pussy pass, vaginas, violence. Bookmark the permalink. 1,286 Comments.
Also, I redefined MEN to men THROWING STONES AT FLUFFY KITTENS.
Guys, aren’t MEN really bad? we should stop MEN. MEN shouldn’t even exist!
Because apparently now redefining words to make them mean whatever is just fine.
Argenti Aertheri: Thanks for pointing that out – though I suspect that there will be some ragequitting in my future…
Because apparently now redefining words to make them mean whatever is just fine.
It’s not I who is claiming definitions contrary to that found in the dictionary.
Certainly, I’m not saying that the dictionary is the be-all end-all- words change, context matters.
But the burden’s on you, kiddo, not me. Because I think we can safely claim that Merriam-Webster’s definition is at the very least one of the valid usages.
Steele, now you believe in context? Fuck off.
And you’re the one advancing claims, the burden’s really on you, buckaroo. Double fuck off.
And you’re the one advancing claims, the burden’s really on you, buckaroo. Double fuck off.
Nope. You’re the ones promoting the usage of a more specified definition of “misandry”; that is, the sociological one. It’s not the layman’s definition- therefore, you’re the one who needs to provide justification for it.
Now, I actually agree with you- the sociological definition is a valid one- but I’m merely taking issue with your bizarre attempts to invalidate the layman’s definition. Take it up with Merriam-Webster.
I don’t think there is actually any layman’s definition of “misandry”. Try using that word in casual conversation – most people will give you a funny look and tell you that it’s not a real word.
most people will give you a funny look and tell you that it’s not a real word.
Firstly, the layman’s definition is the dictionary definition.
Secondly, most people would probably ask what it meant; I would reply “hatred of men”, and they’d say, “oh, all right. Thanks.”
Most people would not throw a huge fit over it and come up with convoluted reasons why it’s “not a real word” or some such crap.
Thirdly, I have heard the word in casual conversation once or twice. Not much, but it’s in some level of use. I have also heard it used a few times in an academic context.
Try again, kid.
Nope. I’ve tried using misandry in conversation as an experiment, and people have said “that’s not a real word” and then, when I explained what MRAs think it means, “that’s not something that actually exists”. These were men, btw. Doesn’t seem like the general public agrees with you on this (or any other) issue.
I’ve tried using misandry in conversation as an experiment, and people have said “that’s not a real word” and then, when I explained what MRAs think it means, “that’s not something that actually exists”.
Such a comprehensive study!
My experience has been different.
(Personally, as a feminist, I suspect you run with people who are inclined to agree with you. Even if I’m wrong, anecdata is a waste of everyone’s time).
Aw, Schmoopy, sorry to burst your bubble. That was mean of me. I could point out that your circle probably leans pro-MRA and that’s why you know people who recognise the word “misandry”, but that would just be super extra mean.
BWAhahahahaha! You mean, unless it’s YOUR anecdote. Pfft.
Aw, Schmoopy, sorry to burst your bubble. That was mean of me. I could point out that your circle probably leans pro-MRA and that’s why you know people who recognise the word “misandry”, but that would just be super extra mean.
It’s possible, certainly, but your anecdata is no more convincing than mine. The fact that I have heard the word used in an academic context, on the other hand, seems to indicate that it’s not quite as much of a joke as you’d like to think.
Hmmm, I’m not so sure. It depends on the… What’s that word again? … CONTEXT I’ve known many an academic with an extremely dry sense of humor.
I can certainly imagine Ithiliana using that word, but it wouldn’t be as an endorsement.
Ugh, can we just ignore this puling asshole? That’s probably very misandric (even spellcheck thinks that word is bullshit) of me, but I am at roughly half-past give a shit with this utter moron.
Spellcheck, like MS Word, is misandry.
It depends on the… What’s that word again? … CONTEXT
Nothing exciting. Working on a graduate degree at the moment, and I semi-regularly attend lectures on literature- it still interests me despite the fact that I was chased from the profession by a bullying, abusive misandrist. About a month ago the lecturer said something along the lines of:
Some say that yadda yadda yadda’s views could be interpreted as misandrist, that is, anti-male, and others say [...]
No one flipped out. No one shat their pants. We wrote it down.
Steele, here’s the problem. You are using “misandry” to refer to an institutional thing. Why else would you say “episodic misandry” rather than just plain “misandry?”
So you’re being fundamentally dishonest in whining over how “misandry” can refer to single episodes or an institutional thing, as if that’s important in the slightest. It’s just a smokescreen over a topic you explicitly refuse to talk about.
