Geeks Should Argue Politics. It's Good For Us.

[Overhead]

This is your problem, you want sexism to mean "bad" or "unjust" or "pertaining to misogyny" all at the same time. If you didn't you would have an easier time. Your questions are certainly genuinely difficult issues but you are hamstringing yourself with language.

I'm not saying everyone should listen to me, I'm saying people should say what they mean.

Is the man visiting the stripper sexist? Well he may well have a discriminating sexuality giving him a preference to a certain gender. Is that sexist? yes. is that bad or unjust? No - unless you want to posit that anything except bi-sexuality is unjust.
Does the man consider women inferior - who's to say you haven't offered the information
If the woman is or not obligated to be there doesn't seem to having bearing on the sexism of the man just the social justice of the situation which indeed may need addressing - sexism is not the only sin.

Ah, you seem to have a very limited definition of sexism that you seem to think overrides any other people's definition of sexism, so far simply because you say so rather than because you've shown evidence that it should do so. Can you give any rationale for this that isn't based on value judgements?

Objectification, both of fictional women in media and real women, is regarded as sexist from your typical feminist viewpoints. The reasoning for this isn't because it's "bad" or "unjust" as you claim, which is just a simplification with no bearing on on the arguement being made, but rather because it involves the commodification and stripping of personhood from women individually and collectively. As an action it collectively degrades women, sometimes in the singular sense (a stripper) and sometimes in the collective sense (The cultural view of women it helps create). Thus sexist.

But then not everyone agrees, what with it being based on personal values and all.

 

[wizzy555]

This is your problem, you want sexism to mean "bad" or "unjust" or "pertaining to misogyny" all at the same time. If you didn't you would have an easier time. Your questions are certainly genuinely difficult issues but you are hamstringing yourself with language.

I'm not saying everyone should listen to me, I'm saying people should say what they mean.

Is the man visiting the stripper sexist? Well he may well have a discriminating sexuality giving him a preference to a certain gender. Is that sexist? yes. is that bad or unjust? No - unless you want to posit that anything except bi-sexuality is unjust.
Does the man consider women inferior - who's to say you haven't offered the information
If the woman is or not obligated to be there doesn't seem to having bearing on the sexism of the man just the social justice of the situation which indeed may need addressing - sexism is not the only sin.

Ah, you seem to have a very limited definition of sexism that you seem to think overrides any other people's definition of sexism, so far simply because you say so rather than because you've shown evidence that it should do so. Can you give any rationale for this that isn't based on value judgements?

You are misunderstanding my argument. I'm not saying "never make value judgements" I'm saying unwrap your value judgements from your objective statements. I will say it is better because I value clarity as this facilitates clear communication. See, all nicely unwrapped.

Objectification, both of fictional women in media and real women, is regarded as sexist from your typical feminist viewpoints. The reasoning for this isn't because it's "bad" or "unjust" as you claim, which is just a simplification with no bearing on on the arguement being made, but rather because it involves the commodification and stripping of personhood from women individually and collectively. As an action it collectively degrades women, sometimes in the singular sense (a stripper) and sometimes in the collective sense (The cultural view of women it helps create). Thus sexist.

But then not everyone agrees, what with it being based on personal values and all.

Well that's a better unwrapping than simply calling it sexist and leaving it to my imagination whatever you mean. So another meaning for "sexist" is anything that you believe perpetuates what you consider a negative view of women in society. I'll add that to the list. Although all that stuff about being forced into stripping doesn't come into it.

 

[James Crook]

I - like many people on this website in the last few weeks - have been seeing The Escapist changing into a website not about games but offering clickbait articles cashing in on the eventuality of a left-wing circlejerk, something MovieBob's article on Gary Oldman epitomizes.
I used to like Bob but his hamfisted way of seemingly cramming his political views everywhere has now made me not want to watch or read him anymore - not even The Big Picture.

I am a mostly centre-right, mixed-race Frenchman.

I find racism completely irrational and as such shouldn't be levied at people who thought the casting for Johnny Storm was wrong - like me.

I find sexism pretty stupid but don't think Ubisoft has sexist attitudes - they're lazy and fucked up at justifying their laziness when they saw the shitstorm incoming.

