“How are you handling all of this so well? Explain to me so I can do it too with my trolls.”
I think the real question is, “why don’t you seem to get your feelings hurt?” or something along those lines. Part of it is growing up with such a powerful feeling of self-loathing, I’ve already thought about myself pretty much any terrible thing someone can say about me. It’s been almost a decade since my suicide attempt, and having spent years crawling out of that head space, I’ve got a lot of ways to mentally process ideas without letting them weigh me down too heavily. A couple of weeks of shitty blog comments isn’t going to undo years of therapy (sorry to disappoint, trolls).
Also, no offense to strangers on the Internet, but…you’re strangers on the Internet. If my best friend was saying those things, or even if people I know in the video game industry were saying those things, I’d probably be a lot more upset. Hell, the thing that upset me enough to post without editing first was Mike’s comment about why they pulled the Dickwolves t-shirts. I don’t know him, but I am more invested in his opinion on this topic than a complete stranger’s, and so that hurt more.
Kim Pallister gave a fantastic talk at the IGDA Leadership Forum last October, and during it, he said, “don’t go looking for approval, look for feedback.” That’s my goal in anything I do, really. People vehemently disagreeing with me is a form of feedback, and it’s one I can engage in and learn from. I can’t learn if I just shut out anyone who thinks I’m wrong – doing that just means I’m much less likely to get it right, this time or the next. (Note: this kind of thing – listening to people, some of whom are upset or angry, and continuing to talk to them – is a huge part of being a project manager. So some of this just happens to be part of my work skill set.)
“I’d like to be the 500th person to explain the “real” joke in The Sixth Slave.”
For fuck’s sake, I get it, okay? I get it. I have played World of Warcraft and loved it so much I had to stop playing completely lest it throw me off schedule for finishing my Masters. (Yes, really.) I understand how jokes work, I understand what that joke was “about” and how that joke was set up – I don’t think it was executed well. I think the phrase “raped to sleep” is surprising enough, and unusual enough, that that ended up being the line people laughed at, even if it wasn’t the punch line. Looking at that comic, it seems to me like that’s where you’re supposed to find humor and react with laughter. Whether you agree or disagree, please don’t comment about it here – I have heard it already, many, many times.
“Did you think the first Dickwolves comic was funny?”
I laughed, yeah. I do not like this thing where people say, “Oh the first comic was totally okay, but then later blah blah blah.” It wasn’t totally okay, and some people complained to that effect. According to the news post on the response comic, Jerry and Mike got multiple emails from long-time fans who were upset. Saying that the first comic was A-OK dismisses that, and I’m not thrilled at the idea of saying that the people who spoke up were speaking up over nothing. It wasn’t nothing, it just wasn’t something that on that particular day, for me, seemed to be upsetting personally. You may not believe this, but I do not go through every part of my day just digging like hell to find things connected to rape culture. Also, not all rape and sexual assault survivors have the same triggers about the same things. It’s like we’re individual people or something.
“For whatever reason, I feel comfortable telling you that you having PTSD means you’re weak.”
I’ve been hearing this pretty consistently. Sometimes from people for whom this is all hypothetical. Also from people who’ve had traumatic accidents and feel that’s comparable to another human being raping you, and so since they’ve “dealt with” their PTSD already, I’m supposed to have already “dealt with” mine. And also from other rape and sexual assault survivors, some of whom never had PTSD and so think I shouldn’t have it either, and some who had it but don’t let it, “rule their lives,” the way I supposedly am letting it rule mine.
I know it can be tough to get a full sense of another person via the Internet, but just to throw it out there: my life is not spent speaking out against things that trigger me. This is actually the first time I’ve ever talked about being triggered in any kind of depth, to anyone. It doesn’t happen to me regularly or often. In this instance, for reasons I can speculate on pretty confidently, the idea of being in public while guys walk around wearing a t-shirt that advertises how funny/awesome they think rapists are makes me feel wildly, terrifyingly unsafe. Given that this scenario is also one where I’m supposed to be a professional, it makes for a pretty damn hostile work environment.
I’m sorry if my speaking up about having PTSD makes you mad or makes you think it somehow reflects poorly on you or your own experiences. I know that to you I seem to need to grow a spine or have more courage or something along those lines. Please believe me when I say that to actually admit to myself that this kind of trigger exists for me, and to admit publicly that it happens, and speak up to try and prevent it rather than be in denial until PAX rolls around and my hands are shaking while I throw up in the nearest trash can and can’t bear to have anyone touch me, not even my partner…admitting all of that and not trying to pretend it isn’t real is the limit for me. I’m being as brave as I can be right now.