You want us to buy the term “episodic misandry?” Prove misandry exists. Want to prove misandry exists? Don’t cloud the issue by saying that there exist individuals who hate men, when really what you need to show is that there is any sort of institutional backing to that hatred. And if you want to use the term “misandry” to just talk about those individual instances, don’t use the phrase “episodic misandry.” You gotta pick one or the other.
Says the man who uses an anecdote about a possibly man-hating, bully of a teacher as evidence that we live in a misandric society.
It really would help if Steele would sit in on some Logic 101 classes, wouldn’t it?
@Steele: You seem to assume a dictionary is a neutral authority. It’s not:
http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9781405111850_chunk_g978140511185042
@Steele
Yes, you heard misandry in a literature class. That is generally where it comes up, because misandry is often used as a hypothetical position for FICTIONAL characters to have. You know those weird caricatures of feminists that show up in books, movies and tvs? Like the Feministas from Futurama?
Alright, misandry is indeed a position held by many characters in novels, a plethora of cartoon characters, and maybe even a dozen or so real live people.
However, you continually contend that it is an institutional bias similar to misogyny, to which we keep replying: evidence or stfu.
Are we going to go around this circle again or are you going to post some sources?
I know your idea of a source is some angry dude talking about how Jesus’ personal sex life was an attack on men, but try to shoot a little higher, yeah?
SOC SCIENCES INDEX: search for misogyny results in 229 ‘hits’.
SOC SCIENCES INDEX: search for misandry (NOT racism, NOT masculinity): 10 hits.
SOC SCIENCES INDEX: search for masculinity, 7124 hits.
@Steele: so you think the word appearing in a lecture means it exists?
What was the context? (book or text under discussion, etc).
Plus, it’s possible that some critics do argue X is misandrist, but others disagree and the consensus is Q.
I think I’mma check the MLA now.
Only 10 hits? Well that’s just MISANDRISTIC!!!
I was going to say, he’s just going to interpet this as a sign that misandry is totally real but tragically underresearched.
Modern Language Association’s International Bibliography (the PLATINUM resource for literature and languages research): misogyny=670 hits
Misandry: 8
Masculinities: 4523
Femininities=2754
Oh, heck, I’m on a roll:
gender=22,225
queer: 3904
Didn’t we already establish that logic is MISANDRY! (I’m having way too much fun with this.)
@Ithiliana: wow, that Blackwell’s thing is interesting. I’m going to adopt the phrase “World Englishes” as my theme this week, and try to work it into every conversation. I like it a lot.
(More probably, I’ll cool down and think more clearly, and realize I’m being a bit loopy right now…) Still, thanks for the link.
“Didn’t we already establish that logic is MISANDRY! (I’m having way too much fun with this.)”
Well obviously, but he’s taking literature classes despite the humanities being dominated by misandry, so I’m sure he’ll be able to cope.
PS – Whatever databases Ithiliana is searching are also misandry, as is the fact that she has access to them and Steele doesn’t.
How MISANDRIST of you to imply that logic, a purely masculine virtue, is MISANDRY!!
@Unimaginative: it is!
The comma discussion the other day, um, night, between US and UK comma rules–an example of World English differences. One legacy of the colonial history is that there are a bunch of different “standard” Englishes (with support from different national goverments and university systems). “World Englishes” is a category in linguistics (one of my colleagues works in that area). Anybody who tries to bambooble anybody into thinking there is one correct English should be smacked (metaphorically) over the head with WORLD ENGLISHES!
Linguistics joke: “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy.”
I am a female english teacher, therefor MISANDRY!!!
Fun story: the first time I was called for jury duty, in the voir dire, the defense attorney asked me to confirm I was an English teacher. I said yes, I taught English. He said “my mother was an English teacher.”
A bit later, three people related to police and I were kicked out of the room, ahahahahahahahaha.
MOMMY ISSUES!
Watch out, Steele is going to start holding you personally responsible for that one teacher who told him not to pursue the humanities back when he was a kid.
I was excused from jury duty for teaching, but only because my course was going to be in conflict with the first 2 or 3 weeks of the trial. Thank fucking dog. It was a murder case, where one gang shot the wrong brother (in his mother’s driveway), and the brother they had meant to kill hired some other tool to kill them (for $30K or something), all in an otherwise quiet, suburban neighbourhood.
Turns out my best friend was one of the many witnesses who saw the aftermath while driving home from work, so I would have been ineligible anyway (I think… The rules confuse me).
@CassandraSays: OF COURSE I am responsible. As part of the englishteacherhivemind, I spread MISANDRY throughout the profession! Nay, the world!
@Unimaginative: Yes, if you knew anybody involved in the case, you’d be ineligible (that was one question that was always asked–I’ve been called in three or four times).
Hey, Steele, I’m still waiting for the evidence of systematic misandry that I asked you for last night.
