online gaming sexism stories

[Pink Gregory]

"what's wrong, too fat to find a boyfriend so trying to win all the fat nerds online?"

The guy clearly lacked a sense of irony...

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Much in the same way that I don't think someone calling another guy "gay" is always homophobic or someone an n-word is always racist, I don't think some instances of using derogatory language to women are sexist. For a simpler explanation, much of what I hear in that regard comes off as the same mentality that has people looking at physical features and mocking them. Calling someone a big-eared big nosed four eyes is a specific insult directed at a person and trying to use their identity against them. To that effect, while the people who do are certainly assholes, I can't call them or their actions as such racist, sexist or whatever.

This is something we discussed a little earlier in the thread. Imagine you're a member of a minority race, and you're walking down the street. Two different people shout racial slurs at you. One was doing it because he was a racist. One was doing it because he thought it was funny. Does it make ANY DIFFERENCE TO YOU whatsoever? All you hear is the slurs.

Now imagine you're in an atmosphere that is territorial as hell, where you're used to being judged/attacked for your gender, or race, or sexuality, and imagine you're just hearing a BARRAGE of this shit on a daily basis. Are you really going to give a shit if the person on the other end of the insult is a "legitimate racist", or if they just like winding you up? And does it even matter? It's a hostile atmosphere either way.

What I hate about this particular argument is it seems to be a way for people to "debunk" sexism as a concept. "I bet 90% of those sexists are actually fake sexists! They're only trolling!" What difference does it make? Whether I'm doing it out of malice or simply a terrible sense of humor, the result is the same.

If you disagree, would love to go deeper on the topic. Jiust please make sure you demonstrate the ability to read and understand where I am coming from here and don't just try to strawman the position as poor Smeatza up there seems to have been.

Smeatza has only himself to blame. If he wants to be seen as taking a rational perspective on the issue, he needs to not litter his post with emotionally charged and accusatory language.

Also, might want to tie down your preconceptions about internet relationship a little. You know, data about how many start online nowadays and all that. Casue, you really kinda come off as a twat when you talk about people asking others out online.

Uh...what?

I've not only advocated for online dating on this very website, I've used it. What is that you're saying? About preconceptions?

I'd tone the language down as well, hero.

 

[Smeatza]

There are a lot of places people do not go with the expectation or intention of being hit on, relentlessly. I imagine XBOX live is one of those places. Really, though, what's your stake in it? If a nerd asks a girl for a date in an offbeat setting, and said girl says "That was creepy", what damage has been done? A nerd got rejected and a girl got creeped out. I'm not really sure why this provoked a passionate jeremiad about horrible, horrible people and the suffering of nerds.

It's not a question of cold hard practicality, it's a question of morals, what's right and wrong.
You're saying it's wrong for someone to pursue a relationship on the internet (as far as I can tell)
I'm saying it's wrong to demonise someone for doing so.
I mean, if I go to the library I don't expect to get hit on, but that doesn't make it creepy if it happens. Its the manner that it is done that can make it creepy.

Therefore if someone hits on you online, in a respectful and polite manner, it should not be seen as creepy or classified as harassment (as long as it's doesn't continue after a rejection). And the poor lad that doesn't have the courage to try it in real life certainly shouldn't be demonised, when he could be one of these abusive people that does sexually harass others online.

In fact I'd go as far as to say that demonising this figurative nerd would push him more towards the ways of the misogynist mindset and discourage him from being polite and respectful towards women in future.

If you will re-read my post you will see I was referring to the "polite, respectful but socially insecure."

Buddy, YOU need to re-read your post.

....please don't adopt the witch hunting attitude of www.fatuglyorslutty.com

Anyone who feels the need to demonize polite, respectful, socially insecure nerds who can only pluck up the courage to ask out a girl online, are horrible horrible people who have much bigger problems than said insecure nerds.

I once went on this web site where there were all these people posting comments saying "all male gamers are misogynist." And accusing people with any kind of social insecurity of being "creepy" for trying to flirt online.

And every time the topic of sexism came up it was used as an excuse for mass man-hating, especially from the self hating males on the forum.

Bolded some of your generalizations/hyperbolic assertions for you.

Look up the phrase Tongue in cheek, realise that my entire second paragraph was just that, then hang your head in shame.