“So are you going to PAX and if not, are you starting another convention, and either way, what conventions should I attend?”
I had always thought of PAX as a place for everyone in the game community, regardless of their play style or the genres of games they like. The initial comic didn’t change that perception for me; unfortunately, everything that’s come after has chipped away at whatever sense of belonging or welcome I might have had.
It is one of the few universal things about people – we love to play games. Not just people like you, whoever you are, but people the opposite of you. People who disagree with you politically, people who hold entirely different belief systems than you. People who’ve lived thorough things you haven’t lived through. There are people in the industry that I don’t see eye to eye with on a lot of things, but they make great games and I love playing them. For me, the whole point of gameplay is to be able share experiences with others and allow them to do and feel things they couldn’t otherwise do and feel in their non-gaming lives. To draw a line in the sand and say, “I am explicitly safe in this community and get share in this, but you are not and thus you don’t,” is heart-breaking to me. If that’s the message from PAX’s founders, then I have to assume that’ll be the message from at least some of PAX’s attendees. You get the audience you deserve.
I’m not starting a convention of any kind, but if you are, feel free to let me know. I have it on good authority that starting a convention is pretty easy these days. Deirdra Kiai has assembled a list of PAX-alternative cons to attend, if you’re interested in that sort of thing. I can say with confidence that I’ll be at Geek Girl Con one way or another, so if you’re coming to that, feel free to find me and say hi.
“I have a problem with another website and would like to tell you about it.”
Um, okay? You realize that the only websites I run are this here blog and a sadly-neglected Tumblr about interior design, right? If you got banned on Shakesville, then I’m sorry you didn’t adhere to their comment policy. If you have a problem with Fuck No Penny Arcade, including a problem being able to tell that I do not in fact run FNPA, perhaps let the person who actually runs it know? I am not the Feminism Police of the Internet.
“But FNPA says they hate ‘neckbeards’ and ‘rape apologists’ and so I would like to hold you responsible for that statement.”
Based on what I’ve been able to find out about “neckbeards”, it seems to relate to poor hygiene and grooming and/or being fat. I genuinely don’t understand this – so we’re making fun of nerdy guys for their bodies or their facial hair now? Like…categorically? I understand that there is a sub-set of nerddom that could stand to bathe more frequently, but that applies to all people. Not nerds, not guys, all people. Any large gathering of any group had stinky folks, or have you never attended a concert or State Fair before? We already have tons of words to describe being stinky or smelly (I just used two of them!). Likewise, I don’t get this thing of mocking bad nerdy guy behavior (and yes, there is definitely some worth mocking) via mocking their bodies or looks. Are we really doing that now? We’re going to make people who are fans of shit we’re fans of feel bad about their physical appearance? Really? Cause I am not into it.
This got bounced around on my corner of Twitter, and it seems like the closest thing to “neckbeard” that actually means what it says would be along the lines of, “misogynerd.” So to whatever extent anyone wants to claim I have influence over anything or anyone: go forth and rightfully call out misogynerds on their fucked up ways, be it total denial that rape is even real to that freaky-condescending “chivalrous” claim that all girls are mysterious, unknowable beings from a mystical realm. (And if you genuinely want to get someone to shave their neck-hairs, I’ve found, “you look like a Confederate soldier,” to be effective. But that’s something I teasingly say to my partner when his goatee starts to disappear into his unshaven stubble, not something I say to a stranger as if I assume they want to be found attractive by me in the first place.)
On the rape apology thing…the PA guys haven’t said anything up to this point that’s made me go, “hey, rape apology.” Others may disagree, and again – if you see someone saying things that you don’t think are correct, and you want them to stop, maybe consider actually engaging the person using the terms you don’t like in conversation? I mean, I get that whoever is writing FNPA is anonymous and brilliantly scary, and meanwhile you already know my real name and can ask me questions on Twitter whenever you feel like it. But again: I am not the Sheriff of Internet Feminists. We aren’t an organized unit, and we disagree with each other a lot.
To wit:
“I think rape only happens to women, or happens to women so disproportionately that I’m comfortable telling men they shouldn’t comment on the subject at all.”
I think I’ve gone through the comments and left messages directly to the people putting this idea forth, but just in case I missed one, and to keep it from happening in the future: Rape and sexual assault happen to all genders, not just women. I’m not interested in engaging in debate on this issue. If you must perpetuate that lie, and thus feed into one of the myths of rape culture, let me at least assure you that I will not let you perpetuate it here. Anyone who responds to this post trying to argue with me about this fact will have their comment deleted and their IP address banned. That is how little I care about hearing the “other side” of this issue. It’s a lie, and a damaging one, and it erases the experiences of multiple people I know.
