Escapist Podcast: 069: Surviving the Apocalypse and "Fake" Geek Girls

[maxben]

Hey Escapist guys, great podcast.

Spoiler: :D I hid the secret.

Unfortunately, I found your discussion of fake geek girls a little worrisome....
It is unfair to claim that people judging you for how you act are wrong because its their fault they feel that way. Its in fact counter to what you said about your theater experience. Its YOUR fault you are sensitive to people talking or that it bothers you. Your annoyance though is no more under your control than someone's annoyance at non-physical stimuli. The distinction doesn't hold water.
If we generalize the actual issue, the real question is about community norms and expectations.
EVERY community and society, micro or macro, complex or simple, are based around norms and expectations.
A community seeks to propagate itself but only so far as it keeps its fundamental values, otherwise we get the issues we have today with multiculturalism as people feel their societies are shifting from their traditional norms because it accepts people who do not follow said norms.
Now multiculturalism can also be benign and enriching. In the case of geekdom, consider how all the sub-communities combine make all of geekdom stronger and more complex and fascinating. However, every person cannot be aligned with every sub-community, and the norms and expectations within said sub-communities are going to be unique. This causes issues within geekdom, but they can all be solved through dialogue and exposure.
The idea of the non-geeks penetrating geekdom cannot be solved. If geeks are passionate about fringe entretainment, non-geeks are not passionate about fringe entretainment (this is not an argument from knowledge. I was a geek way before I knew anything of significance because of my passion). The community can't be accepting of people who are its exact opposite. You cannot add X to not-X and get anything enriching or positive. In the same way, if we are in a theater to watch a movie, those who make watching a movie harder are missing the fundamental point and are not adding anything to the experience (though its less of a community so much as communal, so we don't want them to do anything)
And I know that this was a similar argument to the one used when masculine geekdom tried to keep girls out referring to masculinity as its fundamental characteristic. But they were wrong, geekiness is the fundamental characteristic of geekdom and the proportion of males was incidental and was caused by social norms outside of geekdom. As those outside social norms changed, geekdom had to as well. I mean, if there was serious geek clubs and conventions in the 1800s I bet they would have banned Jews because these were Christian geek clubs, as was the norm in the greater society.

There is something to what you say. However, I think you should add that just because something is a social norm doesn't mean that it's right, or that we should just let it continue.

If people always did that, we would still have terrible things in society. Like salvery, not letting women vote, letting people get away with public bigotry to those not of the "norm", and of course we would still be using leeches and bloodletting as cure alls.

A society that rejects change either comes under attack, or is destroyed.

Haha, fair enough. That's why I am saying that there could be positivity from adding new people. However, there has to be a limit and saying that its ok for a non-geek to be a part of geekdom (a non-geek defined by having NO passion for the material, not by knowledge) seem contradictory.

Although, I am with movie bob on this, how much is this actually a problem? Do these people actually exist? I can't imagine getting involved with a scene I hve no passion for for attention, and I cant really imagine people doing that.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Hey Escapist guys, great podcast.

Spoiler: :D I hid the secret.

Unfortunately, I found your discussion of fake geek girls a little worrisome....
It is unfair to claim that people judging you for how you act are wrong because its their fault they feel that way. Its in fact counter to what you said about your theater experience. Its YOUR fault you are sensitive to people talking or that it bothers you. Your annoyance though is no more under your control than someone's annoyance at non-physical stimuli. The distinction doesn't hold water.
If we generalize the actual issue, the real question is about community norms and expectations.
EVERY community and society, micro or macro, complex or simple, are based around norms and expectations.
A community seeks to propagate itself but only so far as it keeps its fundamental values, otherwise we get the issues we have today with multiculturalism as people feel their societies are shifting from their traditional norms because it accepts people who do not follow said norms.
Now multiculturalism can also be benign and enriching. In the case of geekdom, consider how all the sub-communities combine make all of geekdom stronger and more complex and fascinating. However, every person cannot be aligned with every sub-community, and the norms and expectations within said sub-communities are going to be unique. This causes issues within geekdom, but they can all be solved through dialogue and exposure.
The idea of the non-geeks penetrating geekdom cannot be solved. If geeks are passionate about fringe entretainment, non-geeks are not passionate about fringe entretainment (this is not an argument from knowledge. I was a geek way before I knew anything of significance because of my passion). The community can't be accepting of people who are its exact opposite. You cannot add X to not-X and get anything enriching or positive. In the same way, if we are in a theater to watch a movie, those who make watching a movie harder are missing the fundamental point and are not adding anything to the experience (though its less of a community so much as communal, so we don't want them to do anything)
And I know that this was a similar argument to the one used when masculine geekdom tried to keep girls out referring to masculinity as its fundamental characteristic. But they were wrong, geekiness is the fundamental characteristic of geekdom and the proportion of males was incidental and was caused by social norms outside of geekdom. As those outside social norms changed, geekdom had to as well. I mean, if there was serious geek clubs and conventions in the 1800s I bet they would have banned Jews because these were Christian geek clubs, as was the norm in the greater society.

