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:
![I want to talk about "fake geek girls" (self.MensRights) submitted 9 days ago by guywithaccount For those of you who don't know about this, there's a bit of a controversy in what I'll call the geek community. Apparently, when women attend geek conventions (that is, those celebrating e.g. video games, comic books, sci-fi and fantasy), some men accuse them of being "fake geeks" or demanding that they prove their "geek cred" by correctly answering trivia questions made up on the spot. Here's one article (of many) that talks about it: [1] http://bookviewcafe.com/blog/2013/08/08/the-fake-geek-girl-nonsense/ My concern for this issue is that, like anything else that involves gender, feminists and feminist sympathizers are attempting to dominate the discussion and frame the whole thing from a feminist and gynocentric perspective. The prevailing analysis might be summed up as "geek culture is deeply misogynistic, and the people complaining about fake geeks are just sad little losers who hate women." IMO, the geek subculture has provided a somewhat-safe space for many men who have been snubbed by the rest of society, where they are not expected to prove their value to each other by carving notches in a bedpost or exemplifying traditional masculine traits. The increase in mainstream appeal and female participation over the past decade or so threatens the safety and exclusivity of this space, and the backlash from male geeks is a somewhat-predictable response to the invasion of their space. Of course, there are few spaces just for men, and when someone tries to create or preserve one, they're accused of misogyny. I suspect that some of you don't give a crap about any of this and see the whole thing as petty, but realize that it's not happening in a vacuum. I believe it's merely a symptom of the fact that men have almost no voice in gender discussions and their needs are routinely denied or ignored.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/fakegeek.png?resize=573%2C541&ssl=1)
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.
CassandraSays’ story is making Asher interesting to me! It’s a miracle. Please go on, let me know what happens next!
By all the gods man, you’re the one who said that identities are exclusionary and linked that to badness being culturally relative. I’m the one who called that a crock of shit because identities cannot be inherently bad! My memory is bad but not that bad!
As for that turd about norms, you really need to use that dictionary of yours —
3: average: as
a : a set standard of development or achievement usually derived from the average or median achievement of a large group
b : a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the behavior of a social group
c : a widespread or usual practice, procedure, or custom
Typical, as in not universal, as in applies to most, but not all, people is EXACTLY WHAT A NORM IS!
But if it worked well, then it would be A-OK.
Hey, Asher’s true colors are starting to emerge! Time until meltdown?
Honestly, I’ll give him a few days. This one has stamina.
The fact that he got 55 Google results for “asher is boring” kind of puts the lie to his claims to have used the handle since “the beginning of the internet” because I just can’t believe he’s been active that long and not bored a whole lot more people to tears.
Utilizing the well-known scientific method of conjecture, which cannot be refuted, I conjecture therefore that most of his 55 hits are from this thread and therefore he is a mendacious flap-mouthed bum-bailey.
NB for the hard of thinking: That wasn’t an ad hominem fallacy, it was just an ad hominem insult. I didn’t say we shouldn’t listen to you because you’re a mendacious flap-mouthed bum-bailey, I just said you were a mendacious flap-mouthed bum-bailey. Hell, look at it a certain way, I didn’t really call you a mendacious flap-mouthed bum-bailey, I just typed a string of letters that happen to read so.
Well, morals are all contextual anyway, right?
The first, not all geeks are members of the Klannish aspect of the culture.
Assuming facts not in evidence, which the was the problem with David’s initial analogy. Now, if David’s analogy was accompanied by evidence for Klan-like elements among male geeks then this would be a valid objection. It’s been many hours now since I made the initial observation and no one has attempted to substantiate where the Klan and male geeks are functionally equivalent.
and real world consequences attendant to “Donglegate” Katherine Harris, Anita Sarkeesian, Redheaded Feminist,
Not terror and nothing even remotely resembling what the Klan did. What the women did at Donglegate was appalling and their consequences were well deserved. I seriously doubt those women are going to starve due to the consequences.
katz — so do pecunium and I. And I, for one, have nothing better to do. This is currently more interesting than dodging things a ghost throws (not my favorite part of VtM:B)
And he who questions training only trains himself in asking questions.
Where’s that popcorn? I can’t believe he just tried to lecture Pecunium on the US military.
More hyperbole. A one line observation isn’t what people usually consider a lecture.
But why are there watermelons on my feet?
HE DENIES FREE WILL!
No I didn’t. You need to re-read the comment. I noted that if you want to practically apply the notion of free will then you need a applicable demarcating principle between actions that are free and those that are not.
