sigh.

Feb 03, 2011 00:39

So I've been keeping up with the Penny Arcade Dickwolf debacle(See here Major Warning: Discusses rape).

Phil Plait once gave a talk on the tone argument in a skepticism context. You can find it here. He talks about Skepticism and how to turn people to the light. He brings up several basic questions. First off, what are you trying to ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

taiki February 3 2011, 19:31:59 UTC
By what metric? How much money has PA actually lost? Who's now on board with the whole rape culture paradigm that wasn't prior to this? This is a lot of navel gazing and I'm willing to bet PAX East and PAX Prime will still do very well. It is actually very difficult to see what gains, if any, have been made.

This is my problem. It's hard to be skeptical of social justice movements because the moment you question their activism, you're suddenly the enemy.

I am a rape survivor. I am the survivor of systematic abuse and violence. When I have to talk about my experience, it does not help that people I talk to have been exposed to this hostile, charged rhetoric. I know why what PA did was wrong. I know why they're angry. What I don't understand is why are they doing what they're doing when it negatively impacts the work they're trying to do and the work of others. In any other context, this would be unacceptable. When emotions run high, it's hard to be skeptical and to inquire if what is going on is the right thing to do when there is much evidence proving that it is not. This is dismissed as concern trolling and feeds a cycle of hostility that is self defeating.

This isn't about being nice, or not being angry. This is about civility. Just because the other side is not civil does not mean we have to stoop to this level.

Yes, I am a penny arcade fan, and no, I am not a neckbeard. I've come to long rationalize away having to be pissed off all the time and offended and being amused by the output of others. The problem is systemic. The problem isn't two guys in an office producing JPEGs for a living.

The term neckbeard is incredibly problematic as it is very dehumanizing. Being a geek of my degree is still marginalized, and if you don't agree with me, look at any site that makes fun of obsessive Japanese Otaku. Or open source Linux advocates. etc. I don't know about you, but I'd really like grades 7 through 10 back where I wasn't beaten up on a routine basis for being socially awkward and geeky.

Reply

dr_teng February 3 2011, 19:58:15 UTC
Civility isn't necessary for any movement or even for education. Should the civil rights movement have been civil? Do you think it would have accomplished as much if it had? Pretty much a guarantee it wouldn't have.

Obviously, the two aren't directly comparable, that's just a general point about civility. I wasn't even aware this was an issue (I've thought PA sucked and has never been funny from way back when PA started) but I read a little summary about the situation and whoop di do, a crappy comic aimed at 18-34 year old males makes a crappy offensive joke and their audience goes nuts.

Anger, when directed properly, is indeed useful. Insults and mockery when directly properly are also useful. In other situations, civility is more useful. It depends entirely on the audience and the intended message, as well as the person presenting it.

Less critique of the message and more thought about how to present the message (or your version of it) would be more effective. I've noticed that's something you do often on twitter, critique the message/people presenting the message. Yeah, I do it too, I think the democratic party are a bunch of corporate shits and leftism in America is pathetic/fairly weak, but spending the majority of time infighting doesn't make things better.

Reply

taiki February 3 2011, 20:09:06 UTC
Civility isn't necessary for any movement or even for education. Should the civil rights movement have been civil? Do you think it would have accomplished as much if it had? Pretty much a guarantee it wouldn't have.

But it was. That was the corner stone of Martin Luther King's non-violence philosophy. It's why we remember him and instead of the numerous other civil rights leaders who advocated for more extreme measures and solutions.

"Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern world that we must love our enemies - or else? The chain reaction of evil - hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars - must be broken, or else we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation."

Less critique of the message and more thought about how to present the message (or your version of it) would be more effective. I've noticed that's something you do often on twitter, critique the message/people presenting the message. Yeah, I do it too, I think the democratic party are a bunch of corporate shits and leftism in America is pathetic/fairly weak, but spending the majority of time infighting doesn't make things better.

I've noticed though that when you critique that, it suddenly becomes personal. When it shouldn't.

Reply

dr_teng February 3 2011, 20:30:39 UTC
Non-violence doesn't imply civility. Nor does being angry imply one must hate one's opponents. You're linking things that aren't naturally linked with each other.

Boycotts and illegal actions (sit-ins and the like) aren't "civil". Breaking the law is pretty obviously not a civil action. Nor was the civil rights movement entirely MLK. I doubt you'll find many historians, aside from ones whitewashing it, that will ignore the contributions of more extremist members like Malcolm X.