There is something to what you say. However, I think you should add that just because something is a social norm doesn't mean that it's right, or that we should just let it continue.

If people always did that, we would still have terrible things in society. Like salvery, not letting women vote, letting people get away with public bigotry to those not of the "norm", and of course we would still be using leeches and bloodletting as cure alls.

A society that rejects change either comes under attack, or is destroyed.

Haha, fair enough. That's why I am saying that there could be positivity from adding new people. However, there has to be a limit and saying that its ok for a non-geek to be a part of geekdom (a non-geek defined by having NO passion for the material, not by knowledge) seem contradictory.

Although, I am with movie bob on this, how much is this actually a problem? Do these people actually exist? I can't imagine getting involved with a scene I hve no passion for for attention, and I cant really imagine people doing that.

Well that actually brings up one of the big questions about this whole mess. Why would someone with no passion for something try to be a part of the community?

By that I mean, someone who weres a T-shirt with a Tardis on it but has no idea it's not just a phone booth, why would they try to be a part of the Dr. Who community? I mean it's not like the person is going to go to some Con about Dr. Who or anything if they know nothing about it, or don't care about it.

And as for some people who just like to cosplay as who/whatever at a con just because they like the look, or think it makes them look hot. Don't those people have enough passion already for whatever they are cosplaying as to make the outfit? Even if they don't know anything about what/who they are dressed as?

I mean have you seen some of these cosplayers? I can't believe they can make the outfits they make look so good! That's something I don't think I could ever do. Certainly not if I didn't know anything about what I was cosplaying as, or if I didn't care even a little bit about it.

And even if someone didn't know anything about whatever it was, and didn't care but just does it for attention. Like everyones been saying, it wouldn't hurt anyone/anything, and as for your concern about that kind of person "being a part of the community". Well, I don't really think you could call them really part of the community, or at the most they would be a part that noone would have to care about.

 

[Lieju]

I usually watch movies in press showings or middle of the day, which means I can watch the movies in peace.

However, I must say that watching the Ace attorney-movie in a theater full of people who were fans was awesome. They didn't yell or talk, but they went 'OooH' and laughed.

Also some of the women were squeeing at Edgeworth.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

I'm going to have to be careful here. I'm definitely not trying to say women deserve to be treated differently based on how they dress, but... Women who wear skimpy outfits to attract attention to themselves, then who are berate men who generally have less experience with women for perving on them. Not touching, they have a right not to be touched but looking at them... I just don't understand why that's the guys fault.

The guy who suffers is the one who wouldn't in a million years have the courage to talk to that hot girl but eyes pop out of his head and hyperventilates every time he sees her flesh. Skin tight latex and push up bras, I'm 100% behind those things as long as I'm permitted to look at said girl without being made out to be a monster. And yes my mouth may be down to the floor but I think that's more of a compliment than an insult.

Or am I wrong? Should I feel bad about giving unwanted attention to said girls in that environment? (Basically staring at SOMEONE I find visually pleasing).

Fixed that last bit for ya.

Anyway, we are all perverted to some degree Raioken. What makes ya a pervert is how much you show it in public(yes that pun is there, and it's there for a reason. Don't do it!)

It's okay to look, just don't don't be obnoxious about it.
So just keep yourself cool, okay?

