On Monday, Anita Sarkeesian posted the latest installment of her Tropes Vs. Women in Video Games series on YouTube, a half-hour examination of the ways in which video game makers use sexualized violence against women as a cheap way to spice up their narratives and appeal to straight male gamers.
Her tone was measured, her analysis clear and logical and supported by dozens of clips from a wide assortment of games.
Late Tuesday night, this happened:
Some very scary threats have just been made against me and my family. Contacting authorities now.
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) August 27, 2014
I’m safe. Authorities have been notified. Staying with friends tonight. I’m not giving up. But this harassment of women in tech must stop!
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) August 27, 2014
That’s right: Sarkeesian was forced to leave her home due to violent threats against her and her family … because she made a YouTube video analyzing violence against women in video games.
She then posted some of the threats she had gotten from a Twitter account set up specifically to harass and threaten her and her family. [TRIGGER WARNING for graphic rape and death threats.]
I usually don’t share the really scary stuff. But it’s important for folks to know how bad it gets [TRIGGER WARNING] pic.twitter.com/u6b3i0fysI
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) August 27, 2014
For a larger version of the screenshot, see here.
Sarkeesian has also been tweeting some of the other threats she gets on a daily basis from anonymous gamers who are incensed that a woman has anything critical to say about their precious video games.
It’s especially amusing that this misogyny laced email is unironically signed “See you soon m'lady. *tips fedora*” pic.twitter.com/rLk3CvoxXV
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) July 15, 2014
https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/504437681527353344/photo/1
I get so many emails like this I could publish a coffee table book full of them. pic.twitter.com/qMoYOtV9tT
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) July 15, 2014
Unfortunately, this is an all too typical twitter response to my observations about video games. #E32014 pic.twitter.com/aWmwtQZLnm
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) June 9, 2014
You’ll notice that several of these threatening comments mention videos by Thunderf00t, a “skeptic” videoblogger best known, at least in the corner of the internet I write about, for a series of videos in which he viciously attacks some of the women who’ve drawn the most internet hate from angry misogynists – from skeptics like Rebecca Watson and Melody Hensley to video game maker Zoe Quinn and video game critic Sarkeesian.
Thunderf00t’s attacks have won him kudos from assorted Men’s Rights activists, from the regulars on the Men’s Rights subreddit to A Voice for Men “operations manager” Dean Esmay, who has praised his videos and urged other MRAs to subscribe to them.
In other words, the harassment of feminist women on the internet is directly linked to antifeminist propagandists like Thunderf00t – and his MRA fans and enablers.
The constant, vicious, personal attacks on Sarkeesian you see not only in video game circles but from Men’s Rights Activists – on Reddit, on A Voice for Men, on YouTube, and so on – have helped to create a hostile environment in which critiques of sexism in games result in real-world death and rape threats against women. This has an undeniably chilling effect on the free speech of women. That in fact is the intent of the harassers.
Margaret Atwood once famously observed that
Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.
I think we need an internet corollary to Atwood’s observation:
Men posting on the internet are afraid that women will block them. Women are afraid that men will treat them like Anita Sarkeesian.
Thing is, Sarkeesian keeps moving forward, diligently researching and putting forth the videos she promised she would. All the huffing and puffing of her critics and attackers hasn’t shut her up. Each new video she puts out is a testament to her courage and her perseverance. Each new video is a blow against those who would shut women up. Each new video helps to inspire others who’ve gotten similar threats to continue speaking up and speaking out.
Supporting Sarkeesian helps to support every woman who wants to be able to speak out online without fear of violent threats. There’s no better proof of this than how angry the biggest misogynistic bullies get whenever feminists and other people of good conscience rally around her. The bullies are still angry about the money she raised via kickstarter, money that has enabled her to bring a new professionalism to her videos.
Hell, AVFM Bully-in-chief Paul Elam is still so angry about this that he’s already accusing her of “damseling for dollars,” collecting “gash-cash” because of these latest Twitter threats. Indeed, in a post that’s a lot more revealing than he intends it to be, he complains bitterly that she’s getting bigger donations than he is:
I am jealous. I have had half the major media in a couple of countries disingenuously and maliciously demonize me. Even after forcing some retractions I bet I got more threats than Sarkeesian.
My reward? Jack shit.
Maybe it was because I didn’t swoon hard enough or treat the threats like they were tickets to Disneyworld.
Oh, don’t be modest, Paul. You take in tens of thousands every year by pretending to be some sort of human rights generalissimo. You raked in $35,000 this summer by trumpeting “threats” that you were saying privately were phony.
