Harassment in gaming

[Rottle]

Not all of us gamers lacked the physique of jocks......��

But yeah the Arnold Connan was likely more wishfullfillment but the comic book version was more Tarzan style. Lean mean fighting machine.

Still none of that stuff really strikes me as nearly as important as this harassment issue. I lean on if we can all just be respectful and honest with ourselves things will be much better. And really is that so hard to do?

( in college 2ed was the current d&d for me and it had a max press accociated with each level of strength, I never managed to get out of 18(01)-18(50)...and I tried for four years to do so. ). Yes I am old......get off my lawn.....

 

[MechaPilot]

As a gay man, I'm very familiar with the rhetoric which attempts to reverse hatred in order to be heard. It is cheap. It is lazy. It is unproductive and it actually _increases_ the amount of harm being done.

If you are unable to write effectively without stooping to the level of cheap shots (like using words like "terrorist"), that's really all about your lack of writing persuasively. Get better.

While I generally agree, I do have to say that the term terrorist is at least accurate as far as those who were sending death and rape threats to the lady who wrote the article. If someone tries to use fear of being killed, violated, or otherwise harmed as a weapon to silence you, that person is a terrorist just as surely as a religious extremist who threatens to blow up a school for girls because he objects to women being educated.

 

[Morrus]

I must have not missed something. I've seen a bunch of posts discussing and acknowledging that harassment happens. I've seen a bunch of posts from people waking up to the extent and scope of the problem. I've seen a bunch of posts talking about effective anti-harassment policies (and some not so effective and some counterproductive, even). I've seen LOTS of discussion about the problem and even positive steps to addressing it. Either we're reading different threads or we have a different idea of what a discussion of the problem is. So, let's solve that: what does a discussion have to have to be a discussion that isn't occurring in this thread?

I guess we are reading different threads, because to my eyes this thread is largely dominated by how a handful of white men feel about the technicalities of the discussion's language, and not about the actual harassment. Even this exchange isn't about the harassment our fellow gamers are experiencing; it's still about us. I'm even contributing to the problem by raising it!

 

[Ovinomancer]

While I generally agree, I do have to say that the term terrorist is at least accurate as far as those who were sending death and rape threats to the lady who wrote the article. If someone tries to use fear of being killed, violated, or otherwise harmed as a weapon to silence you, that person is a terrorist just as surely as a religious extremist who threatens to blow up a school for girls because he objects to women being educated.

I don't think anyone has much of a problem with that (aside from the overuse of the word terrorism these days). The issue is with the broad generalization of the term with sexist and racist baggage.

 

[Morrus]

As a gay man, I'm very familiar with the rhetoric which attempts to reverse hatred in order to be heard. It is cheap. It is lazy. It is unproductive and it actually _increases_ the amount of harm being done.

If you are unable to write effectively without stooping to the level of cheap shots (like using words like "terrorist"), that's really all about your lack of writing persuasively. Get better.

I think you may be confused.

(a) I was not the author of said phrase.

(b) The writing eloquence of those who have tried to draw attention to the issue is not the issue. So what if it's "lazy" and the author needs to "get better" at writing? This isn't a book review. It's an attempt to discuss harassment. If the writing isn't up to your standards, let it go. That's not the important thing.

And yet again, we're still not taking about the issue of harrassment; just your critique of the author's writing style.

 

[MechaPilot]

And that's the problem. Because as long as feminists are complaining about chain mail bikinis, they are undermining their own credibility. No one is going to listen to someone who undermines their own credibility EVEN WHEN that someone is discussing other issues which are real and significant.

I don't know if this was directed at me or not (I was just talking about CMBs in this thread, so I think it could be), but I have to say that I disagree with your opinion here.

I am an old-school feminist, meaning that I adhere to the original feminist philosophy of advocating for equal treatment under the law regardless of gender (and not for special treatment for one gender over another, or overreacting to things in media like the Joker-Harley slap photo leaked from the set of Suicide Squad). I do not have a problem with pin-up art in general. I like pin-up art. However, to claim that the depiction of females in gaming art is not relevant to how females are seen seems naive to me. The overly-sexualized style with which females are often depicted in fantasy art presents women who are typically less-competent, less-prepared, and more fixated on appearance than their male counterparts.

I don't think that anyone is reasonably claiming that the CMB is, on its own, the source of the problems facing women in gaming. If anything, it's either symptomatic of the existing issue, or a potentially exacerbating factor. I will say that a reduction in the amount of pin-up style art over the years has made it easier for me to show off my D&D books to other women who show an interest in gaming. Being able to show off the books without being embarrassed by the art and without having to say things like "I know, I know, but the game really is fun if you give it a chance" improves the accessibility of the game and helps grow the hobby.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I guess we are reading different threads, because to my eyes this thread is largely dominated by how a handful of white men feel about the technicalities of the discussion's language, and not about the actual harassment. Even this exchange isn't about the harassment our fellow gamers are experiencing; it's still about us. I'm even contributing to the problem by raising it!