I am starting to be really annoyed to what has become of The Escapist. For a while I was starting to consider this to be kind of a home on the internet.

 

[dragonswarrior]

To the Escapist Staff:

I would hope you are not too worried about the three or so people who decided to cancel their Pub Club subscriptions due to this column. In case you were however, I have just gone and purchased said subscription, in direct support of this article and in direct opposition of those who are leaving in protest (while of course still respecting their rights to leave in protest.)

I feel in some ways it is long overdue. I have loved this website and its political take on a culture I am so deeply invested in for years now.

Keep up the good work,

dragonswarrior

 

[BreakfastMan]

God damn, the reactions to this article are kind of glorious. You don't like people who don't agree with you actually expressing opinions? You want to leave? Good. Would rather not want to read whatever you have to say anyway.

 

[Andy Shandy]

The Escapist as of late, who's name is now misleading because it's no longer offering any kind of escapism,

I always assumed the name was meant to be ironic.

Because, so very often, I find myself wanting to escape from this place.

Considering that the majority of your posts (that I see anyway) are complaints of one form or another, I must ask, why exactly do you come here?

Anyway, on the subject of the article itself, I agree. Not much more to say than that.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Personally, I'm not completely against the column, but I do have two issues.

First, the title, as you mentioned, is pure flame bait. Whether you like it or not, the term "Social Justice Warrior" has some extremely controversial connotations for some people. Naming the column this is just waving an explicit body part in their face and daring them to say mean things. It serves no real purpose other than to create false preconceptions in some minds when reading the title and drawing discussion away from the actual content of the article.

Second, I think my only real issue with the concept of this column is that it's somewhat redundant. Between The Big Picture, Jimquisition, Critical Intel (Or, God help you, the occasional Critical Miss), and basically every news article written by Bob Chipman, social issues are already handled extensively on the Escapist. I'm not saying it's terrible to have more, I'm just not sure what this can offer that's really all that different.

As for the content of [i/]this[/i] piece, I partially agree. It's certainly true that certain people that are part of the geek culture nowadays have a strange phobia to political issues.
At the same time, I can absolutely understand people who purely want to have fun with something and stop thinking about it further than that. It's just as unreasonable to expect every nerd to care about sexism as it is to expect the average moviegoer to worry about the social problems of action movies.

You don't like people who don't agree with you actually expressing opinions?

Would rather not want to read whatever you have to say anyway.

Oh the ironing

 

[Nieroshai]

It's hard to discuss politics with the right wing on a site like this, when they tend argue fairy tales and conjecture. Once upon a time the stereotype was that the left wing would accuse detractors of being "Nazis", but ever since the internet gave a voice to virginal 15 year old boys, it seems like everything is now "Marxist".

"I hate my mom, I hate people telling me what to do, I don't pay tax but if I did then blacks and latinos would live like kings from my meager offerings. Small government! Brian from Family Guy is such a libtard, I like guns, if you try to take them away from me you're like Hitler, that's what he did dontcha know, you yellow cultural marxists..."

Sure geeks should discuss politics, but I don't think the forum of this site is the best environment for it. Everyone has a political opinion, but only few have enough conviction to research and commit to what they supposedly believe in. Therefore you'll get a lot more of the above bollocks from both sides of the debate.

This is why the more intelligent and level-headed of us don't even bother: people believe what you believe, that we're all angry and stupid no matter what we say. All you have done is insult and oversimplify. I make this offer a lot, and have never been taken up on it; do you want a real, level-headed political and philosophical debate? One where no insults are hurled and your opponent actually does research and takes time to think about implications and ramifications of policy? If so, message me. We can have fun discussing the world and everything about it.
If all you want is a religious Right-Winger to knock around, or you think my beliefs automatically make me a juvenile, then debate just isn't for you, and so you shouldn't bother.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

The pub club guys joined back when Russ Pitts and Susan Arndt ran the show. And their vision is totally different from the current one, I can see them leaving in droves.

I've had this niggling in the back of my mind that Susan leaving was the end of an era. It seems like the Escapist just hasn't quite been the same since. Of course, it didn't become really noticeable to me until recently with the site design and a bunch of old hands exiting the staff and a bunch of new hands being given more clout and presence on the site.

