Yesterday, I wrote about Vox Day’s extravagantly evasive — yet highly revealing — interview with David Pakman. But the interview also featured a few striking moments of candor. One of these came when Day — a sometime gave developer as well as the biggest asshole in Sci Fi — offered his answer to the question: “What is Gamergate really about?”
Suggesting that the issue of “corruption in game journalism” was little more than “the spark that set the whole thing off,” Day declared that
what Gamergate is fundamentally about is the right of people to design, develop and play games that they want to design, develop and play without being criticized for it.
Which is an. er, interesting perspective, as there is in fact no “right” to be immune from criticism.
If you write a book, if you make a movie, if you post a comment on the internet — you should be ready for it to be criticized. Because that’s how free speech works. That’s how art works. And that’s how ideas work.
Criticism — whether it is positive or negative — helps to sharpen ideas and make art less self-indulgent; it pushes creators to hone their craft and expand their vision of the world. And it helps the consumers of art not only to look at art with a more critical eye but also to appreciate it more fully, by helping to draw out the more subtle meanings of this art and to put it in a broader cultural (social, political) perspective.
Of course, neither the artists nor the consumers of art are required to listen to this criticism, but they have no right to demand that such criticism be eliminated.
But Vox is right in one sense: the elimination of criticism is in fact is what #Gamergate has been about all along — or at least the elimination of criticism aimed in their direction. Indeed, that’s what most #Gamergaters mean when they talk about fighting “corruption in game journalism” — shutting down those writers and publications that have dared to critique the prejudices of a backward portion of the gaming universe that is hostile to any challenges to the status quo ante — particularly from women with opinions different from theirs. That’s what drove the outrage over the “death of gamer” articles last Fall. And that’s what has driven “critics” of Anita Sarkeesian from the start.
Speaking of which: If you want to see how testy Gamergate types get when the criticism they lob at others gets turned back in their direction, even in jest, take a look at Jordan Owen’s new video responding to a post I wrote a few days ago gently mocking Owen’s recent plea for more money to fund The Sarkeesian Effect, the alleged “film” he and far-right Anton LaVey impersonator Davis Aurini are allegedly putting together.
Owen has devoted much of his life over the past several years to attacking Sarkeesian, a woman whose main “crimes” in the eyes of her detractors have been that 1) she raised more money than she asked for to produce a series of videos looking at sexist tropes in video games, and 2) that she’s taken longer than originally planned to put out these videos (which is largely because the extra money she raised has allowed her to research these videos more thoroughly and increase her production values, but never mind).
Yet Owen is outraged that anyone would even gently tweak him and his partner Aurini for going over budget and missing deadlines on their own film. Of course, Owen and Aurini are planning on charging their Patreon supporters more money at the end of the month unless these supporters specifically opt out; Sarkeesian herself never even requested any of the additional money she received.
In his video, Owen also compared me with Bill Donohue of the Catholic League which is, er, weird. But hey, it’s his right to criticize me, no matter how ineptly.
Here’s the video, if you’re interested. Alas, he did not film it in his famous bathtub.
Exactly, @wlindsay, it seems like, after very long discussions from people with all different opinions, society came to the conclusion as a whole that these are awful things that should be ousted. You know, the same discussions that Vox and you want to stop happening.
Oh, good. The “be tolerant of my intolerance!” argument. That’s original.
We don’t believe racism, sexism and homophobia are wrong because some authority says so. We think they’re wrong because they harm people and hurting and subjugating people is wrong. It’s pretty simple.
Just because you can’t think for yourself and need some sort of dominant class to tell you what’s right, don’t assume the rest of us are that way.
Actually, Lindsay wheeler, things like racism and homophobia are relatively new. Racism in particular didn’t really exist until the late 17th century, and it was pretty much just deliberately used as justification for slavery and colonialism.
Lots of people and, amazingly, they’re not necassarily black, women or gay. It’s called empathy.
I imagine that wlindsaywheeler has not had the fortune to experience racism, sexism or homophobia, otherwise they would not be asking such dumb-ass questions.
Ah, to be privileged to the point of outright stupidity.