Spoiler: Don't be like this guy.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Ok, I have a confession. I used to be an elitist geek. I went through that "phase". I think everybody does at some point.

As a kid, I played music. I enjoyed talking with other kids who played music. I unconsciously felt like we had a little "club" thing going on, so when the school started TEACHING music, I felt as though they were taking away something of mine. Something that made me "me". I hadn't learnt not to define myself by what I could do at that point, I guess.

Now I'd never heard of the "fake geek girl" thing, but what depresses me the most is that it is directed, almost exclusively, at women. It plays into the whole idea that gamers are misogynist guys, exclusively. And FTR I've never met ONE misogynist guy gamer in real life (although I've seen a few homophobic slurs thrown about on the Interwebs, which really really annoys me. Haven't we got past referring to people as "gay" in a derogatory way yet?)

I think everybody goes through a phase where they define themselves by "geek" or whatever. Most of them grow out of it (although some, unfortunately, do not. And some of those make it into the mainstream media as pundits.) I think that's a part of growing up and that you eventually learn to get over it. It's just when you add the misogynist element into the mix that it becomes really ugly for me.

I mean, I know "that guy" who is either openly hostile or teeth-gnashingly condescending towards women, depending on his mood. He's a douche. And I don't want people thinking that he speaks for me or for my interests.

 

[yeti585]

(around 35:30) "The amount of impact that has on your life is all self governed. Like, if you were upset about a woman who's dressing up in a costume who knows nothing about the character, you know she's only doing that - she's only doing it for attention, and you feel that effects you somehow that's all self generated.". . .

. . ."Because reality is you don't have to look at her, you don't have to talk to her, you don't have to engage at all. but, if your doing any of those things, your the one that making it an issue."

I have a problem with this. And if this gets a read by the escapist staff, please set me straight on this.

Would it be okay to say the same thing to someone who is offended by another person saying something racist/sexist/homophobic/bigoted? No, not really. But, it's the same principle. If there is a guy on the corner with a sign that says "god hates fags" and people cause an uproar about it, they don't have to look at the sign.

While this issue is no where near as important as the aforementioned issues, I'd like some consistency.

EDIT: Please read my second post, also.

 

[Henriot]

(around 35:30) "The amount of impact that has on your life is all self governed. Like, if you were upset about a woman who's dressing up in a costume who knows nothing about the character, you know she's only doing that - she's only doing it for attention, and you feel that effects you somehow that's all self generated.". . .

. . ."Because reality is you don't have to look at her, you don't have to talk to her, you don't have to engage at all. but, if your doing any of those things, your the one that making it an issue."

I have a problem with this. And if this gets a read by the escapist staff, please set me straight on this.

Would it be okay to say the same thing to someone who is offended by another person saying something racist/sexist/homophobic/bigoted? No, not really. But, it's the same principle. If there is a guy on the corner with a sign that says "god hates fags" and people cause an uproar about it, they don't have to look at the sign.

While this issue is no where near as important as the aforementioned issues, I'd like some consistency.

I'm no Escapist staff member or anything, but those are two different scenarios. I believe we can all agree that bigotry is a negative quality (I would also extend that to homophobia/racism/sexism). Someone dressing up in a costume without having a deep understanding of its source is not something everyone can say is a negative thing.

Now, free speech and rights to say what one wants comes into play with the idea of the antihomosexual sign holder but again that's someone sending out a message that is inherently a judgement. That person is actively attacking with that sign, person in a costume is not.

 

[yeti585]

I'm no Escapist staff member or anything, but those are two different scenarios. I believe we can all agree that bigotry is a negative quality (I would also extend that to homophobia/racism/sexism). Someone dressing up in a costume without having a deep understanding of its source is not something everyone can say is a negative thing.

Now, free speech and rights to say what one wants comes into play with the idea of the antihomosexual sign holder but again that's someone sending out a message that is inherently a judgement. That person is actively attacking with that sign, person in a costume is not.