@Asher:
In the short run, slavery is stable. Gender stereotypes are volitile and unstable on pretty much the same time scales, as I’ve argued before. In the long run, slavery is on its way out. In the same way, stereotypes and inequality between genders are also on their way out.
I think you’re forgetting what you were originally arguing about. You’re like a markov generator for tedium.
We didn’t substantiate it because David already did, dimtwit.
Right here:
And I’m not the first one to point this out to you.
Don’t read his comments more than once! If you do that the unicorn gets jealous.
People did. I did so as well. And none of us were referring to all male geeks. We were referring to a particular subset of them.
Yeah, it’s about time for you to fuck off.
The comparison was being made between “Klan Members” and “Self-designated Gatekeepers To Geek Culture Who Demand That All Of Geekdom Be A ‘Safe Space’ For Male Geeks Specifically.”
Except that the two are not at all alike. Every single identity has gatekeepers, the Klan, male geeks and leftists are no different. What we judge those different identities on is whether or not their actions are in line with our sentiments. What the commenters on this site seem to want is for male geeks to conform to their particular notions of identity.
Fair enough, as along as we’re all clear that it’s nothing more than a naked power struggle involving who gets to impose their norms on the other party.
I’d ask him what his views on taxation are, but that’s probably leading the witness.
I don’t think I’ve read that one. Which is it? Unless it’s the Nine Tailors, I haven’t plowed through that one because change ringing is a long row to hoe.
As for that turd about norms, you really need to use that dictionary of yours –
Indeed. Apparently everyone who has ever used phrases like ‘outside of the norm’ or ‘not the norm’ is TOTES WRONG AND ILOGICAL. If one person does not adhere to the norm, the norm never existed in the first place.
Imposing norms on others is also a standard practice in human history. That just the way the world works; always has, always will. What’s dishonest is engaging in that and then pretending you’re not.
That was far more than one line, that was a damned paragraph predicated on second hand knowledge of 4 and out service members and (at best) third hand knowledge of “lifers” (career military). While completely ignoring that some people making a career of their service are not married.
And that this is all completely irrelevant to whether being a soldier is part of pecunium identity the way being a gamer is part of many gamers’ identities. Because you know who gets to say whether it is or not? He does. Though I’d bet I’m right in saying it is, but I know him far better than your disingenuous ass ever will. Because for all your claims about intellectual honesty, you have not, so much as once, actually considered anything anyone else said. You’ve twisted what you said, moved goalposts, gone off on complete tangents, acted like a broken record stuck on how superior you are, but never gave a whiff on consideration to what anyone actually said.
Grow the fuck up. You want to claim intellectual superiority, to claim that you question all sides of things, then actually listening to other people is not optional.
Asher: Which is conjectural. What Darwin did, and he admitted this, is to take stuff we already know that then conjectural apply this to prior eras. Darwinian evolution relies heavily on conjecture and, in fact, this is a salient argument I’ve encountered from skeptics of Darwinian evolution.
Nope. If you read Origin of Species this not what happened. And you are conflating “Darwinian Evolution (which, like the Klan, has larger overtones; esp. when you marry it to “skeptics of”), with Darwin/Wallace and their specific argument.
Origin of Species is, actually, one single argument, from the first page to the last.
But, if you want an, “observe, describe, conclude” paper, you can look at Darwin’s treatise on the forming of atolls in he S. Pacific as a function of Volcanic subsidence.
Asher Men are the gatekeepers to sex with men.
If you mean male sex with other men, then, sure, but not if you mean sex between men and women.
Nope. I am the gatekeeper of who I have sex with. If a woman I don’t want to have sex with should express an interest, I decline, and she doesn’t get it (from me).
It’s really that simple.
Asher: So, as women are agents; and so posesed of independence,
Ah, yes, the argument to free will.
Nope. The argument of agency.
People are their own ends. It doesn’t matter “why” a person says no, only that they did; and that their dissent be honored.
they will not (by and large) conform to these slack-jawed nitwits ideas of how “women” ought to behave;
Argument by aspersion. Basically, you’re just saying “those people are stupid so we can discount anything they say”.
Lets see…. if I take out the insults does an argument remain:
they will not (by and large) conform to these [people’s] ideas of how “women” ought to behave;
Seems the argument remains; so the aspersions weren’t the argument, they were rhetorical flourish, and editorial persiflage, meant to show my personal contempt for them.
Where did you teach? I’d like see to it no one I know attends; if they hired you there must be other terrible members of the faculty.
Enough with they hyperbole, already.
Ain’t gonna happen. You can make demands of me to change my style until the stars grow cold, and the universe is dark for their lack, and I shall still use the tools I think best suit the purpose; even though it cost me my very lifesblood, and loses me the taste of Paradise.