The Big Picture: Not Okay

[Darkmantle]

It's sad that all these discussions inevitably get weighed down by two sides. The "Misandry doesn't exist and it's all Men's fault side", and the "woman are just as sexist so it's ok" side.

Sexism does exist, and is very wrong, but it's wrong against BOTH sexes. And I think until everyone figures out that we need to work on this as a human issue, instead of a "gender wars" issue, it will never be solved.

WoW, I just had an epiphany there.

 

[Phasmal]

It's sad that all these discussions inevitably get weighed down by two sides. The "Misandry doesn't exist and it's all Men's fault side", and the "woman are just as sexist so it's ok" side.

Sexism does exist, and is very wrong, but it's wrong against BOTH sexes. And I think until everyone figures out that we need to work on this as a human issue, instead of a "gender wars" issue, it will never be solved.

WoW, I just had an epiphany there.

Yeah, but those things do generally stop us from having conversations about the behaviour in our community, which is what this was supposed to be about.

Don't get me wrong, I've seen great things in this community, and I love being in it.
But as a female player, I've also seen the ugliest side of it, and I do think that if we chose to, we could do more to stop it.

Unfortunately, we just let it happen usually. We should be better than this.

 

[Phasmal]

We put pressure on that guy to apologize, so that's something, I guess.

I like Bob's suggestion (that he made in a different video), that if you ever hear someone spewing crap like that on voice chat or whatever you immediately exit the game.

I know this solution won't work in tournaments but for regular play it's a start. *shrug*

Yeah, I also think more male players standing up for people they see getting harrassed would be a really good thing, too. Most people do it to look big or cool, another dude calling them out on it would be really good.

Honestly, with some of the crap I've had, for example in WoW groups when it came out that I was female and I got shit for it*, I would have loved for somebody other than me to say it wasn't okay. Everybody usually just either ignores it or tells me to shut up.

*A lot of people ask `Well why do you bring it up?` as if I should keep being female a secret, but its usually something harmless like:
Dude: Never seen [mount] drop.
Me: No, neither have I but my boyfriend has [mount]

Of course, I dont always get shit for it, there are loads of great players out there.

EDIT: Reworded it to be a bit more readable, hopefully.

 

[Tipsythegza]

It's sad to see someone above the age of 14 still acting like a child when they see a girl playing a video game.

 

[axlryder]

A woman gets drunk enough to impair her judgement. She CHOOSES to impair her judgement,

So, you agree that a guy that "agrees" to get his money stolen from while being drunk CHOOSES to impair his judgement and can therefore be robbed unless he specifically tells everyone he does not want to be robbed, right?

Because that's your argument for rape here.

well it wouldn't be stolen if they asked for it, now would it? It's not like the dude is going to rape her or ask if he can rape her. He's gonna be like "you want to have sex?" or some other phrasing which explicitly indicates having sex. If he just forces himself onto her or never really gets "consent" and she's too drunk to do much, than it's undoubtedly intentional rape, but I doubt that's what he's talking about. What's more, you're under the assumption that the guy is intentionally preying on the woman who's drunk, when that's not at all always the case (he might not even realize she's blasted or be a little drunk himself). It's also not at all an equivocal comparison, as sex and money are two very different concepts. If the guy was drunk and the girl was drunk, no one got raped. How are the emotional consequences on the woman's part different if he wasn't drunk? It's not as though she'd know if he was sober. It's a potentially complicated situation with variable consequences. Yet in your example the guy lost all his money no matter what. There's a simple and concrete consequence to his actions and the actions of others. Now if a guy had an STD then, yeah, he's being criminally irresponsible, regardless ('course, isn't the woman being irresponsible for not informing others if she has an STD and the guy she's sleeping with is also drunk?). The point is, it's a complicated situation with tons of variables that no simple, crappy analogy is going to encapsulate perfectly. I'm not even introducing my own personal feelings here, your example just bugged me.

 

[axlryder]

Sometimes, guys want to be kicked into the balls and them saying no, they don't, actually means yes. I'm not saying all guys do, but some do, so it's very understandable that a woman would get confused and kick a guy in the balls who said no or said nothing since she reasonably assumed he meant yes. I mean, some guys want it.

Are you serious right now? Another completely idiotic point. A LOT of woman will say "no" when they're entirely reciprocating your feelings. It's just the reality of how some people communicate during or before sex. There's a complete and total difference between a "yes" no and a "no" no and anyone with a brain and an ounce of experience can tell the difference. come on. The body will be obviously willing and aroused, the "no" will usually be playing or lasciviously spoken, she'll probably be smiling and seem happy, she'll undoubtedly not be showing any signs of nervousness or fear, she'll most likely reciprocate your physical gestures and at no time will she ever forcibly try and resist or squirm. A "no" no. Her voice will be flat, serious. That alone should be enough to tell.

btw, there are some woman who will legitimately try to resist your advances and yet still want you to have sex with them. They're the "hold me down and fuck me" types. That's not what I'm talking about here, since in those cases it's far too hard to distinguish and not at all worth the risk of you being wrong about what they really want.