It's nice to know that it's not just me.

 

[Lono Shrugged]

The pub club guys joined back when Russ Pitts and Susan Arndt ran the show. And their vision is totally different from the current one, I can see them leaving in droves.

I've had this niggling in the back of my mind that Susan leaving was the end of an era. It seems like the Escapist just hasn't quite been the same since. Of course, it didn't become really noticeable to me until recently with the site design and a bunch of old hands exiting the staff and a bunch of new hands being given more clout and presence on the site.

It's nice to know that it's not just me.

There is a reason I never discuss religion and politics with my friends. Best case we bicker horribly, worst case you discover something terribly unpleasant about them. I don't mind some politics and sociology in my game discussion every once in a while, it can be nice to talk about how great it is to have such a strong protagonist as Clementine (Notice I didn't say 'black' or 'female') or how 'Papers Please' is a pretty sweet satire as well as a fun game.

My theory on what has happened here is that the site is less focused on content and more on clicks. Look at the way they tried to introduce sub headings to videos like Yahtzee's to get people to click on them. Notice how articles are named nowadays. If you look at the comments you will see that people are noticing this shift in content.

This "social justice" schtick is people realising the age old rule of journalism, sensationalism sells. Say that woman are oppressed and it's like chucking chum into the water. Anita really helped spearhead this. (alongside a lot of other people to be fair) People fucking love martyrs, it really is a microcosm of society. They self identify with these so called 'outsiders' (Because who doesn't feel like an outsider?) And people can't help but get sucked into this cyclical argument about race, gender, sexuality etc. All in aid of making themselves feel better about themselves. But it should be remembered that gamers are a group of people joined together by a common love of a hobby and nothing else. I don't care about your race/ gender/ equality issues, I know people with real problems with all those things and I play games to get AWAY from all that shit and depressing reality. I am here to talk about games not provide ad revenue. You have to earn my loyalty and insulting my intelligence is not the way. Not saying I don't care. Just that I don't care what you have to say about it.

 

[IceForce]

Considering that the majority of your posts (that I see anyway) are complaints of one form or another, I must ask, why exactly do you come here?

You know, I've been asking myself that very same question.

Every time I try to have a discussion here, I get passively-aggressively insulted, harassed from thread to thread, baited and provoked, and told that my opinions don't matter or that no one cares about them.

Since you're such a devout follower of my posts, you've no doubt noticed that I have significantly reduced the amout of time I spend on this site, and the amount of posts I make.

So don't worry, I hear what you're saying.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Considering that the majority of your posts (that I see anyway) are complaints of one form or another, I must ask, why exactly do you come here?

You know, I've been asking myself that very same question.

Every time I try to have a discussion here, I get passively-aggressively insulted, harassed from thread to thread, baited and provoked, and told that my opinions don't matter or that no one cares about them.

Since you're such a devout follower of my posts, you've no doubt noticed that I have significantly reduced the amout of time I spend on this site, and the amount of posts I make.

So don't worry, I hear what you're saying.

Eh, I'd hardly consider myself a devout follower of anyone on here, it's just I don't think I've seen you ever make a positive comment about anything here. Perhaps you have and I've missed it. In which case, I'm definitely not a good "devout follower" =P

 

[T'Generalissimo]

The issue isn't the combination of geeks and politics, it's the combination of ad-funded content, internet forums and politics; it encourages click-bait articles and tends to produce valueless bickering in the comments instead of well reasoned and researched content and interesting discussions. I mean, it's not impossible to avoid such a scenario if you're careful and smart about - oh wait, you named the series "Social Justice Warrior", never mind then.

 

[Verlander]

It's hard to discuss politics with the right wing on a site like this, when they tend argue fairy tales and conjecture. Once upon a time the stereotype was that the left wing would accuse detractors of being "Nazis", but ever since the internet gave a voice to virginal 15 year old boys, it seems like everything is now "Marxist".

"I hate my mom, I hate people telling me what to do, I don't pay tax but if I did then blacks and latinos would live like kings from my meager offerings. Small government! Brian from Family Guy is such a libtard, I like guns, if you try to take them away from me you're like Hitler, that's what he did dontcha know, you yellow cultural marxists..."