-----

As for your second point, I'm not sure what you mean. Elaborate?

Reply

taiki February 3 2011, 21:11:11 UTC
In the context of conversation and discourse, civility is a matter of how you deal with the opposition. Do you throw a trashcan through their window or do you sit outside and picket their doorstep? While yes, serious historians do remember extremist wings of the civil rights movement, the point I'm making is, who had more effect, Huey P. Newton or MLK?

What i meant on my second point was that people who are on this side of the debate often can't tell the difference between, "Your argument is crap" and "you are crap."

Reply

dr_teng February 3 2011, 21:23:47 UTC
Many people would (and have) said that any illegal actions aren't civil. If you were a business owner and you had people protesting your business by occupying it, would you consider that civil? I find that unlikely. My point here is that civility isn't a requirement and never has been. Non-violence is an entirely different matter so linking the two really makes no sense.

It doesn't matter who had "more" of an effect. Without Malcolm X, the civil rights movement wouldn't have went as far as it did. He's considered one of the most important civil rights activists of all time by a great many people, so it's not like you can ignore his contribution. Just because MLK is considered more highly doesn't mean much, it's not a game of who scored the most points. Their cumulative effect was what mattered. It's a fairly common belief that so many people warmed up to MLK because there were more extremist factions, the whole good cop/bad cop situation.

Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, many people have issues with tying their form of presentation to their own opinion. I've went through phases where I was a total troll, completely civil, to my current mix of a bit of both, so I'm fairly detached from how I present my message. I simply find extensive critique of an already weak community somewhat counter-productive.

Reply

dreaming_faerie February 3 2011, 20:43:22 UTC
Have you been reading comments? A lot of geek-central places, especially with feminist geeks or female geeks, have talked about getting refunds, not supporting the comic, and on spreading the word.

As I said before, people have tried to be nice to the creators before. They were civil. The creators didn't like it, mocked them, and profited from it like a bunch of little brats that didn't want to accept they did something wrong in some form or another. They could have easily said "We understand what you're saying and how it's harmful, but it wasn't the intention of the comic. We don't intend to stop with our type of humor, especially as it is what we're known for, but we do understand what you're saying."

We are not turning into a pissing contest on bad, dehumanizing pasts. I don't feel comfortable describing what I've survived. I'd like my 7th grade year back, where I wasn't called a 'nigger,' punched by boys, and made to feel like shit due to my race and interests. Neckbeard is problematic? I'm sorry that a bunch of privileged males, mostly white, are feeling so dehumanized, especially when they're teasing women with rape and trying to belittle and be condescending to them.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

dreaming_faerie February 3 2011, 22:31:30 UTC
taiki February 3 2011, 22:38:18 UTC
Please, let's not.

Reply

taiki February 3 2011, 22:38:06 UTC
Please. let's not.

Reply

taiki February 3 2011, 21:40:23 UTC
Have you been reading comments? A lot of geek-central places, especially with feminist geeks or female geeks, have talked about getting refunds, not supporting the comic, and on spreading the word.

The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.

As I said before, people have tried to be nice to the creators before. They were civil. The creators didn't like it, mocked them, and profited from it like a bunch of little brats that didn't want to accept they did something wrong in some form or another. They could have easily said "We understand what you're saying and how it's harmful, but it wasn't the intention of the comic. We don't intend to stop with our type of humor, especially as it is what we're known for, but we do understand what you're saying."

I'm not going to defend what they did. I don't know what they did. But when they shot back snark, maybe the right reaction wasn't to shoot back hate. Check their front page. Yes, they've given in, but Tycho is basically saying that he has no idea if dialogue is even possible. Which is really. Really. Really. REALLY a damn. fucking. shame.

We are not turning into a pissing contest on bad, dehumanizing pasts. I don't feel comfortable describing what I've survived. I'd like my 7th grade year back, where I wasn't called a 'nigger,' punched by boys, and made to feel like shit due to my race and interests.

Nor should we. I opened up because I wanted you to understand where I was coming from. I often resonate the pain of others by reflecting it against my own internal prism. I open up in hopes that others see it similarly.

Neckbeard is problematic? I'm sorry that a bunch of privileged males, mostly white, are feeling so dehumanized, especially when they're teasing women with rape and trying to belittle and be condescending to them.

Yes.

Yes it is.