I will re-iterate, I am no defending those who harass others online. I am criticising the demonisation of the polite, respectful but socially insecure. Those who seek a mutual online relationship and get labeled as "creepy" for doing so.

You could've probably chosen a less histrionic way of going about it if that was your aim.

You could have used the word dramatic instead of histrionic, but you didn't.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You're saying it's wrong for someone to pursue a relationship on the internet (as far as I can tell)

Where the hell did you get THAT from?

I mean, if I go to the library I don't expect to get hit on, but that doesn't make it creepy if it happens. Its the manner that it is done that can make it creepy.

"Creepy" is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

Therefore if someone hits on you online, in a respectful and polite manner, it should not be seen as creepy or classified as harassment (as long as it's doesn't continue after a rejection). And the poor lad that doesn't have the courage to try it in real life certainly shouldn't be demonised, when he could be one of these abusive people that does sexually harass others online.

Again, this is all in the eye of the beholder. A lot of guys think they're being respectful and polite, and they're being anything but. You're worried about the socially awkward boy? How about the girl with extreme anxiety? He feels sad, she feels threatened. It's a matter of looking at the opposite side of the ledger and understanding where they are coming from, instead of characterizing their behavior as "a witch hunt" and "demonizing" them.

Look up the phrase Tongue in cheek, realise that my entire second paragraph was just that, then hang your head in shame.

I will as soon as I'm finished rolling my eyes.

 

[runic knight]

This is something we discussed a little earlier in the thread. Imagine you're a member of a minority race, and you're walking down the street. Two different people shout racial slurs at you. One was doing it because he was a racist. One was doing it because he thought it was funny. Does it make ANY DIFFERENCE TO YOU whatsoever? All you hear is the slurs.

Why don't we try something else. You are playing a game and see in text chat you are being called a racist slur. Is that racist? Now, you don't know if the person calling you the slur is of your same race or not, but apparently, by the logic above, it is how the slur is interpreted and not who said it or the intent behind it. Thus, you may have someone racist against their own race based solely on how you interpret the slur. With no other information to go off of, and by your own rules, that is the only conclusion you can come to and it is a bit flawed I think.

Going back to your example. In both cases the slur is insulting. In both cases, the goal was to insult so thus, they succeeded. When has it ever been the case that the intent to insult was the line of racism? Is then, every insult out there just some other "ism". I don't think so.

I find reference to minority a trivial and unimportant detail as there are places where the population levels are reversed. Hailing from central detroit, is being called a cracker only racist there because a white person would be outnumbered by blacks? Is it not because as a national whole they are still a minority? Would then calling an asian person some slur not be racist because of the large numbers hailing from asia world wide? Does racism change based on your geographical location? Racism is regardless minority status. Minority status and racism are separate things and one should NEVER assume they relate in a way you have used.

Now imagine you're in an atmosphere that is territorial as hell, where you're used to being judged/attacked for your gender, or race, or sexuality, and imagine you're just hearing a BARRAGE of this shit on a daily basis. Are you really going to give a shit if the person on the other end of the insult is a "legitimate racist", or if they just like winding you up? And does it even matter? It's a hostile atmosphere either way.

It is hostile. But racism isn't hostility either. Now, hostility against a selective race or races of people for being of that race or races of people it sure is, but that isn't what is being said here, now is it? What you describe is unbiased hostility. Asshole move, certainly, but not racist or sexist. Thus it is wrong for hostility, should be called hostility but... that is it. It isn't hostility and racism just because the one being hostile to is of a different race, nor even if they reference the other person's race.

What I hate about this particular argument is it seems to be a way for people to "debunk" sexism as a concept. "I bet 90% of those sexists are actually fake sexists! They're only trolling!" What difference does it make? Whether I'm doing it out of malice or simply a terrible sense of humor, the result is the same.

