The Big Picture: With Great Power

Recommended Videos

The Material Sheep

New member
Nov 12, 2009
339
0
0
TomWest said:
> "Whiteknighting"

This isn't a term I've heard before.

Is it, as context suggests, a term used by misogynist jerks for males who aren't misogynist jerks because they can't conceive of any male *not* being a misogynist jerk unless they had ulterior motives?
Misogynist.

A term I've heard quite often. It use to have real meaning but in our day in age it has rapidly deteriorated.

It's a pretty meaningless word at this point because it's used in near every case describing someone who has criticisms of any form of feminism. A categorizing term to make sure the user feels good about himself or herself for not being one of 'those' people. Yes, lets defame all ideological resistance to our ideas and see how far it gets us.

Historically it never has good results.

In all seriousness though, there are real misogynists and there are critics of feminism as a theory. Feminism as a theory and a lot of frequent posters don't see the difference a lot of the time.
 

AstaresPanda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
441
0
0
you have really lost me siding with that women/pop culture critic and feminist. Sorry but if you really do buy into all her crap. Im not not falling into that trap. the double standards are amazing.
 

TomWest

New member
Sep 16, 2007
41
0
0
th3dark3rsh33p said:
I choose to be around people who don't support stupid and irrational behaviors. That is all you have at the end of the day.
Um, no, that isn't all you have. What you have is the ability to *publicly* make it clear that you find certain behavior repulsive. Odds are that most of the people around do as well, and may well chip in once someone's been brave enough to call out the behavior for what it is.

I'll use an analogy. When I was young, drunk driving wasn't a big thing. When the government first brought in real penalties for it, most people felt it was way overkill and would scoop up decent people who didn't deserve it.

Cut to 10 years later in university. I remember an acquaintance getting ready to drive who *definitely* shouldn't be. He's a popular guy and there's a sort of silence as he's getting ready to leave. Somebody offers to drive, but he turns them down. He's fine. He's been doing this for years without a problem.

One of the young women just snaps and makes it clear she finds it *really* uncool. He gets annoyed, looks around for support, and it becomes instantly clear when there's either a shaking of head or refusal to meet eyes, that everyone else agrees he's being an idiot. He got annoyed, and stomped off, driving home.

But after that, he always had one of his non-drinking friends drive. Never acknowledged anything (at least where I saw him), but the behavior changed.

Most of us have occasionally witnessed the bad behavior that Bob is talking about, but there's usually only a slightly uncomfortable silence, which is easy enough for the clueless to see as approval. I think our ethical duty is to make certain that the offender clearly understands how acceptable we find his actions. Personally, I don't feel the need to denigrate the offender, just the offense.
 

Quadocky

New member
Aug 30, 2012
383
0
0
I like this video because all the posting in here shows me that MovieBob is pretty much right on the money, as usual.

You nerds got a lot of growing up to do :V

When someone does something obviously awful, you don't just sit there and pretend that its 'okay' for whatever reason. NO its not okay, and you do yourself and your fellows a disservice by not calling out awfulness for what it is!
 

McMarbles

New member
May 7, 2009
1,566
0
0
theultimateend said:
JimB said:
So you're saying that instead of hypocritically embracing an atmosphere of exclusion that we have defined ourselves as the victims of, geeks ought to try to fight the demon that has plagued us for so long?

You're a madman, Mr. Chipman! A madman!
It certainly worked for African American Culture.

You won't catch them viciously fighting against gay rights.

It blows my mind.

I think that's just the thing. Once people get into a position of power they pick up the reigns of the people they fought against in the first place.

Maybe something about us all being the same at the core or whatever. I dunno.

Be nice. That's my advice.
To paraphrase another geek icon...

We're dicks. It's instinctive. But the instinct can be fought. We're human beings, with the dickery of a million savage years on our hands... but we can stop it. We can admit that we're dicks, but we're not going to be dicks today. That's all it takes. Knowing that we're not going to be dicks. Today.
 

TheFinalFantasyWolf

New member
Dec 23, 2010
361
0
0
Father Time said:
TheFinalFantasyWolf said:
TomWest said:
> "Whiteknighting"

This isn't a term I've heard before.

Is it, as context suggests, a term used by misogynist jerks for males who aren't misogynist jerks because they can't conceive of any male *not* being a misogynist jerk unless they had ulterior motives?
Pretty much.
Not quite putting a good footing for the male population, considering that they (said misogynist in these scenarios) are suggesting that males are just constant attention starved sex fiends.

