So I was idly perusing Janet “JudgyBitch” Bloomfield’s Twitter yesterday, and I came across an alarming tweet. It seemed as though Bloomfield had somehow penetrated the 47 levels of security protecting the Feminist HIgh Council to discover incontrovertible evidence of Operation Wicked Succubus. You know, the feminist plan to eliminate all men (except for me).
https://twitter.com/BloomfieldJanet/status/523458962704699393
Her followers were aghast:
And naturally one of them brought up #GamerGate.
There were a few others, but you get the idea.
It never occurred to any of them to, you know, try to find out just who the bald man advocating killing all men was. Or who exactly he was talking to.
So I decided to do some serious investigative journalism to see what I could uncover. I typed out “‘eliminate men as a gender’ security” into a little known internet “search engine” called Google, and boldly clicked on the first result.
This led me to a Tweet with a URL in it. Bravely, I clicked on that URL and found myself looking at a video of a presentation at something called Monitorama PDX 2014 — clearly the code name for one of the Feminist Conspiracy’s conventions.
I looked it up in Google and discovered a web page for the event, which had been held in May. It was described as an “An Open Source Monitoring Conference & Hackathon.”
Ah, clearly a clever Feminist code name.
And then I decided to look up the name of the speaker: James Mickens. Turns out the guy works at Microsoft, one of the companies at the center of the Misandrist Conspiracy. Mickens is also the author of a number of papers, with titles like “Pivot: Fast, Synchronous Mashup Isolation Using Generator Chains” and “Mugshot: Deterministic Capture and Replay for JavaScript Applications.”
Obviously, some high level feminist theorizing.
Then I decided to watch the video. And I was shocked!
Because it wasn’t a speech about killing all men after all. It wasn’t even a feminist speech. No, it seemed instead to be a highly technical talk about internet security issues, illustrated with a lot of silly slides. Like this:
And this:
I must confess that I didn’t get the overwhelming majority of his jokes. But he audience seemed to find these slides, and much of what he said, hilarious. So if you ever need to hire a comedian who can joke about Synchronous Mashup Isolation Using Generator Chains, Mickens is your guy.
So where does the whole “kill all men” thing come from?
Well, I skipped ahead a bit in the video until I found a section in which Mickens talked about the dumb things people do that can undermine even the most sophisticated security setup.
His example: gullible, horny men who are tricked into “friending” hackers on Facebook posing as hot babes — even when there are pretty obvious indications that the hot babes aren’t really hot babes at all.
Things like: saying they graduated from Central University, even though there is no school by that name in the US, or spelling the name of their profession wrong.
These are all good clues, he said, that the hot babe you just friended on facebook was really this guy:
Given that men are regularly duped with simple tricks that play on their horniness and gullibility, Mickens joked, maybe the real goal for people trying to design secure systems should be the elimination of all men.
So that’s where the slide comes from.
And by the way, that whole bit of his killed — not as in “killed all men” but as in “got giant laughs from the mostly male audience.” Expecially the part about killing all men.
If you want to see the whole bit, starting with Mary and ending with “eliminate men as a gender,” it starts at around 20:40 in the video.
Men’s Rights Activists: more gullible than guys who friend Mary from Central University on Facebook.
NOTE TO EXTREMELY LITERAL-MINDED MRAS: That bit about the feminist plot to kill all men (except me) at the start of this post was a joke. Feminists don’t really intend to kill all men (except me).
Or do they?
After the stuff about radfems being evil and scary in the other thread I’m changing my designation to Social Justice Witch.
“I didn’t say that his use of the trope meant that he was responsible for the threat.”
“There is no question that they have contributed to the harassment against her.”
Are you getting tired? Don’t reply before checking your posts for evident contradictions. Note that I said morally responsible, not legally responsible. Which is exactly what you said, namely that thunderfoot and his criticism of Anita is one of the causes of her harassment and, ultimately, of the threat against her.
This is a very unethical tactic. This is what Joseph McCarthy did when he accused people of using some tropes in their movies that could have contributed to civil unrest in America and ultimately a Communist takeover.
You know very well what you’re doing. You’re juxtaposing thunderfoot’s name to the ones of spree killers and to a death threat. You know very well that if the general press,that doesn’t have room for nuances, gets hold of your piece they will smear thunderfoot reputation by calling him a harasser.
If the author of the threat is caught and it turns out he wasn’t a thunderfoot fan you owe him a public apology
“Fuck off, Chockanga.”
Finally! I was getting tired of the monotonous “shut up”. And now that you’ve given your contribute to the discussion, can you actually do something better than waste your time with pointless profanity?
It’s funny, men love to mock women and girls for getting all fangirly about actors/bands/whatever, but this kind of “I must defend the honor of this dude whose videos I watch on YouTube!” shit is far more embarrassing than screaming excitedly because you think the dude you’re fangirly over has a nice ass, imo.
“When your side is pro death threats to silence women d00d, you don’t have a side. You have a serious problem.”
And here come the smears and the slander. Just like you try to say that thunderfoot is in favor of death threats, now you say that I’m in favor of death threats just because I point out that he’s not.
Again, since the Manichean vibe is strong in this blog:I’m not even a thunderfoot fan. But he’s not in favor of death threats, and the problem is exactly that you think he is just because he used the same word that is found in a death threat.