Are you aware that hate crime is, you know, a crime? As in, multi-partnership authorities such as the criminal justice system and the government decided, “Hey, you know what? Racism, sexism and homophobia are wrong, and should be punishable!”
And you know all those things like anti-discrimination laws, the Human Rights Act, the Equalities Act, the Sex Discrimination Act …
… seriously, have you been going through life with your head in a bucket/bag of Cheetos/receptacle of choice?
Boo-hoo. Got a mouse in your pocket, Sunshine?
Bwahahahahahaaaaaa!
1. You cannot have both “ethics in game journalism” and freedom from criticism. This would require writing glowing reviews for even the most deeply flawed video games, which is incredibly unethical.
2. Gators claim that they support freedom of speech and expression, but consider it a travesty that people express opinions that differ from their own and actively campaign to silence these dissenting opinions.
And this has been a rebuttal of all of GamerGate’s claims in a nutshell.
First of all, regardless of what obscure definiton of the word “criticize” he meant to use, he’s still not protected by law from that sort of criticism. There is no right not to be criticized. Boo fucking hoo.
Second, if you’re gonna use a word in a non-standard way it would be a good idea to give some sort of indication of it. You can’t complain after the fact that nobody managed to read VD’s mind to figure out that he really meant Y when he said X.
The people they hurt and the people who care about them?
Empathy and reason, gamergoober. Get some.
How the fuck is it OK to make judgments about people based on their race, gender or sexuality but not on the contents of their character? Are you joking or just sharp as a marble?
Language is for communication. When words have no meanings they may as well be growls and grunts. Either learn to use words properly or shut up.
At this point goobers remind me of dogs chasing cars. They make alot of pointless noise, achieve nothing (aside from being a dangerous nuisance) and in the end only they think they’re beating back their wicked foes.
Actually, Racism, sexism, and homophobia are quite OLD! Racism, Sexism and Homophobia are in the Bible. The death penalty was proscribed for homosexuals in the Mosaic Law so they had them then. Early Christianity forbade women to be priests. Racism, Sexism, and homophobia is throughout Classical Antiquity. Plato called homosexuality unnatural. Athens prevented women from engaging in politics. And the Greeks and Romans knew a lot about the differences of the races.
Google the term “Cultural Marxism” and you will find the basis of what you believe. It is Marxism.
So we are not to engage in so-called racism, sexism, and homophobia because it “hurts” people yet you are too willing to sic the police on the Honey Badgers, hurt them and throw them out of a convention! Your attacks upon Vox Day are about hurting him and somehow engage in slander so he looses business and money and therefore causing destitution. Calling someone racist, sexist, homophobe is lying and slander because they have never been evil or wrong. So on your made up agenda, you are engaging in false pretenses and causing harm to other people because they don’t follow your Marxist ideas! How wonderful!
Do you claim science at all? Science is “the knowledge of that which is”. As Aristotle said, “All things are either in Authority or in subjection”. All things. Hierarchy is throughout nature. It is the way things are, hence scientific. Yet, you people push ideas that have NO basis in nature–they are against Nature.
So again, you guys really don’t have a clue on what you are doing. You obviously don’t believe in God because you are gods because you think you set a moral agenda. You are just pushing your crappy ideas that have no basis in religion, science or in Nature.
What the hell did I just read? Is this wlindsaywheeler a KKK member or some shit? What the fuck is happening?
Seriously, I have seen people DENY that homophobia, racism or sexism doesn’t exist, I have seen people be 100% okay with being homophobic, racist or sexist, but I have NEVER seen someone try to support all three at once.
Seriously. This guy must be a Neonazi. Who the fuck would even say that shit?
Okay, yeah, this guy is a KKK member. Racist + Sexist + Homophobia + Christianity = KKK member.
No one here booted the honey badgers, though some agree with those who did. Most of us here are just talking. You want us to shut up. Stop limiting our free speech wlindsay!
Can you not see the difference between attacking someone for what they re and attacking someone for what they choose?
Basically: Inherent characteristics = off limits; voluntary actions = fair game.
Also the Random Capital Letters on Words that are Not Nouns are very amusing to me today, thanks wlindsay.
