Harassment in gaming

[Obryn]

The very first post in the thread links to an article on Tumblr, a site very well known for being an extremely political site to the point that Reddit has a sub-reddit dedicated to picking it apart, and said article declares white males are terrorists. The entire thread is an ad hominem attack upon an entire demographic.

Oh, well, if Reddit has a subforum dedicated to something, certainly it

...No, I can't even finish. I can't satirize that argument any more than that argument has already satirized itself. I mean, Reddit also has subforums for virulent racism (really, I can't even post the subreddits' names on ENWorld), candid 'creepshots' of women (oh! sorry! it's not called that anymore is it), and outright misogyny. 'Some people on Reddit believe a thing' is a terrible argument for legitimacy.

 

[Gradine]

I also thought that what Tumblr was "very well known for" was Supernatural gifs and Benedict Cumberbatch memes. Did that change recently?

 

[Hussar]

The very first post in the thread links to an article on Tumblr, a site very well known for being an extremely political site to the point that Reddit has a sub-reddit dedicated to picking it apart, and said article declares white males are terrorists. The entire thread is an ad hominem attack upon an entire demographic.

No, it really, really doesn't. That's not what it says at all. What it does say is that a large group of white men in the hobby are perpetrating terrorism on women in an attempt to force them from the hobby. And that people who use the threat of violence to force others to behave in a certain manner are, in fact, terrorists.

So, let's look at the quotes shall we?

This isn’t the first time I’ve received an avalanche of threats from pathetic and insecure men. It isn’t the second time or even the third or fourth. At this point, I know that if I speak out against the abuses myself and my friends have suffered as a result of our participation in the “friendly gaming community” I can expect to be silenced with extreme prejudice. Section 83.01 of the Criminal Code of Canada defines terrorism as an act committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause” and with the intention of intimidating the public “…with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act.”

...

Make no mistake that this is terrorism. The men who e-mail me rape threats have a vested interest in anyone perceived as “lesser” being expelled from the community. And the tragic thing is that it works.

So, unless you are one of the men who have emailed this woman a rape threat, then she isn't talking about you. Also:

White male terrorism is the white underbelly of the gaming community, meant to terrify and disrupt the lives of those who threaten the status quo by race, gender, or sexuality. It succeeds because the majority of men in the community are too cowardly to stand against the bullies and the terrorists. At best, these cowards ignore the problem. At worst, they join the terrorists in blaming their victims for the abuse. The point of online terrorism is that it is endless, omnipresent, and anonymous. I have no way of knowing whether the person with whom I’m gaming is safe or the person who wants to “[/edit for very much grandma unfriendly quote]". Knowing that the person sending those e-mails could be anyone and the community will not support me if/when I am attacked keeps myself and many others from the hobby.

The majority of gamers do not engage in online terrorism, but are instead complicit in lower levels of harassment. It is almost impossible to convince gamers that sexist and racist jokes are unacceptable and that they make others uncomfortable and drive people off. Indeed, raising this issue at all often results in threats and more terrorism. It is unsurprising then that people with conscience have come together to create Hater Free Wednesdays/Saturdays—a master list of comic and game stores and their relative safety for women and minorities.

Gamers bemoan the loss of the local game store while ignoring their culpability for its demise. Amazon is blamed for the death of local game stores, but few gamers stop to question why so many people are choosing to buy social games in such an asocial manner.

At worst she is saying you are complicit by not acknowledging the problem and actively doing something about it. Claiming that the article is calling all gamers white male terrorists is a misreading what's written. Now, is what she saying accurate? That's something we're talking about and it should be discussed as openly as possble. But fixating on something she never actually wrote in an attempt to shut down all conversation is, well, precisely the point she's trying to make. That the majority of gamers are complicit in not actively attempting to ensure that this sort of crap doesn't happen in our community.

 

[Sadras]

Okay I never read the link, but now that you've posted it on here, I feel the article is seriously, SERIOUSLY exaggerated. I'm all for stating that varying levels of harassment exist within and without the hobby, men are generally boorish and behind closed doors the table might not be A-correct but to state "It succeeds because the majority of men in the community are too cowardly to stand against the bullies and the terrorists" is just plain....

Quick someone call Seth and Amy for an episode of Really! This stuff is gold.

If you buy into that dogma then I'm free to say "the majority of people in country X are too cowardly to stand up against its bullish people in government whom they voted for" and might as well call the population of X terrorists.

Really!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

History shows again and again that inaction aids the triumph of evil.

You ever been in the projects of my old hometown, NOLA? People complain about the crime, but also "don't snitch". How can the police be effective if witnesses don't come forward? Yes, they have legitimate concerns for their safety, and not everyone has the spine to risk it and be a hero, but their silence IS a factor in their neighborhoods being so dangerous.

More accurately, it started with a few people not coming forward, then more, and then some more. Because it takes YEARS of continued silence for a neighborhood to reach a critical mass of criminality. Those projects, when built, were not like that. They even had parquet floors. But decades of that subculture of looking the other way let the criminals become the dominant force.

 

[Morrus]

The very first post in the thread links to an article on Tumblr, a site very well known for being an extremely political site to the point that Reddit has a sub-reddit dedicated to picking it apart, and said article declares white males are terrorists. The entire thread is an ad hominem attack upon an entire demographic.