Why are you denying to others what you yourself want? Isn't that hypocrisy? I have to deal with racists, homophobes, heterosexists, and all sorts of people with horrible attributes, but to forget that they're people is an incredibly tragic repeating of horrible past history and prevents me from getting about in my day. I don't have the comfort of surrounding myself in a safe space when I go to work and I don't have the comfort of living in a safe space.

Reply

dreaming_faerie February 3 2011, 23:22:37 UTC
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.

You said this to say, what? Excuse my grammar.

I'm not going to defend what they did. I don't know what they did. But when they shot back snark, maybe the right reaction wasn't to shoot back hate. Check their front page. Yes, they've given in, but Tycho is basically saying that he has no idea if dialogue is even possible. Which is really. Really. Really. REALLY a damn. fucking. shame.

It really seems like you're defending what they did. You're using tone argument, a tactic that's used in many feminist (and poc) arguments to derail and dismiss the concerns of the one side.

Their apology is shit and forced at best. It's also sadly the only one we'll get. Mike only "apologized" after he and his family was threatened. When Courtney was threatened, he didn't stop his fans with their threats. He did give a respectful tone and as I said, it's still an apology. He told his fans to knock the fuck off. Finally.

Jerry, however, is dismissing that there is something called rape culture to begin with. A dialogue would be possible if he was willing to admit or be open to the possibility of how our society is one that endorses rape culture. I don't even know what the hell the paragraph on hormones had to do with anything. He did, as well, admit to reading and learning new things from all of this, but there was little to no apology in all of that.

Why are you denying to others what you yourself want? Isn't that hypocrisy? I have to deal with racists, homophobes, heterosexists, and all sorts of people with horrible attributes, but to forget that they're people is an incredibly tragic repeating of horrible past history and prevents me from getting about in my day. I don't have the comfort of surrounding myself in a safe space when I go to work and I don't have the comfort of living in a safe space.

I'm having a hard time seeing 'neckbeard,' a term applied to geeks, as problematic. From the same geeks that constantly use misogynistic language and act as such. I like how you find it problematic, but don't even acknowledge how such neckbeards have been acting to the other side. Being called a neckbeard is now the same as belittling and threatening women? Lol, ok.

Again, I'm not getting in a pissing contest on what's being dealt with. Who can surround themselves in safe space? Everyone has shit they deal with and crappy pasts, yes, but if you're in a line of work where you contribute a form of media to society, be expected to take criticism and opposing views. Address those views, don't mock them and be a total shit.

Reply

taiki February 4 2011, 23:16:29 UTC
You said this to say, what? Excuse my grammar.

Because it is not actually evident from what bloggers say what kind of impact this kind of activism has had on the larger gaming community as a whole. Where's the solid data proving this to be true?

You're using tone argument, a tactic that's used in many feminist (and poc) arguments to derail and dismiss the concerns of the one side.

Yes, because when I try to have that conversation about being a little aware of people around them, they've heard it before, except someone was yelling at them. Either in real life or on the internet.

Pardon me invoking the tone argument, but, the tone others use is making my life harder by making the nature of discourse that much more difficult due to people I've never even seen or heard from before.

Jerry, however, is dismissing that there is something called rape culture to begin with. A dialogue would be possible if he was willing to admit or be open to the possibility of how our society is one that endorses rape culture. I don't even know what the hell the paragraph on hormones had to do with anything. He did, as well, admit to reading and learning new things from all of this, but there was little to no apology in all of that.

Jerry's point is that the whole notion that we endorse a rape culture isn't up for debate and the lexicon used is full of thick, impenetrable academic jargon. The arguments are all built on sacred untouchable premises. It's nearly impossible to have dialogue under those circumstances.

I'm having a hard time seeing 'neckbeard,' a term applied to geeks, as problematic. From the same geeks that constantly use misogynistic language and act as such. I like how you find it problematic, but don't even acknowledge how such neckbeards have been acting to the other side. Being called a neckbeard is now the same as belittling and threatening women? Lol, ok.

Because being petty and belittling isn't going to achieve anything? Because the very thing you're fighting against, you're doing, even if it's to a much smaller degree?

Going 55 in a 35 isn't as bad as doing 120 in a 35. You still went noticeably over the line though.

Again, I'm not getting in a pissing contest on what's being dealt with. Who can surround themselves in safe space? Everyone has shit they deal with and crappy pasts, yes, but if you're in a line of work where you contribute a form of media to society, be expected to take criticism and opposing views. Address those views, don't mock them and be a total shit.