I have Asperger’s, as do my boyfriend and (probably) mother, and I’ll actually use the term “sperging out.” I’m not telling anyone else they have to be OK with it, though.
But the thing is, I thought it referred to getting obsessive about your Special Interests. So, when I was talking about military history, I was sperging out, but not when I was telling Steele he was thick as a whale omelet.
Until the two categories briefly and beautifully collided, when it was revealed that Steele believes that the Vietnam war was history’s costliest example of draftees getting killed.
That’ll never get old, Steele buddy. It’s the perfect encapsulation of (1) your solipsism (since America in the late 20th c is obviously the whole of history) (2) your idiocy (since HOLY SHIT MAN)
Mmmm. Whale omelettes….
Christ. I’m Canadian and I know that Vietnam wasn’t the deadliest conflict for Americans. And here I thought American history was drilled into the kids heads over there.
Well..at least the white American history…
White Americans outnumbered for the first time in history. The stupidity of that statement made a lot of jaws drop amongst my friends. And Canada aint no bastion of native understanding and acceptance either.
It is, he’s just a dumbass.
Also, Vietnam did usher in a national conversation about the draft that was heavily disapproving, which is probably what he remembers. Americans were drafted in World War 2, but so far as I know there was no widespread outrage. (There was outrage in both the CSA and the USA over the draft during our Civil War, but that doesn’t fit the narrative full of SEPIA-TONED PORTRAITS AND SAD VIOLINS.)
It’s easy, if you’re a dumbass, to elide the memory of that outrage with the fact of the draft itself.
To be brutally honest, my impression (especially over the last 20 years) is that a lot of Americans get their history education from John Wayne movies. (Mind you, this impression is mostly gleaned from things like Rick Mercer’s Talking to Americans and Jay Leno’s thing where he talks to people on the street, so maybe that’s not a fair impression.)
I mean, I’m no great scholar, but if I learn something historical-ish from a movie or a novel, I double-check its accuracy against dramatic effect before I file it away in my How the World Came to Be mental box.
There’s a commentor on Spreadhead calling for single mothers to be whipped with cat o nine tails. Exceptions made for widows of course.
But its not a hate movement.
And these guys whipped into a fury by one woman calling men a financial support system for children and telling them their happiness no longer matters once a child is born. That’s not nice, I’ll agree. So…maybe now some of them will change their viewpoint on women being ambulatory lifesupport systems, and who gives a shit if the women are unhappy once they become mothers? Shall I hold my breath?
The HIstory Channel.
History teachers blench when students tell them how much they LOVE the History Channel.
*sigh*
No, you’ll only succeed at turning blue.
@Unimaginative: I’ve had students who insisted Texas won the Battle of the Alamo!
So in some cases, John Wayne movies would be BETTER than the coaches teaching history (only recently has HISTORY been added to the list of standardized exams students must pass to get a graduate degree which means that more schools hire people who are qualified to teach HISTORY rather than hire coaches who are also assigned history classes).
@Kirbywarp: I suppose, in the end, I really only have one thing to say. You don’t get to speak for other men. You don’t get to proclaim that bullying and abuse from an authority figure “doesn’t carry much weight” or “isn’t so bad” due to the Feminist 401 theory that you’ve learned to parrot on the internet. You don’t get to make blanket statements about how the boys in your class felt- or how any male feels in the presence of misandry. Some will not be bothered; others, it will hurt very badly indeed. Your attempts to erase other men’s experiences is mind-bogglingly presumptuous.
If you found your teacher’s bullying to have an unexpectedly positive result, that’s awesome for you. But the buck fucking stops there. You don’t get to make grand, sweeping proclamations about how bullying and abuse from a teacher is “a good thing”, or “justified” in any sense of the term. You speak for yourself and no one else, you lying, arrogant, presumptuous sack of shit.
That’s right, Kirbywarp! Only STEELE is permitted to make grand, sweeping proclamations of systemic abuse totally extrapolated out of his fee-fees being hurt by a mean teacher that one time!
Hey Steele, how do you feel about hard wooden chairs?
Hey, Steele, weren’t you going to show your humanities chops and prove that institutional misandry is a real thing?
@Ithiliana: if it makes you feel any better (it probably shouldn’t), the reverse also happens. My best friend’s first year of teaching (high school), she was assigned to be the cheerleading coach. We were like “Buh? Cheerleading is a sport?” It was a humiliating year for her and her team.
Because our town only had one high school until about the year we started grade 10, and the next nearest high school was a 4-hour drive away. So inter-school rivalries weren’t really a thing for us, even if we’d been into sports.
(She became the yearbook advisor the next year, to everyone’s relief.)