The difference is simple. Lets use an analogy. Grats, you got a phd and are tasked with curing a disease. First step is to identify the symptoms and determine the underlying causes. (no real medical knowledge here, this is just for concept.). See, the whole point of signifying what is what here is to better address the issue and be able to actually fix it. Assholes online, pretty good issue to tackle I think. You don't stop someone having pneumonia by just giving them a cough suppressant. Likewise, you don't some the issue of hostility by saying "don't be sexist". Hell, you weaken the power of the word by tossing it around casually where it does not actually belong. The terms racist or sexist implies a belief in the one called it, a bigotry and prejudice. They are an emotionally loaded terms that instantly causes those called it to feel well and deservedly ashamed (aside from the ones that are proud of their ignorance) You are saying an action is sexist determined on how it is received and yet an action described as such is reflected on the one doing it. In short, you are saying how someone is perceived determines their actual prejudices and biases over their own agency. Can you see why I find this the wrong way to go about handling it? If I see your actions (such as your speaking) as offensive, I can now say I know your motivations for it as ones of bigotry. Or to put it as simply as I can "This is because I am black, isn't it?!" It is a rather dishonest representation of things.

Smeatza has only himself to blame. If he wants to be seen as taking a rational perspective on the issue, he needs to not litter his post with emotionally charged and accusatory language.

Says the one supporting the use of the term sexist. Says the one talking bad about the poor fools who seek internet relationships, regardless how awkwardly. You are hardly a paragon of rational perspective here.

Uh...what?

I've not only advocated for online dating on this very website, I've used it. What is that you're saying? About preconceptions?

I'd tone the language down as well, hero.

Based off of this remark here...hmmm... that is strange, can't find it now. Well I suppose I recant my snappishness there, as what I was responding to is not there anymore or was mixed up with something else. Was something relating to nerds social habits and tieing it into online. -shrug- well regardless, not there now so no point to go deeper on a non-topic

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The difference is simple. Lets use an analogy. Grats, you got a phd and are tasked with curing a disease. First step is to identify the symptoms and determine the underlying causes. (no real medical knowledge here, this is just for concept.). See, the whole point of signifying what is what here is to better address the issue and be able to actually fix it. Assholes online, pretty good issue to tackle I think. You don't stop someone having pneumonia by just giving them a cough suppressant. Likewise, you don't some the issue of hostility by saying "don't be sexist". Hell, you weaken the power of the word by tossing it around casually where it does not actually belong. The terms racist or sexist implies a belief in the one called it, a bigotry and prejudice. They are an emotionally loaded terms that instantly causes those called it to feel well and deservedly ashamed (aside from the ones that are proud of their ignorance) You are saying an action is sexist determined on how it is received and yet an action described as such is reflected on the one doing it. In short, you are saying how someone is perceived determines their actual prejudices and biases over their own agency. Can you see why I find this the wrong way to go about handling it? If I see your actions (such as your speaking) as offensive, I can now say I know your motivations for it as ones of bigotry. Or to put it as simply as I can "This is because I am black, isn't it?!" It is a rather dishonest representation of things.

If you're a gay man, and years of societal shaming and abuse have caused you to feel ashamed of your sexuality and/or afraid of being confronted by potentially dangerous bigots, having someone shout "******" at you is a potentially traumatizing and/or threatening occurrence, regardless of their intent. And regardless of their intent, they have contributed to an atmosphere where shouting "******" at someone online is not only commonplace but perceived as "hilarious" by a portion of the community. So whether or not you personally harbor homophobia or a hatred of gays, you are contributing to an atmosphere that is threatening and/or damaging to them. So if you're a woman and you log into a game and it's 24/7 SHOW ME YOUR TITS, you're in a sexist atmosphere which you can correctly identify as sexist. Whether or not each individual is, in a highly technical sense, a "legitimate sexist" is kind of irrelevant to that person.

I understand your point about how to go about addressing the issue, but how do you really address the issue of the "U MAD BRO" demographic? What suggestion would you have for "handling it" in that case? Shall we stop public censure of racism or sexism or homophobia on the off chance the person expressing it isn't really being serious and secretly delights in our outrage?

Says the one supporting the use of the term sexist. Says the one talking bad about the poor fools who seek internet relationships, regardless how awkwardly. You are hardly a paragon of rational perspective here.

Is this the I'm Rubber and You're Glue rebuttal? Seriously man. You make some high-handed comments about "wading into the cesspool", immediately call someone a twat, misapprehend their position, and then when corrected on it you start lashing out defensively. THIS is a fucking straw man. However, let's do this instead of continuing this juvenile slap and tickle fight. *I* will address my earlier statements, since perhaps it is *I* who is responsible for a miscommunication.