While Elam “damsels” and fumes, Sarkeesian simply goes about doing the job she set out to do. Each video she puts out is yet another “fuck you” to her haters, and they know it.
U mad bros?
Here’s the video that caused all the stir. It’s well worth watching. CONTENT WARNING: Graphic violence against women.
@kittehserf
Right, I’ve contacted David and the other mods about this. “Judging threats isn’t very interesting” in the context of Anita Sarkeesian and David receving actual death threats is way over the line as far as I’m concerned.
Ed: piss off and don’t come back.
Let me clarify – no one (including me) is arguing that death threats are great things. They shouldn’t happen. But that’s about all there is to say about them, because I have yet to find anyone approving of them. So what interest is there in kicking a dead horse about how bad death threats are? Ergo, I don’t find judging them to be that interesting. And really, I’m pretty immune to the insults and don’t really care about them. Proceed if it makes you feel better about yourself, but it just goes into the pot of “terrible emotional reactions based on very mild criticism” that is interesting to me. Certainly, I’m allowed to have my own interests and if that is inconsistent with this website, then so be it.
May I politely suggest not feeding this particular troll? He’s not going to burst, just feed on everyone’s anger like a vampire.
@Anarchonist
Well, that was a disjointed mess. I blame this on my hangover and the fact that this topic makes me pretty goddamn furious.
It was not a disjointed mess and I appreciate it. Certainly, it is true that going on about what people being attacked did wrong or could do better is often besides the point. However, it isn’t always besides the point. There are those who like to repeatedly kick the hornet’s nest then claim to be a victim. I am not claiming Sarkeesian is doing this – like I said, I think her series is good and important and helping to influence changes.
However, there is another of social progress, and that’s making people feel like they are part of the solution. If a bunch of people are mean to Sarkeesian yet at the same time say they aren’t misogynist or whatnot, perhaps there is way to bridge the gap and let out some of the steam. It’s not an either/or proposition, you aren’t for everything she says or against women.
Edward, everyone here is tired of your victim-blaming bullshit, including me. Banned.
And with this, Ed proved beyond all doubt that he has not understood, tried to understand, nor wanted to understand the point of the post or the whole discussion. Good riddance.
Thank you for banning him, David, and sorry to everyone that I kept feeding the disingenuous troll.
Well, now you know why Gemmer pissed off the folks at Pharyngula.
I’m interested in why people are sometimes violent. I even created an independent study in forensic psychology when I was in college because my small psych department didn’t have a class on it. That said, there’s a time and place to analyze the behavior of violent people. This thread is the wrong time and place. You’ve been told that repeatedly and don’t seem to care. We aren’t here to be interesting to you and since you’re trolling and not a regular nobody really cares what you want to talk about.
Also, if you’re going to analyze the behavior of the wrongdoers, you should really do it objectively. You are ignoring the two glaringly obvious motives behinds these threats.
1. They are bullies
2. They are misogynists
It isn’t that hard to figure out. Your insistence that people just get sad and defensive when their favorite thing is critiqued doesn’t hold up. We’ve demonstrated that criticism of art is a normal thing in our culture and not terribly controversial. Other people who do it don’t get this much pushback. I think everybody has experienced irritation when something they love has been criticized. However, people who aren’t assholes or bigots can grasp that everyone is entitled to their opinion and opinions always vary and enjoyment of a thing is not predicated on the approval of the entire rest of the world. You are clearly ignoring the obvious and likely motive behind the threats in favor of the implausible explanation because you also agree that women should shut up and know their place. You obviously think it’s up to women to appease men so they don’t hurt us. No matter how much you protest this point. It’s obvious to us.
Complete and utter bullshit. Your previous comments indicate that this is exactly how you really feel. Of course you think she was asking for it. Just come out and admit instead of pretending to be an objective person who just wants to debate and play devil’s advocate. You aren’t the first disingenuous “neutral” troll to come here and you won’t be the last. We aren’t new to the internet and you aren’t that clever. Don’t think you’ve fooled anyone.
@Edward Gemmer
They’re NOT part of the solution. Why should we believe the people who are “mean” (great way to minimize death and rape threats there) to Sarkeesian aren’t misogynists? If they act like misogynists, then they’re misogynists.
I mean, let’s take you as an example, you claim that you think rape and death threats are bad, but then you turn around and say it’s just people being “mean” and constantly try to place the fault for the threats on Sarkeesian. It’s clear that you don’t in fact think the threats are bad, you just say that to insulate yourself from criticism. You’re dishonest, you’re misogynistic, and you’re boring, so just shut up already.
