I’m back from a brief vacation in Migraineland, and thinking about the ways in which Men’s Rights Activists love to appropriate the language of feminism and other progressive movements, usually in ways that are face-palmingly ass-backwards.
Take this recent discussion on the Men’s Rights subreddit of the dire threat of “fake gamer girls” invading the “male space” of gaming. The generically named guywithaccount sets up the discussion with this post:
Now, there is a teensy bit of gold in this pile of bullshit: the notion of a “safe space,” where oppressed people can come forward and discuss their issues without fear of being talked over or shut down by those outside their group — who have more power in the world and who may not have their best interests at heart (or who may just be Blabby McBlabbypants types).
But there are a couple of giant problems with this notion when it comes to gamer dudes declaring gaming a “safe space” for men. The first is that, despite lingering resentments over being “snubbed” in high school or wherever — evident in the OP and in comments throughout the discussion — these guys are not actually an oppressed people by any measure that really matters.
Indeed, many of them — as tech dudes in a male-dominated tech world — are in fact in fairly privileged positions. For them to claim they need a “safe space” to protect themselves from the evils of “fake gamer girls” is a bit like Klan members claiming they need a “safe space” to protect themselves from blacks, Jews and Catholics. (Which is more or less what Klan members have argued over the years, albeit in less PC language.) No, I’m not claiming that all MRAs are the equivalent of hood-wearing Klan members. Only some of them are.
The second problem with the “game world as safe space for men” aregument is that YOU CAN’T JUST DECLARE BIG CHUNKS OF THE WORLD TO BELONG TO MEN. Yes, men dominate the gaming world in sheer numbers, both as game-makers and game-players. (While women make up nearly half of all game players — 47% — men tend to dominate the “serious” games that many geek dudes claim are the only ones that really count.) But gaming doesn’t “belong” to men any more than, say, novel-reading “belongs” to women — even though surveys suggest that women make up a staggering 80% of the fiction market in much of the English-speaking world.
Yep, that’s right: Women dominate “noveling” much more dramatically than men dominate gaming. Yet you don’t find women denouncing “fake noveler boys” or declaring that the male brain isn’t wired to understand the subtleties of written fiction.
No, in fact men are actively welcomed into book clubs. And my best friend, a woman, has spent much of the 18 or so years or our friendship trying to get me to read this novel or that novel, though over the years she’s only succeeded in getting me to read maybe one or two of her suggestions, which were pretty good, I have to admit. (I do plan to read some of the others, really.)
If you’re a socially awkward guy and want a safe space to discuss that, find a therapist, find a support group. Don’t pick on women gamers and pretend this is somehow your right because you’re oppressed as a socially awkward guy.
Anyway, here are some other dumb comments from the Reddit thread. YetAnotherCommenter warns feminists that they may lose some powerful allies if they continue acting so feministy.
Speaking of nerds who can’t get laid — which we weren’t but which these guys keep bringing up (and identifying themselves as) again and again — guia7ri seems to harbor some lingering resentments from high school, and who better to take that out on than attractive geeky women?
Hey MRAs, if you wonder why feminists sometimes describe MRAs as bitter men who hate women because they can’t get laid, it’s because MRAs like gui7ri so often EXPLICITLY DECLARE THEMSELVES BITTER MEN WHO HATE WOMEN BECAUSE THEY CAN’T GET LAID.
Meanwhile Byuku blames it all on evil feminists pretending to be geeks in order to make trouble. Because that’s what feminists do.
That’s how they get you!
EDIT: Added a sentence to temper and clarify my assertion that men “dominate” gaming.
Did it owrk? Kitens?
http://instagram.com/p/dUZIPiF-13/
KITTENS!!!
@seranvali:
The “women are the gatekeepers of sex” comes from a bunch of cultural things, like wives punishing their husbands by witholding sex, or men asking women for sex and the woman saying “yes” or “no.” It’s all really asinine. In pretty much any situation where the agreement of two people is required for a thing to happen, the other person is going to look like the gatekeeper. (If I want the thing, I can’t get it unless the other person agrees too)
See, Twitter has a purpose. A twitter-friend told me about an IRL friend of hers who was a vet’s nurse. a local farmer had been gradually trapping all the feral cats on his farm, getting them neutered & then releasing them again. One female cat had a litter of 5 kittens before he could catch her. He brought the kittens in to the vets and asked them to put them all down. Vet nurse couldn’t do it so got them signed over to her & was trying to rehome them. All 5 solid black so she was really struggling to find homes. How could I resist? /smug
@titanblue
So…did you take the kitties?