1. I think I've adequately explained my position on "sexist is as sexist does".

2. I do not consider people who seek internet relationships to be "poor fools". I think if your approaches are rebuffed, you are best advised to reconsider your approaches, rather than slamming the person rebuffing you and declaring them horrible, horrible people though.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

I was playing Dawn of War 2 ranked 3v3 with 2 steam friends who just so happened to be boyfriend and girlfriend. Things were fine while we played but a few days after they told me to check out her steam page. Just a wall of fresh accounts posting really awful comments all happening in the same weak.

They both had the same avatar, which was them hugging close for the camera with some basic MS paint editing to differentiate who was who. This was likely how they figured she was a girl. I guess they were trying to find out who we were? Perhaps planning to harass us all, but decided to focus on one member of our group (we ranked frequently in DoW 2). The guy got some abuse too, but it was still directed at her.

She was quite upset about it, it wasn't something that happened to her before. They contacted steam and things were cleared up and those accounts were all banned. It was pretty shocking the sheer quantity of abusive messages she received in such a short space of time, but we figured it was either one guy or one team who just spammed new accounts... though I'm not sure that's even possible.

Either way there was some amount of dedication involved, which is just disgusting given the fruits of their labour.

On a later occasion, we were playing TF2. WE were using microphones for teamspeak. It was a larger group at first so we were using the in game voice chat for convenience, but as the night wore on it was just us 3 again. We wandered off from our starting server only to find one server after another giving her grief because she's a girl (and one who thought she was a he and only 12). After a few servers and several appeals to admins to sort shit out, we finally found a string of pleasant servers who were friendly.

It spoiled the night for her and she was very quiet for the rest of the session. We could have played for a few more hours but they pulled out. A message over steam later said she went to bed and was really upset about the shit that happened.

See, typically she doesn't use a mic because they live together, but when they play with friends, like me, she puts one on for the sake of co-ordination. In this case, the sexist abuse actually damaged our ability to play together as she started to use the mic less frequently and was a lot more hush when she did.

This fucking nonsense is appalling and I fly off the rails when I hear it happen. I can't stand it. I don't see either of these friends come up on steam anymore, but I won't assume they were scared off it due to said abuse. They had careers and likely went further ahead with their relationship and left the hobby behind. But frankly I don't think she regretted getting away from online competitive scenes.

This was the most direct experience I've had with sexism in online play. Another experience though something I wasn't there first hand to see it was my sister. She played CoD with her boyriend for a time and once she used a Mic. After a torrent of abuse she put down the mic and never took it up again. She described the feeling of hearing such unrestrained vile language targeted directly at her as being "very unsettling" and made her feel "physically unwell".

There is no defence for this nonsense... not even in the playful sense.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Sure it is, but nobody will give a single fuck if you find something creepy or not.
Besides that, I've seen many girls use "creepy" as a euphemism for "guy who hit on me that I didn't find attractive" when the individual in question was not creepy by any reasonable measure.

You're moving the goalposts, and actually in the wrong direction, because the socially awkward boy in this scenario still has the same fear of rejection, but the girl with anxiety can just turn the game off and delete the message, no harm has come to her, and she can carry on as normal with no damage caused, she has nothing to fear as it is a situation that she is in control of, the boy however is still rejected, and has to deal with the resultant bad feelings (they may be diminished, but they're still there).

You're not doing your argument any favours here.

Balberoth, I'm not actually having a discussion with you, so I'm not sure why you're continually weighing in. I get it. You disagree with me. If you want, I can amend every paragraph with "Balberoth disagrees with this" and save you a lot of typing.

 

[aguspal]

Oh yeah this thread is getting pretty interesting and fun.

I dont have a fucking idea how to cntrobute to it so sorry about ath.

 

[Frankster]

I was playing an rts game with one of my female friends and some online buddies.

The female player was kicking ass and saved the base of one of the dudes, who then responded "thats why your "my" mary" (mary isnt her name but for the purposes of this story lets call her that), prompting another guy to butt in "she isnt yours" and then...they actually started arguing over who she belonged to and who deserves her the most o0

One of the younger dudes, 15 yr old chipped in merrily "guys dont fight, she is probably ugly and fat anyways" as they were arguing. Meanwhile mary had not said ONE thing in the entire game thus far beyond "^^" at being thanked for saving team mates base.