I think it's more that we're reading the same thread through a different lens. I don't accept that I have to acknowledge that I have any responsibility or guilt over the actions of others. I can see that there's a problem without needing to accept guilt for that problem. My solution set doesn't require that others refrain from talking about poor behaviors because there are worse behaviors. I can see the people that have stated that they weren't aware of the scope of the problem, but are now. I can see the people discussing useful harassment policies. I can see the people that state that they're going to be more aware and more ready to take action. You seem to only see the people that don't want to acquiesce to group guilt. Both are here; it's a matter of perspective.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I don't know if this was directed at me or not (I was just talking about CMBs in this thread, so I think it could be), but I have to say that I disagree with your opinion here.

I am an old-school feminist, meaning that I adhere to the original feminist philosophy of advocating for equal treatment under the law regardless of gender (and not for special treatment for one gender over another, or overreacting to things in media like the Joker-Harley slap photo leaked from the set of Suicide Squad). I do not have a problem with pin-up art in general. I like pin-up art. However, to claim that the depiction of females in gaming art is not relevant to how females are seen seems naive to me. The overly-sexualized style with which females are often depicted in fantasy art presents women who are typically less-competent, less-prepared, and more fixated on appearance than their male counterparts.

I don't think that anyone is reasonably claiming that the CMB is, on its own, the source of the problems facing women in gaming. If anything, it's either symptomatic of the existing issue, or a potentially exacerbating factor. I will say that a reduction in the amount of pin-up style art over the years has made it easier for me to show off my D&D books to other women who show an interest in gaming. Being able to show off the books without being embarrassed by the art and without having to say things like "I know, I know, but the game really is fun if you give it a chance" improves the accessibility of the game and helps grow the hobby.

For some reason I can't give XP to this post (the button is missing), so take a quote instead. 100% agreement on this whole thing. Game art had/has a serious objectivication issue. I've no issue with the occasional cheesecake/beefcake, but it was almost all that. Much better now, and the bit about showing around the books to others is very true.

 

[Morrus]

I think it's more that we're reading the same thread through a different lens. I don't accept that I have to acknowledge that I have any responsibility or guilt over the actions of others. I can see that there's a problem without needing to accept guilt for that problem. My solution set doesn't require that others refrain from talking about poor behaviors because there are worse behaviors. I can see the people that have stated that they weren't aware of the scope of the problem, but are now. I can see the people discussing useful harassment policies. I can see the people that state that they're going to be more aware and more ready to take action. You seem to only see the people that don't want to acquiesce to group guilt. Both are here; it's a matter of perspective.

Group guilt is not the thing. I don't even know where that comes from or what it is, but I wasn't talking about it. But I don't want to exacerbate the hijack by discussing how *we* feel about the way the problem is being discussed. I can't stop you talking about that, but I think it repeatedly distracts from the important thing: that our fellow gamers are being abused.

I'm not going to respond further on this side issue. Not because I'm annoyed or anything, but because I don't want to contribute to the very problem that I'm seeing (the problem with discussion, not the more serious problem of actual abuse). It becomes hypocritical of me to turn the thread even further into yet another a discussion about how we discuss the issue rather than actually discussing the issue.

 

[Umbran]

I think it's more that we're reading the same thread through a different lens. I don't accept that I have to acknowledge that I have any responsibility or guilt over the actions of others. I can see that there's a problem without needing to accept guilt for that problem.

I think it may be important to inject a bit on language here. Specifically about "responsibility" and "guilt". This will be relevant for any number of cases where one is part of, or heir to, a group that committed some wrongs. In colloquial use, we don't often differentiate between these terms, but discussion becomes *tons* easier if we do.

If a person is "responsible" for something, that actually means that they are expected to do something about it, to take some action.

If a person is "accountable" for something, then when we go looking for why it went wrong, we are going to look to them. If you are looking to punish, or assign guilt, you're actually looking for the person who is accountable for it - "the buck stops here" tells you where the accountable person is.

So, in a completely non-criminal example: If you have a software project, the engineers are responsible for writing code - it is their assigned task. If the overall project fails, however, it is the project owner who is held accountable for it.

Those of us who do not commit harassment are not accountable for it - we are not guilty. We may be responsible for providing part of the solution, simply because we are in a position to do so, in a way the victim is not.