What a surreal life Anita Sarkeesian must lead, in which virtually everything she says and does becomes grist for the Great Internet Lady Harassment Machine, Sarkeesian Division.
Take the latest blowup, which followed a few comments Sarkeesian made in the wake of Friday’s school shooting in Marysville, which may have been triggered by the shooter’s angry response to a romantic breakup. On Friday, Sarkeesian posted a few thoughts on the matter on Twitter:
We need to seriously address connections between violence, sexism and toxic ideas of manhood before boys and men commit more mass shootings.
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) October 24, 2014
Not a coincidence it’s always men and boys committing mass shootings. The pattern is connected to ideas of toxic masculinity in our culture.
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) October 24, 2014
While it it not literally true that every single mass shooter in history has been male, we are talking about an almost exclusively male club: one recent attempt at crunching the numbers found that 97% of school shooters have been male, and 79% of them white. (The Maryville shooter was Native American.)
In any case, the notion that a crime so heavily associated with men might have something to do with our society’s notions of masculinity isn’t exactly a radical notion. Indeed, it seems rather obvious.
But to Sarkeesian’s many haters, on Twitter and elsewhere, it was as if Sarkeesian had just posted a video of herself drowning puppies. Cue the twitterstorm.
Here are just a selection of the literally hundreds of lovely comments that Sarkeesian had Tweeted at her on Friday and Saturday after making her original comments.
[Giant TRIGGER WARNING for violent, explicit threats, harassment]
.
.
.
.
.
There were, of course, the explicit threats:
And the implicit threats:
And the sexual harassment:
And those who merely expressed their hope that Sarkeesian would kill herself:
Or die a horrible death:
Or simply die :
But not everyone wished violence on her. Some just told her that the threats and/or harassment she’s already getting is totally justified:
(Apparently by “fishing” Mr. de Alba means “expressing an opinion or making an observation.” Also note that the tweets that set off this latest wave of harassment didn’t contain the #GamerGate hashtag. )
Speaking of harassment, we’re just getting started in our chronicle of the latest wave.
Let’s continue with an assortment of Tweets using the c-word, a favorite slur amongst Sarkeesian’s detractors.
Why, yes, that is Suzanne McCarley, A Voice for Men’s “Assistant Managing Editor” happily adding her voice to the harassment.
Others pulled out the f-word:
She was called a “bitch.”
She was called a “whore.”
She was called a “terrorist.”
And a Nazi:
One fellow said that he thought Sarkeesian’s tweets were actually worse than the shooting itself:
And one even declared her “officially worse than Wil Wheaton,” the former Star Trek:TNG actor who has won mass opprobrium from internet dicks for publicly expressing his belief that people should not be dicks.
To add insult to injury, a few reported Sarkeesian herself to Twitter for various imaginary infractions:
Another asked why she wasn’t in jail for her, er, crimes:
Just to remind you: these tweets are all from TWO DAYS’ worth of harassment and threats on Twitter. And this isn’t all of them.
At this point anyone who claims that Sarkeesian is “making up” the harassment she gets, or writing it herself, or just the work of a “few trolls,” is either disingenuous or delusional.
I’ll leave the last word to Sarkeesian herself.
Our culture is deeply sick when simply asking questions about how toxic forms of masculinity may harm men leads to hours of hate on Twitter.
— Feminist Frequency (@femfreq) October 25, 2014
EDITED TO ADD:
ATTENTION NEW COMMENTERS! I would like to draw your attention to this bit from my comments policy:
[I]f I’m writing about someone who’s gotten harassed by misogynists on the internet, and you want to talk about how much they deserved it, or what a lying liar they are? Well, fuck you! Your comments go right into the trash.
So take that into consideration. It might save you some time.
CORRECTION: I removed a screenshot of a Tweet that wasn’t threatening but was posted by a troll. See here.
The toxic part is the social assumption (that you are promoting) that men always (mostly, the vast majority of the time, qualifiers, qualifiers, rabble) are interested in sex. This is what is toxic and damaging. Not men who actually do have a high sex drive, but the assumption that most do, that if you don’t you’re not a ‘real man’, and the social use of it as some kind of hand waving excuse for sexual misconduct. Do you see the difference?
Well if you don’t like the colorful one there’s this one:
http://i.imgur.com/D4SWXYs.png
Nah, that’s misandry.
Less frequently and less discriminately, but not less intensely. In my experience.
*cue jokes about me being shite in bed*
@fromafar2013
The toxic assumption is that all problems can be blamed on men.