Sorry for posting twice to reply to the same comment, btw, I just didn't think that second part of your comment would get to me too. I'm not even reading past that because I'm afraid of what I'll find.

 

[Extraintrovert]

A LOT of woman will say "no" when they're entirely reciprocating your feelings. It's just the reality of how some people communicate during or before sex. There's a complete and total difference between a "yes" no and a "no" no and anyone with a brain and an ounce of experience can tell the difference. come on. The body will be obviously willing and aroused, the "no" will usually be playing or lasciviously spoken, she'll probably be smiling and seem happy, she'll undoubtedly not be showing any signs of nervousness or fear, she'll most likely reciprocate your physical gestures and at no time will she ever forcibly try and resist or squirm. A "no" no. Her voice will be flat, serious. That alone should be enough to tell.

I know I'm going to regret getting involved in a discussion that's been going for days, but I felt a powerful urge to respond to this comment and inform you that real life is not a porno.

Seriously, what the fuck. If someone says "no", female or male, then always, ALWAYS assume that they mean "no", because you are neither a mind reader nor the protagonist of a hentai. And if you are ever in a sexual situation with someone who does want to behave that way, then it needs to be thoroughly discussed before anything starts, so that everything is, in industry parlance, safe, sane and consensual.

You don't seem to be outright malicious, but neither do you seem to understand exactly what rape is, nor how rape culture skews perceptions of both victims and how otherwise decent people can become rapists unknowingly. You should really read the second part of zefiris' comment, because it explains such things in more detail than I ever could.

 

[Ramzal]

I will simply post what I put in response to his video:

"It's not okay to use terms, but I will be the last person in the world to try to police people into what to say or not say. Honestly, people may say what they want, and continue to say as they please. But sooner or later, they will see the downside to what they say and face the consequences for what is said. At the same time, we shouldn't be so sensitive to be upset over someone saying: "Yeah... you got raped in Street fighter X Tekken."

What if someone who was raped was not effected by the use of the word. What if I were and I were not offended by the use of it? Or for that matter, it not digging up any traumatic memories? What then? Are you speaking from experience or from assumption of how someone who has been raped would feel about it? My point in this is that playing this from a point of "This hurts people this really happened to" is dangerous waters to tred in."

But neither I nor you can state if this would bother those who -have- gone through it. It may, or it may not. Maybe those who feel pity for those who have gone through rape are bothered by it more than people who have gone through it. Why not let people who have gone through it speak up against it rather than risk becoming a Champion of a cause that victims decide to not make their voices widely known?

Bob means well, but sometimes he can come off as offensive himself. I feel offended that he thinks that people should be angry at RE5's presentation and delivery of shooting at Africans. I'm African American and I am completely fine with it. How fair would it have been if I weren't upset about RE4 blowing away Spaniards, but when they start shooting Africans, I toss my oatmeal at the tv and yell for blood?"

No, seriously. I mean it about Bob's RE5 "Capcom is racist" bull. It really -really- offends me when he does that.

 

[John Funk]

It's sad that all these discussions inevitably get weighed down by two sides. The "Misandry doesn't exist and it's all Men's fault side", and the "woman are just as sexist so it's ok" side.

Sexism does exist, and is very wrong, but it's wrong against BOTH sexes. And I think until everyone figures out that we need to work on this as a human issue, instead of a "gender wars" issue, it will never be solved.

WoW, I just had an epiphany there.

Misandry exists for sure, but... "sexism against men," er, not really. Part of any "ism" is that it needs to come from the party with institutional power. Otherwise, it's just prejudice or bigotry, since it's not being enforced via societal pressures. A woman being misandrist is not sexist, it's prejudiced.

No I understand it, it just doesn't apply to a discussion of what's legal and what isn't.

Although it is cute how you just use that as a catchall so you don't have to bother having a point.

...yes, it does. That is by DEFINITION what it means. Here, let me quote it for you:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress cannot make laws against it. You legally have the right to say whatever you want.

This does not give you the right to have people listen to you.

This does not give you freedom from consequences from said speech. Nor does this give you the freedom to ignore consequences of what you say. (Like yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater).

You're sure right that I legally cannot stop anyone from making rape jokes, or trivializing the concept of rape because they're terrible at games. But I can sure as hell think you're a rape-culture-engendering douchebag for it.

You keep repeating that won't make it true.