And lest I let a teachable moment pass: That paragraph? Is actual censorship.
Rock the fuck on, kirbybits. Well said. We at Shakesville LOLed for real at your comment about us. :
*fist-bump of feminist gamer solidarity*
Now I really really need to get my butt to Geek Girl Con.
Geek Girl Con sounds amazing, thanks for the heads-up!
Awesome post is awesome.
Oh, something that just occurred to me – I think people might associate you with fucknopennyarcade because one of their most prominent/visually obvious/easily accessible sidebar links is to this website.
The way they set it up is such that I could see a person interpreting it as you supporting or in some way being involved with FNPA.
There are also people complaining to her about being banned at Shakesville. So, no, it comes off to me as pot-stirring, IMO.
Oh. Well in that case, people are just being stupid.
I just wanted to say that you are amazing to handle this with such grace. Maybe it’s a practiced skill; it doesn’t make it any less awesome.
What did you end up thinking about Jerry’s comments?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2011/2/2/matter-dickwolves/
I think that Jerry did a good job explaining why he didn’t speak up sooner. I don’t agree with him – I believe that communication helps pretty much 100% of the time – but given that that’s his perspective, I understand more now why he didn’t say anything for so long.
“For whatever reason, I feel comfortable telling you that you having PTSD means you’re weak.”
I got a really hilarious variant on that from a friend, no less: “Also, I do worry what PTSD means for free speech. I have no doubt that you are being sincere, but not everyone will be… witness the cries of autism heard ’round the Internet. I worry about the chilling effect it will have on free expression. This may not be a concern to you, but it bothers me.”
Yes, because survivors with PTSD are so powerful that we can shout down discussion whenever we want. As you can see, we’ve had great success in making Penny Arcade bow to our whims.
1) Telling someone that having PTSD makes them weak is clearly an ignorant, hurtful thing to say.
2) Your friend’s statement has multiple issue that make it logically unsound
3) Your follow up statement is also badly constructed and logically unsound.
Please stop making terrible arguments.
Andy, I think I may not have been clear enough. I know his statement was ridiclous. I was calling it hilarious because I felt the view was ridiculous and as something worth of mockery– this statement is something he said to me, directly, on the issue of PTSD triggers in general.
If by follow-up statemtn, you mean “Yes, because survivors with PTSD are so powerful that we can shout down discussion whenever we want. As you can see, we’ve had great success in making Penny Arcade bow to our whims.” then I am sorry I did not communicate it clearly, but it was a sarcastic statement. Fellow survivors with PTSD are not powerful, the status quo can be clearly stacked against us. No one, AFAIK, wants PA to bow to anyone, our legitimate concerns are not the product of mere whimsy. No one has shut down discussion, and sadly, the impact we had upon PA seems to be negligible.
“No one has shut down discussion, and sadly, the impact we had upon PA seems to be negligible.” But that seems to me to just be arguing from powerlessness (to coin a phrase). If you’re saying “We haven’t censored anyone because we haven’t gotten what we want,” well that’s not a particularly effective defense against charges of censorship.
I think from the start, part of why PA flew so far off the handle is because they weren’t reacting as gaming elder statesmen interacting with the feminist community, they were reacting as artists who felt that people were telling them what words they weren’t allowed to use. To say “No, no, we’re not telling you what to say, we’re just saying you’re an agent of evil if you say that” is kind of a distinction without a difference, and to say “I don’t want to censor anyone, I just want to tell them not to say that” is equally disingenuous.
To broaden to the friend’s argument above: Dunno that it’s nearly as weak as some seem to think. I mean, one could simply put “Trigger warning” on top of every webcomic and be done with it. But if you’re saying that people shouldn’t create webcomics (or other content) that could trigger those with PTSD, then either you’re saying you want something which you believe will never happen, which seems self-defeating, or you’re saying you hope to achieve something which will shut down free speech.
Is there some subtlety I’m missing here? Because it sure sounds to me like what’s being said is “I wish there were no websites that could trigger my PTSD, and it’s only because I’m powerless that there aren’t.” I’m not saying people with PTSD are weak, I’m just saying that suiting all media to the sensibilities of those with PTSD strikes me as being just as oppressive as demands that all media be made safe for the eyes of children, or Christians, or whoever. Andy, you seem to think this argument is totally logically unsound—could you clarify why, because I feel like I’m just not getting it.