(*note* this same specimen may also be the one to claim the existence of "fake gamer girls". The very notion of a woman doing something without seeking his attention or approval may be daunting to this creature. Avoid revealing such shocking information.)
TheFinalFantasyWolf said:
Look, not that there couldn't be SOME instances where that is the case.
Backpedal! Backpedal for all your might!
I honestly I had no idea it was possible to be accused of backpedaling out of A JOKE.
In fact I even went through the effort of separating my the two statements, to emphasise the difference between them.

My joke: Exaggerated perspective with animal planet reference for humorous effect.

My statement: Regarding my opinion of the terms "white knight" and "fake gamer girl".

Ah Escapist, please, never fail to surprise me on how anal some people can be. :)
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,497
0
0
xaszatm said:
So...because it was always a cesspool, we should be proud of it? We should be proud that online gaming is full of misogynistic, racist, homophobic garbage? The fact that we are trying to get rid of this is a bad thing? Is really asking people to think before they open their mouths special treatment? To show common decency? To realize that other people are PEOPLE?
Are you seriously asking if advocating "to get rid of [dissenting opinions]" is a bad thing? I know this subject is generally discouraged from bringing up, but do you really want to go down that path? Ein Volk, ein Rich, ein Furher.
Now I realize that you may have good intentions, but the moment you start demanding that dissenting opinions should be completely silenced, you start to walk a very fine line between having good intentions and repeating the mistakes of the past [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism].

As for how people should communicate to one another, its one thing to ask that a person not say something but its quiet another the demand or expect people to conform to your ideas and censor themselves, because it IS special treatment to be forced to give special consideration to the feelings of one group of people over that of another group of people.

xaszatm said:
I literally cannot comprehend your thinking. Maybe I'm too naive, but I thought that the Cross Assault guy was wrong. That mean-spirited name calling WASN'T part of our culture and if it was, SHOULDN'T be. But here I'm seeing that it is something we should be proud of?!? And when anyone wants people to not to such a thing is "White Knighting?" "Giving Special Treatment?"
Again, you don't have to like that part of the culture, but the idea that things that you find offensive should be completely banned isn't going to sit well with most people-or as Steve Fry summarized it... [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqPcjm-X5GQ]


xaszatm said:
1. Yes, someone can. Someone can use those words without hating homosexuals. However, it must also be said that words have consequences. Saying terms like fag and gay in such hateful manner can and will be taken in the same manner one says N***** and C*****.
2. Okay, so that is a good excuse for their behavior? The fact that they are afraid of what they might say might offend women? That speaks to a bigger social problem.
3. The reason people ask people to watch what they say is because of history. Stick and stones may break bones, but words can show underlining hatreds. Just look at America during the civil rights movement when words BECAME sticks and stones. Watch how watching a black person hang became like a family gathering. Watch the casual misogyny many senators make when restricting women's rights. The thing with words is, if you say it enough times, you start to believe its true, and that can take humanity to truly dark places.
1.First off the words are ****** and Cracker(?), not N***** and C*****. Second off, I must repeat the question that Stephen Fry has proposed above, so what if a person finds those words offensive? They can just mute the person or say something back that is equally offensive.
2. True, the social problem is that people are overly concerned about the consequences of being demonized for voicing an dissenting thought/form of humor/ect.
3.Almost got it, but it goes "Sticks and Stones can break my bones, but WORDS CAN NEVER HURT ME", and while that may not always be the case, fortunately people can just mute those who they don't care to listen to. As for the rest of your comment, lol. You truly give Xboxlive more credit than it deserves if you seriously think that people trash talking on COD could ever amount to the passing of racist/misogynistic federal laws in the United States or any country for that matter.

Finally I'll leave you with this video, it's quiet relevant to the topic and its something that could really do you some good to match and consider...

 

MeChaNiZ3D

New member
Aug 30, 2011
3,104
0
0
Oh please. Defending things at the core of your hobby from people criticising them, and you, as sexist is hardly exclusionary. If you want to play Mario come on in and take a seat, but don't then fucking complain about the characterisation of characters that serve no other purpose than to create a simple motivation that doesn't have to be explained, and to be a catalyst for jumping on mushrooms and turtles.