I have never been so ashamed of my gender as i was that time. Needless to say, mary wasnt happy and felt horrible and we didnt play another game, privately she told me she would change her future usernames so they dont include any clear indications of gender in the future to avoid this. And so this has been our policy henceforth even if i dont like to lie, its avoided a lot of hassle. Plus mary seems to greatly enjoy being considered a guy online and seeing how we guys are like when we think theres no women around xD But yeh its kinda fucked up that she felt the need to resort to such measures in the first place.

On the opposite end, there was a time i made my gender female online just to see how people would treat me different. At first i enjoyed it as people were much more agreeable with what i said no matter how silly it was, and whenever someone was nasty to me id have other guys jump in to defend me xD It was quite intoxicating having "summon white knights" spell.

And then i defended a guy who was being bullied online by 2 others, and here is where it got creepy...The guy i defended then pmed me this epic tldr about how i was this good person and how i deserv only the nicest guy, that he understood me (dropped some mentions of my imaginary family and other fake bio details i dropped in other places indicating he spent a good 30 mins researching me and my background) and so forth, etc...And if i wanted to be his online girlfriend amongst other freaky stuff. What made it worst was guy was so desperate...Felt really horrible.

I deleted all my accounts with female gender and knew never again to argue with a girl when she says she has it rougher online. Not that i ever did, but you get the point.

 

[Phasmal]

This is good stuff guys. throughout say a day and throughout a month would you guys say this kind of thing happens?

It depends.
It can go without happening for ages and then happen several times in the same day.
However, most female gamers learn to avoid it.
I don't use voice (I use a voice program with friends when I play, no strangers), my username isn't overtly feminine and I don't `out` myself unless I have to.
Through this, I can avoid it pretty well.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Excellent, that'll save you having to address anything I said, lucky for you, eh? ;-)

If you want to consider this to me fleeing from the prodigious intellectual heft of your furious rebuttals, that is your prerogative. I'm sorry Balberoth. I lack the wit or the wherewithal to combat your incisive nitpicking. It is sheer, stark terror. I'm intimidated.

*Balberoth Disagrees With This Post*

 

[Smeatza]

You're saying it's wrong for someone to pursue a relationship on the internet (as far as I can tell)

Where the hell did you get THAT from?

You, and other people seem to be reaching the same conclusion.

I mean, if I go to the library I don't expect to get hit on, but that doesn't make it creepy if it happens. Its the manner that it is done that can make it creepy.

"Creepy" is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

It is, but I am well within my rights to judge whether their judgement is fair or not.

Therefore if someone hits on you online, in a respectful and polite manner, it should not be seen as creepy or classified as harassment (as long as it's doesn't continue after a rejection). And the poor lad that doesn't have the courage to try it in real life certainly shouldn't be demonised, when he could be one of these abusive people that does sexually harass others online.

Again, this is all in the eye of the beholder. A lot of guys think they're being respectful and polite, and they're being anything but. You're worried about the socially awkward boy? How about the girl with extreme anxiety? He feels sad, she feels threatened. It's a matter of looking at the opposite side of the ledger and understanding where they are coming from, instead of characterizing their behavior as "a witch hunt" and "demonizing" them.

I'm not referring to those who think they are being respectful but are not, I am referring to those who are.
I have said that many times.

I didn't have to look for long to find this
http://fatuglyorslutty.com/2012/08/03/a-date-for-every-console/

I have seen many instances both in this thread and on the linked website, where people have been labeled creepy, misogynist and, yes demonised for such innocent behaviour. If you disagree that message is innocent/non threatening then we are at an impasse.

Look up the phrase Tongue in cheek, realise that my entire second paragraph was just that, then hang your head in shame.

I will as soon as I'm finished rolling my eyes.

Lol, touche.

 

[runic knight]

If you're a gay man, and years of societal shaming and abuse have caused you to feel ashamed of your sexuality and/or afraid of being confronted by potentially dangerous bigots, having someone shout "******" at you is a potentially traumatizing and/or threatening occurrence, regardless of their intent. And regardless of their intent, they have contributed to an atmosphere where shouting "******" at someone online is not only commonplace but perceived as "hilarious" by a portion of the community. So whether or not you personally harbor homophobia or a hatred of gays, you are contributing to an atmosphere that is threatening and/or damaging to them. So if you're a woman and you log into a game and it's 24/7 SHOW ME YOUR TITS, you're in a sexist atmosphere which you can correctly identify as sexist. Whether or not each individual is, in a highly technical sense, a "legitimate sexist" is kind of irrelevant to that person.