I'm not saying they don't have to take shit, I'm just saying maybe it's not always right to go nuclear. Maybe some fights aren't worth the time and the energy.

Reply

dreaming_faerie February 5 2011, 00:00:41 UTC
So the fact that many bloggers have said themselves they aren't going to PAX or want refunds isn't enough? Mike, who said himself, that he would personally refund people because he got a lot of complaints isn't enough? I'm sorry I don't have hard, cold facts to make you feel better about all of this.

Again from the example I used - if someone steps on your toes, don't expect them to be nice about it, especially if you give them an attitude. Maybe, if people are giving you 'tone,' it's because you are not understanding them while pretending that you do or you're being so thick-headed that you're dismissing their point. Or it could be you're being an ass and just letting things go in one ear and out the other.

Jerry's notion is that he doesn't want to believe in rape culture so he can keep making rape jokes. It's impossible to talk to someone who wants to put their fingers in their ears and go 'lalala.' It can be talked about and it clearly shows he didn't read or learn shit on rape culture.

But you're defending and supporting those that originally were being petty and belittling people. That's rich. I went over the line? You're acting like you're entitled to not be called out or called a name for being an asshole. You, a white, cis-gendered, hetero-assumed (You may be bi, but people assume you're hetero) male, is trying to play victim against a biracial female. In the geek community (Hell, in any community at all). That's real fucking rich.

Some fights are worth the time and energy. If people just choose to stay quiet, then shit wouldn't change at all. Voices wouldn't be heard. Sometimes you need to voice out, even if its 'going nuclear,' against some assholes who think they're in the right to mock the people that tried to educate them. Others will hear and learn then.

Reply

taiki February 5 2011, 01:24:26 UTC
So the fact that many bloggers have said themselves they aren't going to PAX or want refunds isn't enough? Mike, who said himself, that he would personally refund people because he got a lot of complaints isn't enough? I'm sorry I don't have hard, cold facts to make you feel better about all of this.

I ask for proof of efficacy of the methodology used by social justice advocates, you don't have it, and I'm the bad guy?

Jerry's notion is that he doesn't want to believe in rape culture so he can keep making rape jokes.

How did you derive this from what he said? What he said was, quote, The perspectives in play, the lenses, are too different: one side believes that not according the issue of rape the proper respect fuels a kind of perverse, perpetual engine called rape culture. There is a vast, specific lexicon and hundreds of tacit assumptions that gird it. The other side (that’s me, but not just me) believes that when it comes to expression nothing is off the table. It is the creator’s prerogative to create something - even something grotesque - out of anything they can find.

You're acting like you're entitled to not be called out or called a name for being an asshole.

Yes. Exactly. Because that's horribly childish to start talking about what a person is, rather than what they're discussing. This is the adhominem fallacy actually at work.

But you're defending and supporting those that originally were being petty and belittling people. That's rich. I went over the line? You're acting like you're entitled to not be called out or called a name for being an asshole. You, a white, cis-gendered, hetero-assumed (You may be bi, but people assume you're hetero) male, is trying to play victim against a biracial female. In the geek community (Hell, in any community at all). That's real fucking rich.

I have done no such thing. I have never said what they have done is right, I have never come to their defense. What I am saying is that the other side is very wrong, and that is independent of whether or not what Jerry and Mike did was right. However, Jerry's comments that discussion is pretty impossible kind of back up what I'm saying so I'm citing his commentary as to what happens considering the mechanism at play. Input A gets Output B. I'm pointing at Output B and saying this is wrong.

You also assume I am white. I am not. I am half asian(With long hair and a hispanic last name, so people don't know whether I'm Japanese, Mexican or Native American). You also assume that I am cisgendered acting. I am not. Not by a goddamned long shot.

Your whole 'tone argument' thing is bullshit. Right from the start, you're dismissing and derailing the initial argument.

EVEN IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE FUCKING TONE CARD IT WOULDN'T WORK.

People were civil at first. As I said and in the timeline THAT YOU POSTED, it showed bloggers objecting to the comic. People explained why. People tweeted Gabe and Tycho (especially Gabe) and told them what was wrong and tried to educate them. They were 'civil' and 'nice.'

I know you're done with the thread, but I have a simple question. This is a question that has come from a community where the stakes of activism are pretty high.

Have you ever been convinced when someone throws that much hostility towards you? Shakesville and other blogs are perpetually at 11. I'm not thoroughly convinced that all they received was 'nice'. Being civil is not throwing a trashcan through the window. You can protest and still be civil.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up