It's no secret that there are a lot of abusive dickheads out there (not trolls, those are people pretending to be abusive dickheads). But their verbal tendancies generally have nothing to do with why some characters or games are a certain way, and I'm perfectly within my rights to disagree that there is some sort of inbuilt casual sexism everywhere in my hobby, and people who think similarly aren't a stain on overall credibility or acting immaturely.

itsthesheppy said:
Jacco said:
Christ. This was pretty much a sociology class in 6 minutes. I hate those stupid terms like "cisgender" cause it just adds to the idea of difference. If people truly want a unified equal human species, we need to stop making up stupid meaningless terms like that.
Those terms do have meaning to people who are different from you. Accepting that reality and adopting it into your worldview is a big step towards maturity and understanding. Spend less time fighting against that is meaningful for others, and spend more time trying to work those differences in perspective into your overall worldview.
I'm allowed to reject a meaning I don't think needs to exist. Otherwise what do 'man' and 'woman' even mean? Without the assumption that unless you specifically say otherwise, they are as you would expect, they don't have meaning to describe gender. It's a matter of whether you want to use 'cis' and rope yourself into affixing every instance of a gender description with a suffix or just use the standard terms unless you mean otherwise. Why should someone make a word and everyone else be immature for not adopting it, because that person or group finds it meaningful? Can they not be immature for complicating language to pander to their own needs when they could be a little less pretentious and use the words we have? I'm all for describing people as transgendered if that's the case, but cisgender is the status quo, and it is generally understood that that's what you're referring to when you just use the straight term 'man' or 'woman'.
 

Raioken18

New member
Dec 18, 2009
336
0
0
AstaresPanda said:
you have really lost me siding with that women/pop culture critic and feminist. Sorry but if you really do buy into all her crap. Im not not falling into that trap. the double standards are amazing.
I actually think comments like this are part of the problem, it's basically saying that due to one person badly arguing a point that it is inherently wrong. Anita's videos are terrible for a myriad of reasons, but there is an underlying issue of anti-women culture in videogames and only by educating others will it have a chance at being resolved. Now she isn't educating people directly, the way she tries to get her point across is terribly confusing. But the hatred associated with her as a woman gamer talking about feminism, even before most people had even seen the videos highlights the inability of male gamers to deal with women as gamers with their own opinions.

Also... I dislike when people say "I know girls who play CoD", I think the potential for a more widespread and socially acceptable female gamer culture lies in games designed specifically for women. Of course this is based in my own experience and observations that your average woman will go towards the more calm and recreational type games as opposed to the more hardcore competitive style ones.

Now... i'm going to make a really controversial statement.

The Sims, it's a popular franchise among women, it up until this point has been a single player experience. EA had stated that it intends on making the Sims 4 an Online Game. Despite all the warnings up until this point... It may be a step in the right direction. Do you know the kind of crap women put up with to play The Sims 3? It was insane, tons and tons of expansions, DLC, glitches to the roof, and they still loved it. But making The Sims 4 online, adding a social MMO element to it, and possibly live fixes for errors...

Don't get me wrong EA are evil money grubbing so and so's, but it could be a decision that brings to light the potential behind the female gamer as a consumer. EA could make a good decision.
 

Overusedname

Emcee: the videogame video guy
Jun 26, 2012
950
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
Also, I grew up in the 80s and 90s, with what Bob calls the "Golden Age" of gaming. I'd disagree. The Golden age of gaming is upon us right now, or has been for the last decade or so. Aside from nostalgia, few people would give up today's games for the older ones.
...I think it's a matter of perspective, but as someone who grew up with 'state of the art modern graphical masterpieces' I'm inclined to...question what people you're talking about. I grew up exposed to the new, and have now chosen the old, and upon giving the old a chance, I come across few who are not the same. Nostalgia is not a bad reason to enjoy something, but it's also not the only reason why people crave the age of genre variety and reliance on creativity to fight limitation, over the modern method of following the leader, despite the fact that people already have purchased the 'leader'.
 

Amir Kondori

New member
Apr 11, 2013
932
0
0
the antithesis said:
Meh, I kind of stopped watching two thirds of the way through.

I really don't care what you kids do anymore.
So right when he started using the word "cis-gendered"?
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
I am dismayed but not surprised that the general response to a video arguing, "Hey, how about we exercise some social responsibility and try to make things better," is met mostly with responses of, "You're an asshole." There haven't really even been many counterarguments to anything Mr. Chipman said; mostly just ad hominem attacks that try to get around the question of whether there are genuine social problems within our power to improve out of a preference for name-calling.