Have you ever used the word “poison” against your ideological enemies?
Your ethical rules of conduct are a bit shaky there d00d in defense of a person who violates them all. Ethics for thee but not for me simply does not fly here.
Shut up Chockanga. Or at the very least stop digging.
You’re the Manchurian Candidate too! And possibly Hitler, don’t forget about him. Also Pol Pot, because some gamers wear glasses.
Someone who supports the movement to purge games writing of ANY social or political commentary is going to come in here and try to compare its CRITICS to McCarthy? WTF. Oh also you complained about ppl juxtaposing “bad guy from history” with “person we don’t like” in the very same post.
Sea Lion Troll, and not even a great specimen of the species.
“I must defend the honor of this dude whose videos I watch on YouTube!” shit”
Congratulations, you’ve missed the point. I’m not defending thunderfoot’s honor, i’m pointing out your moral deficiencies and your fondness for a particularly stupid form of the “guilty by association” fallacy.
Again, i think that thunderfoot, while right about many things, is an extremely petty individual. This doesn’t make him morally responsible for the actions of the deranged author of the death threat.
I’m no fan of thunderfoot, I’m a fan of ethics in journalism.
Oooh, dude’s upset that people use swears!
Hey genius, you do know this is mockery site, right? Your manly man brain can comprehend “the new misogyny, tracked and mocked”, can’t it?
Nobody owes you an argument or anything else. The minute you identify with misogynists, you’ve shown yourself to be inherently uncivil, a failure at Decent Human Being 101. Your only (potential) value here is as a chewtoy.
So yeah, shut up and fuck off, sonny.
The convergence of MRAs, Anti-Equality Athiests, and Anti-Equality Gamers really makes me wonder if the whole field of vocal misogynists online is tiny.
Only one ethic, mind. I wonder which one it is?
I’m no fan of thunderfoot, I’m a fan of ethics in journalism.
None of the people you’ve been complaining about are journalists. If you actually are concerned about ethics in journalism, why aren’t you complaining about …journalists?
It’s the moral deficiencies troll!!!! Run for your lives.
@ Deoridhe
Crank magnetism again. I’m pretty sure that shouting at women on the internet is their real hobby, and things like XBox Live just provide a convenient opportunity to do so.
I blinked. What was Chockanga’s point again? That we aren’t criticizing our leaders (which I was unaware I had) for imaginary unethical behavior? Fun times…
@Chockanga:
Hey. Environments that people create can be the cause of behavior that comes out of that environment. McCarthy wasn’t wrong about that; he was wrong about people being communists, and his campaign of fear was terrible. As for individual responsibility for the product of a culture, it’s a difficult line to tread, full of nuance. If I thought you were capable of handling nuance, maybe I’d go into it.
You can’t, however, handle nuance. A, because you don’t understand how juxtaposition actually works, and B, you complain about thunderf00t being labeled a harasser (which by all rights he appears to be) by complaining that we’re unfairly associating him with a particular death threat (which we aren’t, and has no bearing upon thunderf00t’s position as a harasser).
Also, you don’t understand the basic argument; that thunderf00t is but a single contributor to a much larger culture. David mentions several other names and groups as well, but for some reason you are particularly interested in this one. If you understood nuance, you would realize how silly it is to think we need the death-threat creator to be a fan of one name in a list for our argument to be valid.
“Oooh, dude’s upset that people use swears!”
Not upset. Disappointed at your lack of integrity and willingness to discuss your moral flaws.
“Hey genius, you do know this is mockery site, right? Your manly man brain can comprehend “the new misogyny, tracked and mocked”, can’t it?”
Yeah, a “mockery site” that loves to insinuate that the critics of feminism (all of them) are in favor in death threats.
But it’s all good fun, isn’t it?
“Nobody owes you an argument or anything else. The minute you identify with misogynists, you’ve shown yourself to be inherently uncivil, a failure at Decent Human Being 101. Your only (potential) value here is as a chewtoy.”
I’ve met fundamentalist Christian who are less dogmatic and Manichean. When have I said anything misogynistic? Or is anyone who disagree with you labeled a misogynist without any need for evidence?
So… basically no sources, no legit rebuttal with explanations, all “T.T David’s (or commenters) being mean”, gaslighting, and fallacies? Shocked not shocked over here.
Fuck off, tedious halfwit.
Better?
Shorter troll – arglebargle SOMEONE PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEE!!!
*snort* It’s a real shame that GamerGaters have turned “ethics in journalism” into a dog whistle. At least we now know what you are a fan of.
>yawwwwn<
Are you? Are you really?
Well, dood, I studied journalism. Media ethics and media law were course requirements. You show zero evidence of a serious commitment to either, by the standards of what I learned.
Therefore, you are cordially invited to fuck off.
Not upset. Disappointed at your lack of integrity and willingness to discuss your moral flaws.
ETHICS IN JOURNALISM!!
(When did we become journalists?)
He’s awfully proud of himself for knowing the word “Manichean”, isn’t he? Bless.
Hey, Mister Nuance, who actually said that? Rewording your opponent’s arguments to make them absolute isn’t exactly the best example of a nuanced discussion.
“I’m not an MRA, but here’s why I’m going to parrot MRA talking points” reminds me an awful lot of the “I’m not a Republican, but here’s why I’m going to parrot Republican talking points” I used to see.