And your sticking your head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge that your desperate clinging to being able to say *one terrible word* is actually *hurting people* doesn't make it any less true.

And I hope your self righteousness keeps you warm at night.

Keep fighting the non-existent rape culture. I heard those windmills over there are part of it.

It does, actually! I feel pretty good knowing I'm doing what I can - even a little part - at fighting a culture that I know for a fact exists, and has demonstrably hurt people I care about in my life.

Because here's the funny part. If you're right, and there is no such thing as rape culture, I'm still doing something good. I'm still fighting for awareness of a terrible crime that effects hundreds of thousands of women in the USA and many more around the world every year. I'm still fighting to make people aware that sometimes language DOES have power.

So even if there's no such thing as rape culture, I'm doing good things.

But if I'M right, and there IS such a thing as rape culture, then you're making it easier for rapists to justify their decision. When it would be so easy to make one little change in the things you say to stop it.

So yeah, actually. I'm feeling pretty good about this one

 

[axlryder]

A LOT of woman will say "no" when they're entirely reciprocating your feelings. It's just the reality of how some people communicate during or before sex. There's a complete and total difference between a "yes" no and a "no" no and anyone with a brain and an ounce of experience can tell the difference. come on. The body will be obviously willing and aroused, the "no" will usually be playing or lasciviously spoken, she'll probably be smiling and seem happy, she'll undoubtedly not be showing any signs of nervousness or fear, she'll most likely reciprocate your physical gestures and at no time will she ever forcibly try and resist or squirm. A "no" no. Her voice will be flat, serious. That alone should be enough to tell.

I know I'm going to regret getting involved in a discussion that's been going for days, but I felt a powerful urge to respond to this comment and inform you that real life is not a porno.

Seriously, what the fuck. If someone says "no", female or male, then always, ALWAYS assume that they mean "no", because you are neither a mind reader nor the protagonist of a hentai. And if you are ever in a sexual situation with someone who does want to behave that way, then it needs to be thoroughly discussed before anything starts, so that everything is, in industry parlance, safe, sane and consensual.

You don't seem to be outright malicious, but neither do you seem to understand exactly what rape is, nor how rape culture skews perceptions of both victims and how otherwise decent people can become rapists unknowingly. You should really read the second part of zefiris' comment, because it explains such things in more detail than I ever could.

First off, obnoxiously bolding, cap-locking and underlining doesn't make your point anymore valid. You can do it, but it looks stupid.

Now, it would appear you don't seem outright malicious, but your self-righteous attitude has blinded you to the way some people just act and your ability to read their intentions. Just because you subscribe to a certain perspective doesn't mean you're objectively correct in it. The reality is that you're not, and you telling me what a previous girlfriend and my current GF really wanted when they undeniably would have been confused or even angry if I had actually stopped when they said "no", is presumptuous and rude. They certainly never felt raped (or maybe "oh god, that was amazing" means "oh god, I was just raped" to you). Even if you would consider it rape, it matters not to me, as I'm only concerned with actions that actually hurt people. Oh, but maybe now you're going to imply you knew my ex and gf better than I did/do because you've got a position that applies to all situations regardless of context. I myself have said "no" but carried on because my girlfriend kept going. I certainly didn't feel raped and I wouldn't call her a rapist based on the situation. It's because: context. She knew what I wanted in that situation because my body language and physical gestures were reciprocating and there was clearly no tension or resistance or indecision (emotional or otherwise). Don't try and apply your perspective as a moral catch-all to specific situations you haven't been in. Personally, I don't care about the definition of rape or how it applies here. I've lied, stolen and done various other "wrong" things without really doing anything I or anyone I've talked to would consider morally wrong outside of technically having committed the aforementioned actions (downloading a program I rightfully bought the first time around but got screwed over by adobe and told I was SOL, lying about not having more money when I got mugged, speeding to get my friend to the hospital because the ambulance was too far out and it only took me a couple minutes, etc.)

Also, if you're going to say "but reinforcing that mentality in your ex will only perpetuate the rape culture!" then you're insulting her intelligence. We already had a conversation sort of dealing with that, and she basically said she won't date or have sex with emotionally insensitive idiots, so she's not concerned about putting herself in a position where she could get forced upon (it took us about 8 months to have sex for the first time). My current GF I will most likely marry, so I don't think I have to worry about this happening with other guys. In other words, no one is doing or is going to do anything they don't want to do without someone literally forcing them. It's all mutual shit. You can hate or deny that all you want, but it's reality. Oh, but god forbid I kiss my girl on the neck when she's doing taxes and she playfully says "not now" and I keep going and we end up doing it without her verbalizing "okay let's do it" despite her giving me every other physical queue that says "okay let's do it". Oh good lord, that happened just the other week! Guess that makes me a scaaaaary rapist. *rolls eyes*

Also, Zefiris' comment is biased as shit and I'm not going to read the rest of it for fear of going off the handle.