I'm not trying to equate such an issue, if we can even call this that, to big things like racism or homophobia. The "sign holder on the corner" example wasn't the best for this situation. It displays my "you don't have to be a part of it" point but makes it seem like I am trying to make the whole thing sound bigger than it really is. The whole situation is more like a guy in a bar telling a woman he is an musician/architect/poet/etc. when in reality he works a boring job. While it's not necessarily the most wrong thing you can do, the woman still has a right to be mad.

Anyone can dress up in any costume they want, but to tell someone they can't feel a certain way about it because they don't have to be a part of it just seems,- off.

 

[Henriot]

I'm not trying to equate such an issue, if we can even call this that, to big things like racism or homophobia. The "sign holder on the corner" example wasn't the best for this situation. It displays my "you don't have to be a part of it" point but makes it seem like I am trying to make the whole thing sound bigger than it really is. The whole situation is more like a guy in a bar telling a woman he is an musician/architect/poet/etc. when in reality he works a boring job. While it's not necessarily the most wrong thing you can do, the woman still has a right to be mad.

Anyone can dress up in any costume they want, but to tell someone they can't feel a certain way about it because they don't have to be a part of it just seems,- off.

Moving away from bigotry...

... I think your bar analogy is a little off. Your "guy" is actively lying about something. Claiming a profession and claiming to enjoy entertainment are different things; one is a bit more of a definite while the other exists on a sliding scale. Greg's sports anology is a bit more fitting; someone at a game in the team colours and jersey, waving the flag with only a shallow understanding of the whole thing. If a die hard fan is aware that "poser" only has a slight interest and is there for the attention, they can focus on them and get annoyed or they can enjoy the game.

 

[teebeeohh]

i initially found revolution to be interesting but i stopped watching when the Mcguffin turned the power on and the phone magically still had a charge after 15 years. i can live with the power being suppressed by a magic-anti-power-field or something and having small devices that disable that locally but that was just stupid.

 

[Magnalian]

I should not have been eating noodles when you guys started talking about chicken intestines coming out.

 

[shiajun]

Big snip

No grilling on my part. I'd just like to know if you realize the slight irony when you describe these famed "fake geek girls" that annoy you because they have no working knowledge of the t-shirt they found attractive or the level interest you profess (and that this somehow justifies the uproar) and then going on to describe how gamers are douchbags on CoD or wherever because you fail to have the level of expertise "required" or the gender necessary for game x or y.

Captcha: Whoa there
All right captcha, this will be the extent of my intervention.

Oh, no, I never said I was unfamiliar with games like CoD. I like them. I'm decent at them. The problem is, and I don't know if you've run into a person like that, when a girl sets foot on the lobby, most guy start making sexist comments. They don't even care if the girl is good or bad, they just do it. Hey, if they were attacking me because I sucked, I'd take it. When I'm bad at a game and I get those comments, I don't like it but I get it. So I retreat quietly. But they do it for no reason at all, believe me.

If I manage to stay quiet, they treat me like any other person. But I have to stay quiet. And mind you, it's not like I go in there talking about glitter or kittens.

I like this video because it shows how guys at CoD usually act (Not everyone! But some guys):

Ok, that video was hilarious. Thank you!

Just to clarify, because I think there was some miscommunication here, I personally don't believe you lack competence or knowledge in anything CoD related. I don't even play CoD, I'm just not into it, I'm certifiably worse at it than you. I meant that these douchbags (which I know exist and really should be conjured out of existence) think you don't have any expertise in the game or start getting entirely demeaning and dismissive based on some random trait, which they chose to be that you're a woman. That's the expanded, bloated version of your reaction to the fake geek girls. They're just there to have fun, to enjoy something in a way that you don't feel is complete, because random trait here is level of interest. Maybe they could or should have a deeper knowledge of what they are trying to pass off, but if the don't there's no harm in that. No need to attach any terms or adjectives to it. Though, triple kudos to you for trying to teach. I wish those a-holes in CoD had the same reaction, but insecurity is hard to erase. That's why one ends up with 50 year old teenagers.

 

[jmarquiso]

This is actually my favorite article on Fake geeks -

http://madartlab.com/2012/11/21/down-with-fake-nerds-a-rallying-cry-to-real-geeks/

Highly recommend a read. Damn cosplayers vying for attention.