Hey, Steele, weren’t you going to show your humanities chops and prove that institutional misandry is a real thing?
Nope. It would be a waste of time to dialogue about that with you extremist feminists, eager to dismiss bullying, abuse and harassment unless it’s the “right kind” of bullying, abuse and harassment. You are terrible individuals.
Bigotry, prejudice and Misandry in no way imply institutionality. In a certain context, they may, but in a general context, they default to the dictionary’s definition- the simple, layman’s term. This is reality.
That’s right, Kirbywarp! Only STEELE is permitted to make grand, sweeping proclamations of systemic abuse totally extrapolated out of his fee-fees being hurt by a mean teacher that one time!
Nope, again. Read for comprehension. I merely question Kirbywarp’s assertion that he can make such proclamations; I do not pretend to know what the boys in his class felt, or any male feels in the presence of Misandry. I simply acknowledge the possibility that some are hurt, and based on that possibility, it seems we should condemn instances of Misandry.
Didn’t realize condemning bigotry was a radical notion.
Why are you now capitalizing misandry?
Like, is there a person named Misandry who you want to tell us about? Is there a Misandry that’s the state capital of Feminiowa?
Let’s see…..
Mean female teacher bullies male student, so that covers the misandry portion. Teacher works at a school, which is an institution, so that covers the institutional portion….
EUREKA!!! PROOF of institutional misandry!!!
Well, it shows that Misandry is a thing, and much more Important than bigotry or prejudice. Lack of capitalization is MISANDRY!
@Steele:
I’d love to see which comments of mine you’re referencing here.
*sigh* What a weird spin you keep putting on this. I personally used the word “joking,” and you’ve consistently interpreted that as “bullying” because my experience must have been bad exactly like yours. Couldn’t be any other way! And then you have the nerve to tell me to stop interpreting my classmate’s experience of the teacher that only existed in your own head, and call me a “lying, arrogant, presumptious sack of shit” for what… the third time now?
I said nothing of your experience, I’ve only ever described my own experience and that of those who were around me (those who I would actually be familiar with, having known them for a couple years). You are the one who is interpreting my experience, and then calling me a sack of shit for not being outraged at the straw-teacher you’ve built up in your head.
Just stop it, will you? Go back to refusing to talk about the one worthwhile subject in your entire shtick.
Seriously? You haven’t convinced anyone here about anything. What would make the institutional misandry argument different from any of your other arguments since you got here?
Also, if we’re going by dictionary definitions, my SOED doesn’t have the word at all, so I guess it’s not a real thing at all.
He hasn’t got any anecdotes about it.
What a weird spin you keep putting on this. I personally used the word “joking,” and you’ve consistently interpreted that as “bullying” because my experience must have been bad exactly like yours.
“Joking”? Just like “ironic” racism and rape jokes? Like kids in middle school who “joke” about making other kids eat worms?
Hypocritical asshole. My point stands.
I have no idea what your teacher was like. I’m merely disputing that all your classmates had your reaction. And I think that, this uncertainty being so, we should be condemning bullying. Even if they’re “only” targeting men. And even if it’s “joking”.
This whole conversation is utterly bizarre. It’s like… I’m being called a liar and my experience is being dismissed because I’m not describing it as being extreme enough. O_O Isn’t it usually the other way around, when women are called liars when talking about their run-ins with misogyny?
Just goes to show the whole thing is about hard-core cofirmation bias.
@ Dracula – LOL.
I heard that an experience airline pilot totally saw an institutional misandry one time, but the Air Force leaned on him until he changed his story.
@Steele:
I never would have guessed, judging by your description of her behavior as:
It is making my head hurt.
Steele, do you seriously not get how weird it is that you are yelling at Kirby for not agreeing with your interpretation of something you only know about because he told you about it? It makes as much sense as if you said, “I am currently wearing a bright red shirt,” and I replied by saying, “Liar! Your shirt is much more of a deep crimson!” despite not having actually seen your shirt and only knowing of its existence because you TOLD me it was red.
Steele, I’ll gladly say that I think that abuse, bullying, and harassment are bad no matter what the reason given is.
Dude, we’ve been trying to engage you in dialogue for the past day. I don’t think we’re the ones unwilling to engage in dialogue here.
And I’m still waiting for your evidence that institutional misandry exists.
@Polliwog:
Then I say that other people around me probably see it as a red shirt as well, and he blows at me and calls me a “presumptious sack of shit” because I dare to speak for other people who might look at my shirt. I might look at my shirt and see red, but I’m probably color blind and anyway he in the past has worn a crimson shirt and blah blah blah blah blah.
blows up at me
Like I said in another thread, words are not with me today.