Sure geeks should discuss politics, but I don't think the forum of this site is the best environment for it. Everyone has a political opinion, but only few have enough conviction to research and commit to what they supposedly believe in. Therefore you'll get a lot more of the above bollocks from both sides of the debate.

This is why the more intelligent and level-headed of us don't even bother: people believe what you believe, that we're all angry and stupid no matter what we say. All you have done is insult and oversimplify. I make this offer a lot, and have never been taken up on it; do you want a real, level-headed political and philosophical debate? One where no insults are hurled and your opponent actually does research and takes time to think about implications and ramifications of policy? If so, message me. We can have fun discussing the world and everything about it.
If all you want is a religious Right-Winger to knock around, or you think my beliefs automatically make me a juvenile, then debate just isn't for you, and so you shouldn't bother.

Oh I do, but not on this forum. My point was less "people of x political persuasion are stupid", and more "people of x political persuasion on this forum don't elevate above this level".

This site attracts people who are interested in games, comics, film etc. Which means when political discussion rears it's ugly head, people give opinions, and not discussion or debate. Everyone has an opinion, few people (on here) have an informed one.

 

[Overhead]

You are misunderstanding my argument. I'm not saying "never make value judgements" I'm saying unwrap your value judgements from your objective statements. I will say it is better because I value clarity as this facilitates clear communication. See, all nicely unwrapped.

Except now your arguement is unravelling because you've already stated that sexism is not a value judgement.

Well that's a better unwrapping than simply calling it sexist and leaving it to my imagination whatever you mean. So another meaning for "sexist" is anything that you believe perpetuates what you consider a negative view of women in society. I'll add that to the list. Although all that stuff about being forced into stripping doesn't come into it.

I didn't say anything along those lines. I'd suggest you read the post again. I'm honestly not sure how you can misread what I've written but if there's anything I can clarify then let me know.

 

[AgedGrunt]

Man, I wish I hadn't renewed my Pub Club subscription. I can tell that, within the next year, the Escapist will have fallen to the same shitty level of in-your-face, left wing yellow journalism as sites like Polygon and Kotaku. It's fucking video games and comic books, not a platform for your political opinions.

There's a subforum for it, but once you've been around there long enough you do understand how disastrous it is to give geeks the podium on politics.

Think about it: geeks debate/discuss subjective material all the time, and nearly all of it is grounded in opinion. What you get is a giant political Op-Ed section, and in accordance with geek culture it's common they believe they're right and not only have more forms than a final boss to fight you but it becomes a game in itself to debate the worst of them who will just keep trying to bring you down like they see a health bar next to your name.

But I don't think it's limited to geeks, it's just so much of what doesn't belong in politics.

 

[spartan231490]

Well that's just stupid. He argued this to justify publishing a political piece on an entertainment website. This is an entirely different matter from whether or not geeks should participate in political discourse. Of course geeks and nerds should participate in political discussions. We all should, politics effect us all deeply. That doesn't mean that you should publish political pieces on a website dedicated, not only to entertainment, but to escapism in specific. That's stupid.

 

[Kameburger]

Geeks Should Argue Politics. It's Good For Us.

Should geeks avoid political controversy at all costs? Nope. We're better than that.

Read Full Article

I had my rant on this subject already so I'll just keep it brief. I'm a bit bothered that after how many days of posting you haven't responded to any comments. I think we talk about engaging in debate but when it comes to engaging it is easier to start a flame war and let other people fight it. Please respond, because I find that it is completely useless to talk about politics if we are not willing to listen to other opinions, and if we don't engage and speak to each other on an honest level we can't debate. I understand it might be unpleasant but this kind of a recurring article could use some participation.

Although I think while I don't disagree with the premise of what your saying, that we shouldn't avoid talking about politics, we are approaching what looks like another contentious election in 2016 and I am frankly not comfortable with the escapist trying to use my hobby as a wrench with which to change my opinions.

What you're saying wouldn't be bad if this was a community blog, but it's you, an editor trying to project your values onto your readers, and as a paying customer, I'm not comfortable with that. I don't want to cancel my pub-club subscription but I don't like the turn the site is taking and the only way I can think to vote, is with my wallet.