 

[IankBailey]

Whatever happened to sticks and stones? Has the world really gotten to a point where being offended isn't ok?

 

[John Funk]

Whatever happened to sticks and stones? Has the world really gotten to a point where being offended isn't ok?

This has nothing to do with being "offended."

 

[X10J]

I'll tackle these both at once. Not at all, and I think I really miscommunicated what I wanted to get across with my message. First off, I don't stand for the use of those words. I dont use them, and I encourage everyone I know not to use them. But the funny thing about that is, when coupled up against strangers, most don't give a flying damn.

Like I go on to say later in the arguement, the community is fractured. People don't care how their actions make us look. You cant change people who are indignant. And this is part of a greater societal change. Most people have accepted that "words are words" (usually people who are not victims to them). And as such, freely spout off words that would not be acceptable. Imagine how many times you have seen the N word, C word, fag, gay, raped, and jew (as a derogatory word) in the last 5 years. The usage rate is alarming, but trending. Its a greater societal thing, and thats not going to change.

While you may be correct in pointing out that most strangers wouldn't care about what they're saying or how it effect how it makes us look, I don't think it is an insignificant thing for Bob (or you and I for that matter) to say that we disagree with the current status of our community. I do, however, think it is a bad thing to sit idly while these things go on, especially when these things are in the pulic eye. Our community already has a pretty bad public image, so when a story like what Aris did comes along we have to be vocal in saying that we disagree with this, we have to take to the forums, to the coments, to (and this pain me to say) our social networks, or to, say our opinion-based web shows that we may be fortunate enough to be paid to produce for a popular gaming website. I cannot think of any instance when speaking out against immorality was an insignificant act. Furthermore, I've seen a few posts that read something to the effect of "You know, I've been using these words. I should stop." Now, I will certainly yield that the entire population of video game enthusiests will not be effected by our efforts or by Bob's, but we will, and have, made a difference with SOME of them. And, while it may be like throwing a peble into the sea, at least, at the end of the day, we've thrown a peble. Our action will not change ALL of the community, our inaction, however, will not change ANY of it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I seem to be channeling Thomas Payne a little bit, a sure sign of my growing fatigue. Goodnight.

 

[CarlMin]

Overall it doesn't seem like moral or political issues and nerd culture are compatible, unless it has to do with government subservience or the threat of taking away piracy. I don't really know why I feel that way but it seems like people within the gaming community specially feels extremely uncomfortable when anything is to politically correct for them, whether it involves not being able to kill children in Skyrim or discussions about sexism for example.

 

[Hashime]

Snip

Thank you for posting this.

 

[laserwulf]

Dang, this video should be required viewing for anyone looking to create/renew an Xbox Live account.

 

[minuialear]

well it wouldn't be stolen if they asked for it, now would it? It's not like the dude is going to rape her or ask if he can rape her. He's gonna be like "you want to have sex?" or some other phrasing which explicitly indicates having sex. If he just forces himself onto her or never really gets "consent" and she's too drunk to do much, than it's undoubtedly intentional rape, but I doubt that's what he's talking about.

So if you get really drunk and someone asks "Hey, can I borrow some change?" as she reaches for your wallet, then it's not stealing anymore? Or, if you're so drunk you can't even identify the person, and you happen to say yes simply because you don't understand what's going on, then if she takes your wallet, that's also not stealing, because you have provided (albeit obviously unintended) consent for her to do so? Also because if you get drunk, that means it's your fault if someone steals from you, as opposed to us faulting the one who stole from you (you know, because unlike getting drunk, stealing is actually a crime)?

What's more, you're under the assumption that the guy is intentionally preying on the woman who's drunk, when that's not at all always the case (he might not even realize she's blasted or be a little drunk himself).

Then he (or if the sexes are reversed, she) ought to figure that out BEFORE having sex. Also, if the person who later considers him/herself to be the victim is somehow liable for his/her actions because (s)he shouldn't have gotten drunk if (s)he didn't want sex, then shouldn't the person who is later considered the aggressor also be held liable for pressuring someone to have sex with him/her, even if (s)he's also drunk? Why argue that only one of the two parties involved should be expected to control his/her behavior?

How are the emotional consequences on the woman's part different if he wasn't drunk? It's not as though she'd know if he was sober.

Because it means he took advantage of her when she was too drunk to say no to his advances. Arguing that there wouldn't be any emotional consequences to being taken advantage of while in a compromised state is frankly the most ridiculous thing I've seen so far in this discussion.