As others have said, human decency tell us these things are wrong. Let me break down for you the way we do for small children moving away from an egocentric worldview: We don’t feel good/like it when we get hurt, and that’s bad, so other people also don’t feel good/like when they get hurt. We don’t hurt others because we don’t want them to hurt us. Racism, sexism, and homophobia hurt people, so they’re bad.
I find your morals interesting though. You say there’s nothing wrong with racism, sexism, and homophobia because there’s no authority saying these are wrong. Doesn’t this mindset also mean it’s fine to discriminate against white people, men, and heterosexuals the way we do to people of color, women, and LGBTQ? I mean if sexism is fine against women, it’s also fine against men. Because why not?
“Calling someone racist, sexist, homophobe is lying and slander because they have never been evil or wrong.”
Yeah, that’s not how things work. Your (misguided) belief that racism, sexism, and homphobia are a-ok does not somehow magically turn our identification of such into a lie and/or slander
That’s pretty much it, yeah.
Except for the bit about ‘hurting’ them. Probably against that as a whole.
Now, I know you’re going to say that bashing people over the head is not against Nature because EvoPsych, and the Spartans fought everyone all the time so it’s totally acceptable for folks to still be physically aggressive towards each other because the Bible. It’s only due to us all being Hivemind Handmaidens of the One True Marxist that we’ve been brain-washed into pushing a non-violence agenda something something something MARXISM.
Did I do it right?
It always amuses me when people claim homosexuality (and nonhierarchical groups in this case) are *AGAINST NATURE*!!1! These people often have such a limited view of our natural world. I think about how sequential hermaphrodites in mollusks (I think specifically limpets?) would blow their minds.
Their ignorant argument often goes that being gay is nonexistent/rare in nature, therefore it’s unnatural. So all of sexual reproduction is “unnatural” because most life on Earth reproduces by asexual reproduction. We are such deviants.
So now the -isms you say no one should care about are
A) not really irrational, immoral prejudice (which is what racism, sexism and homophobia are).
B) Harm no one.
What a load of crap.
When did I sic police on or kick anyone out of anywhere?
What the fuck is going on in your brain? You are making no sense. You are not presenting rational arguments or supporting them with facts. You’re just being an inarticulate asshole.
JB deserves fans like you.
Do go on.
The point of science is to come up with well-substantiated explanations of the natural world through substantial testing, re-testing and peer review. Something is not supported by science just because you agree with it. To the contrary the scientific method is what disproved a lot of racist and sexist claims.
Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with calling someone racist, sexist, ect. if there is in fact evidence to support this claim. This is a logical evaluation of the available evidence, and if you do not want to be called racist, just don’t be racist.
Finally, the communists were perhaps some of the most intolerant people imaginable. They murdered tens of millions of people who believed, acted or (in the case of Cambodian and Laos genocides) looked differently from them. Comparing the belief that all people should be treated as people to the beliefs of the communist regimes is 1. reprehensible and 2. shows a profound ignorance of history.
The MRAss who thinks racism is no big deal also thinks disruptive shitheads getting kicked out of a con is the worst thing ever.
It’s true. Racists really are the worst examples of their race.
Bill,
True. These are people who think that Fascists, Nazis and Communists were big fans of progressive politics. The fact that those labels are placed on people who want gender/sexual/racial etc. equality is nearly hilarious.
Or it would be if they didn’t vote or hold office.
@Lindsay wheeler
Sexism is old, never said that wasn’t. But homophobia is pretty new. There have definitely been figures in history who have written at length about how homosexuality is unnatural but for the most part they were minority views in their respective societies. Greeks, as disparate add their city state were, practiced it until Christianity, likewise for the Romans, and pagans the world over. Racism, however, is a creation of colonialism. You don’t see the same rhetoric regarding race that you do today until 17th century, maaaaybe late 16th.
Take the legend of prestor John, for example. He was a legendary figure in European Christian mythology, and he was always portrayed as being black skinned. Ethiopia, Egypt, China, Songhai, the middle East were all more culturally developed than mediaeval Europe, and were so until late in the colonial period.