The threat is coming from the potentially violence, not the insult. They are separate. Furthermore, motivations for violence tends to be a lot narrower then it is from an insult. While I can understand the atmosphere you speak of, I have to disagree as you lump in two things to the same category. A threat of violence and a fear of violence is something well worth stopping, universally.
The use of a term with a history though is, like it or not, merely the culture of language. Meanings of words change. The atmosphere you describe for women is one of harassment. It is not that the atmosphere is sexist so much as it is harassing that is the problem. What you describe IS harassment and as already agreed upon by everyone in this thread, harassment is bad, universally. That it happens to a woman doesn't make it suddenly any worse. It is still bad, still needs to be stopped.

I understand your point about how to go about addressing the issue, but how do you really address the issue of the "U MAD BRO" demographic? What suggestion would you have for "handling it" in that case? Shall we stop public censure of racism or sexism or homophobia on the off chance the person expressing it isn't really being serious and secretly delights in our outrage?

How about basic moderation, liberal use of block/ignore/mute/report functions and a report/repeal system that is fair and functional. Rather then censor people, have their actions and words be seen, and then judged if appropriate for the community they are in. Best part about all of this, it is not only protecting all parts of the demographic but it applies nicely to cover all bases based on individual guidelines set up by the individual games. I would rather take and deal with assholes for being assholes first, and then see what is left of the racist and sexist variety. My guess, not really any at all. If you get rid of the ones who harass regardless of gender, would there be the same atmosphere you mentioned before? If you get rid of the ones threatening violence regardless of sexual orientation, would there be the same atmosphere? Once you untie the two aspects and deal with the true threat, I have to imagine things improving kinda universally.

Is this the I'm Rubber and You're Glue rebuttal? Seriously man. You make some high-handed comments about "wading into the cesspool", immediately call someone a twat, misapprehend their position, and then when corrected on it you start lashing out defensively. THIS is a fucking straw man. However, let's do this instead of continuing this juvenile slap and tickle fight. *I* will address my earlier statements, since perhaps it is *I* who is responsible for a miscommunication.

1. I think I've adequately explained my position on "sexist is as sexist does".

2. I do not consider people who seek internet relationships to be "poor fools". I think if your approaches are rebuffed, you are best advised to reconsider your approaches, rather than slamming the person rebuffing you and declaring them horrible, horrible people though.

Not really "I'm rubber" approach so much as "glass houses" warning. I wasn't the only one who got that vibe from your posts either though.Aand no one is perfect, but you were the one sounding rather sanctimonious here. My initial comment about the cesspool was more a smart-assed remark then, say, a direct response to someone with an air of superiority in the matter.

1. You have though I find flaws in it, particularly as you marriage aspects of the atmosphere you describe together and then point to a component as permanent representative of your per-conjoined whole.
2. If you look back at my post, you will see I had added a bit after my initial post. I tend to edit after posting to make sure I don't make spelling errors too badly and to make sure I didn't miss something. I assume, as I had to copy and paste that last part after I had already quoted you, that you do the same.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You, and other people seem to be reaching the same conclusion.

We're going to need to chalk this up to a miscommunication on my part, because I do not believe that at all.

It is, but I am well within my rights to judge whether their judgement is fair or not.

Fair is kind of irrelevant, because creepy is such a subjective term. What if I find a guy annoying? How you can you say whether that is "fair" or not? What I find annoying is totally down to my own preferences. If someone finds you off-putting, that's really up to them.

I have seen many instances both in this thread and on the linked website, where people have been labeled creepy, misogynist and, yes demonised for such innocent behaviour. If you disagree that message is innocent/non threatening then we are at an impasse.

That is a cherry picked example, though. There are PLENTY of examples going the other way. I still maintain that it is not fair to characterize the entire website as a "witch hunt". If it is, they're finding plenty of genuine witches.

*Balberoth Disagrees With This Post*