Ninja’d by the ban hammer. Oh well. It’s for the best he’s gone.
Missed the banning. Thanks David.
Oh thank goodness Ed was banned!
“I don’t find these threats against your life very interesting, let’s talk about what I think is interesting, which would be what you did to make people send you death threats” has to be one of the most entitled asshat-ty thing I’ve read in a while.
A good illustration of the Arendt quote about the banality of evil, isn’t he?
Bye, Ed! Have fun bothering a place that isn’t here.
I counted eight I/me in eight and a half lines of mansplaining. Proving once again that they really are as clueless as they seem or they just don’t care.
Thank you for booting him.
Off topic (on fedoras): I desperately want a feminist fedora… stitched on the hat itself would be the feminist power symbol, and the band would say “this is what a feminist looks like”. I want one so bad because I play guitar, and part of my live “costume”, if you will, is a fedora.
On the topic of violence: I’m fascinated by it, too. I’m majoring in Anthropology and studying evolutionary psychology because I’m fascinated by fanaticism… and bullies and bigots are part of that fascination. I always found it interesting that you can find instances of bullying, bigotry, and fanaticism in other non-human animals, and I’m curious about where it comes from, and why such traits would survive, even in small numbers, the process of natural selection, when they would appear, at first glance, to not be conducive to a specie’s survival.
My studying isn’t in the interest of condoning it, though. It’s in the interest of figuring out how stop it. Methods devised so far don’t always seem to work, and I feel that methods at least partially based upon an evolutionary history of such (if there is such a thing) would work even better. One thing that so far appears unique to humans in my studies is victim blaming, something else I’m quite keen on figuring out how to stop. Like Zoe Quinn… let’s pretend, for a moment, that she did “sleep her way to the top”, or whatever… that she did cheat on that boyfriend…
So what? Why’s it any of our business? It sure as fuck doesn’t justify the harassment she’s gotten. Nothing justifies this shit. And bringing it up (true or not), is victim blaming, pure and simple. Same with Anita. Let’s say that her criticisms are off-base. Why is it so impossible for some people to disagree with Anita without threatening her and harassing her and fucking driving her out of her home? Disagreeing with her doesn’t justify this… nothing would.
But the fact that people do it does fascinate me (in a morbid way), and I am interested in knowing the roots of the cause, if only to shed better light on the problem of violence, or, perhaps, even devise a more fool-proof way of educating people on why it’s wrong.
Oh… and I should note: I know Evo-Psych is misused, even by Evolutionary psychologists, to justify and condone bigotry. But I have to say I love my Evo-Psych class, because in the first class our teacher praised feminism and then dissed Men’s Rights Activists, and the entire 80-something class laughed when he did that. So I’m in an Evo-Psych class taught by a feminist and apparently full of students who not only didn’t challenge his praise of feminism, but found MRAs as absurd as he does. I kinda love the class.
(Sorry for the triple! Can’t edit!)
Also, I emailed him about rape culture and patriarchy, and he responded with “we’ll be discussing those in class, because I don’t think you can talk about evolutionary psychology without discussing how to dismantle the predominant systems that make up society.”
Because it works? Because, IMO, there is nothing so horrible that someone somewhere won’t do it if it gets them what they want (money, power, a woman to stop speaking, whatever). So rape & death threats on the internet – minimal effort for proven effect. Selfish little shits are going to do it.
But why does it show up in non-human primate societies, as well? That’s where I find the rub… humans aren’t unique in this.
I should codify – selfish little shits are going to do it until the bad consequences for them (socially or legally) outweigh the perceived benefits.
To be fair, we should be. Our self-awareness is the most complicated that we know of within the animal kingdom. You’d think we’d be better at self-reflection. Yet we have these people (like the bullies who attack Anita) who seem incapable of doing so.
Very true. I’m not sure that’s the whole story, but I agree that this is where it starts.
Why would we be unique? If behaviour gets you want you want, a sense of belonging, access to more food/mates/shelter, approval etc, why would we be the only animals engaging in it?
Cleverer =/= kinder/better/more ethical/more empathetic/less selfish or less self-absorbed. Just look at Richard Dawkins.
I may be wearing some blinders here, but I would hope that we humans have evolved enough to be better than that… and yet many aren’t.
I worded my question wrong above. What I’d expect more humans to be unique in is seeing why it’s wrong, and deciding to go the route of fairness. In short, I’d expect more humans to be feminists.