Yes, the problem with posting the same poorly designed graphic multiple times was definitely that it was too colorful. Well done, you.
Great, JV, so we’re all in agreement: different people have different sex drives and desires, case closed!
@fromafar2013
Never said anything about not being a “real man” and have said repeatedly there is no excuse for a man mistreating anyone. Look, lots and lots of guys have a high sex drive. What to do about that? Ignore it? Blame it on the patriarchy? Or reign it in via some kind of social construct aimed at males, specifically. That’s all I’m saying.
@t1oracle:
Dude, listen to me! Light text on a dark background, or dark text on a light background. Don’t obscure your images with text. Simple rules! Remember them better than you remembered how to use blockquotes. Also stop spamming that image, everyone saw it the first three times.
JV, if you don’t make any effort to ensure that your partners are enjoying themselves then you are shite in bed and that’s not a joke. Young men, raised on the idea of, yes, toxic masculinity that states men enjoy sex more than women turn that into a self fulfilling prophecy by not prioritising the pleasure and enjoyment of their partners. Men who do not buy into toxic masculinity are much better lovers.
t1oracle, whose bathroom signs did you steal to make that graphic? Probably a good move, now they can have gender neutral bathrooms.
@Emmy Rae
Ha! Yeah, well I’m nothing if not a bold thinker.
Nicely written, Shaun DB Day.
Who knew that “bold” was the new “tediously predictable”?
Keep telling yourself that it’s just because women have lower sex drives that they don’t want you as much as you want them, buddy. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
@JV:
Right in one. Why do you need to *do* anything, even if it’s true that lots of guys have a high sex drive? Just treat each individual as an individual.
Oh right, you were the one who said that gender roles helped reduce the amount of rape and domestic violence men commit. How exactly, in your mind, does that work?
t1oracle: What is your goal in posting the same image over and over? Do you think that at some point here someone is going to go “I didn’t understand that graphic the first four times, but it suddenly makes sense now!”
All of that. Plus, on the lower-drive end of the scale (which is widely assumed not to even exist!) is that it’s a total mindfuck for both partners and horrible for the relationship. You might say toxic. Gosh
If “everyone knows” that
a) all men are want sex, all the time and
b) you’re in a relationship with a guy who doesn’t want sex all the time, is totally pleased with once a week or whatever and
c) not only do you want more sex for its own sake but your entire value as a human being and sense of security for the future (!) rests on how much sexual desire you inspire then
d) clearly either YOU are hideous, or he’s not a really a man at all.
No productive discussion results from that set of assumptions. Again, who precisely came up with our ideas of what “masculinity” is? and how is this shit healthy or adaptive?
JV,
Rape and sexual harassment aren’t about a high sex drive. To say male gender roles like benevolent sexism are needed to reign in these behaviors doesn’t make sense. If that’s what you’re arguing. It’s unclear.
Ugh… by “high sex drive,” does JV mean “wants to rape and abuse?” Because fuck that noise.
Also fwiw as a heterociswoman I have *always* had the higher sex drive in literally *all* of my relationships.
@Shaun
I never said anything even close to what you’re trying to pin on me there. I said specifically that men and women as a whole enjoy sex equally intensely, the difference lies in the frequency and more broadly-casted net, in general.
The toxic assumption is that all of the horrible things done by men in the name of masculinity are inevitable and just ‘part of being men’.
I for one know that men aren’t actually horrible, and know that men can do better and feel better and be better when not socialized in a way that glorifies control, dominance and violence.
Like my boyfriend, and his dad and his brother, and my best friend, and his dad, and my cousin, and his boyfriend, etc. They don’t buy into the ‘toxic’ bits of masculinity, they are aware of the impact their socialization has had on them, has on men in general under patriarchy, and they are actively striving to make things better. They are awesome.
They always claim to be about to leave and never do. You could set your alarm by it.
I’ll agree that it’s not only about a high sex drive, it’s also about power and entitlement. But I’ve never agreed with the assertion that it’s always ONLY about power and entitlement.
kirbywarp:
This is really kind of the crux of the whole issue. And this is why I always wonder about dudes who go out of their way to explain to me that women want sex less frequently or less intensely or whatever inane distinction they’re using. I never joke out loud, that would be rude, but I usually kind of glaze over and start thinking, “Why are you telling me this? Why do you feel it is important for me to know this? Why are you so attached to this silly idea that has no bearing on individual relationships between humans?”
WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ME ABOUT YOUR SEXY TIMES!?