(ps I’m being a bad commenter, I only read the last page of this thread).
It’s definitely asinine,isn’t it,@kirbywarp. I am the gatekeeper of sex with me. Everyone is the gatekeeper of sex with themselves. /sigh
@ Marie
You’re not missing anything by skipping merrily past the troll droppings, trust me.
@marie I took two boy kittens. Beran is the fluffier, Brond the smoother coated. I am besotted.
Plus I helped convince another twitter-friend to take another 2. So waiting to hear if the remaining little laddie has found a home yet (the nurse said she might keep him herself if noone turned up for him).
If the picture didn’t work, I’ll have another go when I get home.
I tried to go back to the beginning and read them, but it got TEDIOUS.
I mean, I can read a 1200+ comment thread and enjoy myself when the argument is, yanno, one where all participants are engaging honestly. You can learn stuff in there! And some of that stuff will blow your mind!
But right about the time somebody starts in with the crap, it just gets so unreadable….
@titan blue
D’awww. Yay for your kitties!
He could have just written “I’m so awesome” 500 times and saved himself and everyone else a lot of reading.
@howard bannister/ cassandra says
I swear the more people say about the troll the more curious I get! XD Do not tempt me!
Hmm. Will you need help getting to sleep later? Maybe save it for then. Much better than counting sheep.
They prevent the collapse of society.
If “rights” are nothing more than the rules that keep society functioning then neither the movement to abolish slavery nor the gay marriage movement have anything to do with rights. Societies have existed with slavery and lack of gay marriage for most of human history.
Now, that is not to say that either movement is undesirable but by *your* definition of “rights” neither falls under it.
@cassandra says
Nah, I just woke up an hour or so ago XD
@Asher
Are you the troll? Either way, seems like you don’t actually know what rights are. PS don’t put it in scare quotes.
you familiar with this thing called “empathy”?
Funny you should mention this because it relates to the concept of Dunbar’s Number that I mentioned earlier. Human beings are able to interact, at most, on an integrated emotional level with, at most, a few hundred individuals in their entire lifetime. Interactions outside of that small circle require abstract rules of behavior that are not governed by emotion.
Rules governing behavior in large-scale societies have nothing to do with empathy. Empathy, as an emotion, is immediate and directly proximate. Moral philosophy that bases abstract notions of “right” on empathy are blatantly false.
Ahhhhhhh… so nice of you to admit what has been obvious to the rest of us this whole time. 😛
Imagine about 10-15 teal deers just like that per page and you have the early part of this thread. I just skimmed it because my eyes were starting to glaze over.
the fact that you think it necessarily draws arbitrary lines is telling and says a lot about your understanding of modern psychology, however thorough it is.
What’s telling is that modern psychology *does* do this and when I point it out you don’t even bother to contest it but offer the intellectually dishonest response of “it’s telling”, implying that I’m “that sort of person”. Frankly, your behavior is what’s known as Orwellian; since I seem to have to spell everything out for the commenters, here, calling someone Orwellian is mainly a reference to the concept of thoughtcrime in the book 1984.
You are insinuating that I am engaging in thoughtcrime.
@Asher
So the answer is no?
On the bright side now that trolly’s giving us some of his…wisdom…here I feel less need to go see what he was saying earlier.
@Asher
Dude, 1) everyone knows who Orwell was (or at least lots of people here) 2) links to where people are “insinuating you’re engaging in thought crime”. B/c pointing out you are an ass=/= Thoughtcrime!
No, the insinuation is more ASSHOLE, but you just run with that.
Also, I”m going to have to re-read 1984, since trolls seem to love it so much.
1/10, several points deducted for trying too hard.
…um, see, this is pretty much a ‘no, U WRONG’ statement.
But with no proof behind it.
Then he moves on real quick to impugn the motivations of those questioning him to make sure you don’t stop to ask for proof.
This is a very deliberate shuffle and switch.
This is why you are a dishonest actor.