Guys, seriously, we can all be better than this.
 

The Material Sheep

New member
Nov 12, 2009
339
0
0
JimB said:
I am dismayed but not surprised that the general response to a video arguing, "Hey, how about we exercise some social responsibility and try to make things better," is met mostly with responses of, "You're an asshole." There haven't really even been many counterarguments to anything Mr. Chipman said; mostly just ad hominem attacks that try to get around the question of whether there are genuine social problems within our power to improve out of a preference for name-calling.

Guys, seriously, we can all be better than this.
Whats this "we" stuff ke-mo sah-bee?

I think that is the biggest problem with the entire video and the majority of the responses in agreement with it.
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
I'd hesitate to say "geek culture" went mainstream so much as geek hobbies did. A geek was once defined to me as someone that takes to extremes what someone else does in moderation, and in that regard, we're still marginalized. We happily research our hobbies while others see looking up wikipedia as too much work. WE like a movie based on something, we try the source material, while the Dark Knight didn't move Batman comics to new readers. We get weird looks for devoting time into a video game to 100% it. Heck, several of my family openly state they won't read a book longer than 300 pages (the crap I read gives them a heart attack. I haven't read a book that short not first published in Japan in years). We watched the subtitles. We modded the game. We enjoyed something before ti was popular. When some of that gets practiced by more people I'll surrender we won, but for now, people only like things like the Avengers if they can be consumed in small sedentary bites. One of these geek movies will flop if it hinges on something even as simple as having to go in having read a free online comic.

Moreover there's something to consider. Most of our persecution was that call to conformity, and we didn't just get it from bullies. Parents, teachers, even friends all tried to move us into paths they thought we should take with differing levels of success. While there's always an online pissing contest about what is better than what, most of the time in public we were well behaved and accepting that we all like differing things, and that the world can actually get along without having to try and invalidate someone else's likes. I have to believe at our core that is a geek philosophy, or else we'd have seen a blood bath at some convention over a Star Wars versus Star Trek debate.

Then the activists get involved.

I honestly have little to no trouble if harassment was what these guys dominantly went after, but it seems that more and more they're attacking content for not being 100 percent sanitary to their beliefs. Hey, a game is coming out with character with impossible breasts, I must squash it because I apparently can't just let it be. I have to condemn it for not appealing to me and make anyone that isn't similarly offended or *gasp* likes it is shamed into my line of thinking. The realm of geekdom is limited by our imaginations and willingness to look outside the mainstream outlets, so I reallly do wonder why some people feel that things they don't like seem to have so little allowance to exist. I get they can be overdone, but no one seems to put numbers on these things to prove that this is the case, nor are they adding new plot ideas or characterizations to the table. I know many mean well, but somethings I flash back to high school endlessly being told I'm not allowed to like what I like, I must like what someone else does.

And that's not getting into oversensitivity. There in many ways is how geekdom hasn't spread out. We had to let a lot of harassment and insults roll off our back. We never liked them, but crying to the principal never seemed to do much. Over time, we started wearing the insults of nerd, geek, or otaku as a badge of honor and it didn't seem to hurt us. Today guys get fired over a bad joke about a dongle. You can't criticize any of these ism groups without somehow being against everything they stand for. The wrong word or phrase can net you nothing but trouble. And why? Because some believe that people should never be treated poorly ever. If one bad joke might lead to some hurt feelings it must be killed and the one that made it be made an example out of, and unlike us, they get away with it. I won't deny some bitterness about that, but I think, again, long term geeks have to come to terms about not having the right to not be offended. A lot of our favorite works, from the Dark Knight Returns, to something like Mystery Science Theater wouldn't exist with concern for hurt feelings, and the recent PC police will just further stifle creativity as people afraid for their jobs keep everything safe.

I'm not saying we can't do better, but the people that seem to complain we're excluding them only seem to say so because we aren't bending over backwards to their vision of the world. Treating people with respect is one thing, and big problems in that area need to be addressed. But if people act like everything should be tailor made and sanatized for their protection, you can't be surprised when those people aren't welcomed with open arms. at best it sends us back to the days of being told what we must like. At worst, it's a sign of laziness that in the world where creativity is fairly easy (thanks to the internet) you'd rather complain and make others do the work instead of building on your own.

Both are signs that many of the things that made us geeks didn't cross over.