Well done. Two rules in one post. Arguing about moderation in-thread and ignoring a moderator instruction to leave the thread. I'll give you points for efficiency, at least. Now you have to have a few days off the entire board.

 

[Springheel]

It doesn't really matter one whit that the harassers in this case are mostly white men. ..... AFAIC, race isn't really an issue here​

It may not be an issue to you, but it certainly appears to be an issue to the author of the original article (which constantly refers to "white male terrorism" not "male terrorism"), and with a number of people posting in this thread. That might explain some of the defensiveness.

I wonder how many of the people who are fine with this article would be equally okay with an article titled, "We have a Male Muslim Terrorist problem", and which included lines like, "Male, Muslim terrorism is the dark underbelly of the world today...It succeeds because the majority of Muslim Men are too cowardly to stand against the bullies and the terrorists. At best, these cowards ignore the problem. At worst, they join the terrorists in blaming their victims for the abuse."

I suspect a lot of the same people defending this article would NOT be lining up to defend an article blaming all Male Muslims for the actions of Muslim terrorists, or blaming all black males because they don't speak up about black rappers routinely calling women offensive names and glorifying rape in their music. In fact, I highly suspect such articles would be met with charges of racism.





​

​

 

[Umbran]

I suspect a lot of the same people defending this article would NOT be lining up to defend an article blaming all Male Muslims for the actions of Muslim terrorists, or blaming all black males because they don't speak up about black rappers routinely calling women offensive names and glorifying rape in their music. In fact, I highly suspect such articles would be met with charges of racism.

It seems to me that most of us aren't really defending the article, per se, so much as recognizing that however the article is written the issue that inspired it is real. In fact,I think several of us noted early on (as in on the *first page* of the thread) that the article was overstated.

We then asked folks to *look beyond* that, so we could discuss the actual issues. Because, to be honest, continuing to address that is a form of misdirection - it is making the discussion about all those poor white men who aren't terrorists, instead of about the women who are getting harassed. This misdirection is actually a logical fallacy - discarding a point due to the way it is presented, rather than the actual content, similar in form to an ad hominem, where you dismiss the point due to some personal flaw of the speaker.

The basic issue occurs, whoever wrote it, and whether or not they said it in the best way.

But, a bunch of people don't seem willing to look beyond the statement. That's unfortunate that priorities fall out that way, still after 50+ pages of discussion.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It may not be an issue to you, but it certainly appears to be an issue to the author of the original article (which constantly refers to "white male terrorism" not "male terrorism"), and with a number of people posting in this thread. That might explain some of the defensiveness.

I wonder how many of the people who are fine with this article would be equally okay with an article titled, "We have a Male Muslim Terrorist problem", and which included lines like, "Male, Muslim terrorism is the dark underbelly of the world today...It succeeds because the majority of Muslim Men are too cowardly to stand against the bullies and the terrorists. At best, these cowards ignore the problem. At worst, they join the terrorists in blaming their victims for the abuse."

Well- besides the points raised in Umbran's post- several of us could also point out:

1) the gaming hobby in the USA is predominantly one of white males, so odds heavily favor them being the main culprit, and

2) according to global terrorism stats, the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are done by radicalized right wing white males with anti-minority and/or anti-governmental agendas, and by secular political separatists in Europe.

So, no, there probably wouldn't be many defenders of such an article.

And even so, it is well documented how local action or inaction aids or hinders efforts to root out terrorist organizations, all over the world.

 

[Rottle]

This being the internet I tend to not trust statements of "fact" with no proof. The artical recalls many events and implies they all happened and happened to the same person. I honestly don't believe that, however I also don't care. One of the other poster related her experiences and again my belief things happened exactly as she related isn't important. The artical was poorly written if it's purpose is to get people motivated to change their behaviors in my view. When writing to convince people to do soemthing or more importantly that what they are doing needs to change the last thing you should do is put that group on the defensive, which clearly that writer does.

Ok can we all agree the artical is not important though to the over all discussion of the topic?

To me the only relevant topic is how do we stop harassment and protect each other from it, even if it happens far more rarely then some have stated. I am all on board with a zero harassment tolerance program, so any is not acceptable. Let's move past debates about how much happens, whether this poster has an agenda or anything else. Let just focus on protecting our fellow human beings.

I also saw a bit of talk about some people being too easily offended. For me it would take a lot to offend me, I know who I am, and so whatever a stranger says to me simply doesn't matter. But I respect people have different levels of tolerance for this, and by respect I mean I go overboard in making sure I don't offend. There are limits, as with all things nothing going too far ends well, but I would rather be slightly inconvenienced then offend or even worse make someone uncomfortable. I recall in my college days I went to a college in rural western pa, people there rarely if ever curse. I am from a more urban area of New Jersey...every other word out of my mouth then was a curse. I didn't see it as offensive but it was to them, so instead of insisting they change I took it on myself to change. To my mind it was just me being respectful.

Let's keep this simple. Can we all agree to respect each other? I think just that would be a good step. Add to that don't allow others to be disrespected without standing up for them and we are going strong.

As far as the physical harassment, that can never be tolerated or allowed to stand unchallenged. We can argue over which words offend but once someone is laid a hand on all debate ends. We as a community need to simply not allow it, not tolerate those who do it, and rush to the side of those it is done to.