I’m actually writing an essay about this.
For me, I am not trying to censor anyone. If you want to make jokes about horrible traumas, then fine.
But realize this: freedom of speech works both ways. You can make the jokes and I have the freedom to tell you you’re a horrible person.
A lot of people on PA’s side have been shouting loudly about free speech and censorship. But they seem to be forgetting that the other side has the exact same rights they do.
Thank you blood parade.
The cost of being a big name or a leader or highly influential in any given field is that some people may engage you in criticisms that you don’t necessarily agree with. If one in that position is prone to take personal offense to criticism of one’s edgy humor, one should probably take up a different line of work.
There are a lot of comments to go through so if I’ve ever said ‘the first comic was okay’ instead of ‘I never had a problem with the first comic’ then I sincerely apologize.
Well done for standing up to all this crap and for being as brave as you have talking about the stuff that has happened to you; you’re officially my hero this week.
You’ll have to admit: this firestorm has posited some very interesting sociolinguistic implications. I think many of your dissenters are unable to understand the concept of rape culture because it is very difficult to quantify, and, as a result, very difficult to study the extent to which rape culture impacts society at large. Keeping that in mind, do you think its possible that the escalation of this event has enabled the comic to contribute more to rape culture than it would have were there no firestorm in the first place?
I don’t know, it sucks that I’ve had to use painful traumatic events I’ve gone through as part of a teachable moment, and “do you think its possible that the escalation of this event has enabled the comic to contribute more to rape culture than it would have were there no firestorm in the first place” sounds like a gussied-up way of saying “It won’t be so bad if we don’t talk about it”.
You’re projecting. My observation doesn’t carry bias. It’s a sociolinguistic inquiry. If it’s even remotely possible that anti-dickwolves merchandise could contribute to rape culture, it’s worth discussion.
Alright then, lets discuss it. Until this controversy, and until the firestorm that surrounded it, there wasn’t nearly as much widespread discussion regarding the damaging and distubing behaviors that geek culture has tacitly ignored, or even sometimes embraced.
Now, it’s a heavily argued subject. Yes, everyone has an opinion and they don’t all agree, but it has become a point of contention instead of an ugly but un-debated issue.
Is the response flawless? Not mine to say, but given a choice between silence over a very damaging element of the culture I love, or a contentious argument about said damage, I’ll take the argument any day of the week.
We can’t find the right path if we’re not willing to talk about it. Are the tactics perfect? No. We’re humans, humans don’t do perfect.
However, discussing whether or not the opposition is taking a sufficiently high road in arguing the point is a distraction from the point itself.
I think you’re getting tunnel vision, so let me clarify: my observations make no suggestions toward silence. I think you’re so used to being on the defensive that you’re projecting a bit; suggesting a line of implication that’s just not there. Here’s a thought:
It’s a no-brainer that the Penny Arcade comic is contributing to rape culture, but, posit that the DW Survivors shirt contributes to rape culture and… total dismissal.
I’m not taking sides. I’m suggesting that the concept is more complicated than many of us are allowing, and that our fervor may have consequences that we hadn’t thought about.
They’re unable to understand it because they don’t want to understand it. People who can make the sort of florid, complex, multifaceted arguments about copyright law that I’ve seen are more than capable of getting their heads around a relatively straightforward concept like “treating rape lightly contributes to to social permissiveness towards rape”
“They’re unable to understand it because they don’t want to understand it. ”
I would advise against using dismissal as the crux of your argument.
It is completely true that “treating rape lightly contributes to to social permissiveness towards rape” is an entirely basic premise.
That is not the discussion though. It’s wether joking about rape is the same as treating rape lightly.
In the same manner, treating any form of violence lightly contributes towards social permissiveness of violence.
But being able to make that argument is not the same as being able to say that violence in video games treats violence in the real world lightly.
The dismissal that “they clearly don’t get it” gets nobody anywhere. It is, in fact, the identical dismissal that the PA guys used to justify actions on their own side.
“For whatever reason, I feel comfortable telling you that you having PTSD means you’re weak.”
Ah, yes. I am dealing with a particular nasty person who likes to tell people that only soldiers of war have PTSD and that anyone else to too weak and making it up. Yes, I am making this all up.
Also, thank you for the list of alternate cons. That is something to consider.
I may not agree with everything you say, but still, rock on.
I’ve been amazed at how many people have been mad at me because they perceive me as demanding to agree with everything I say 100%. It’s like, “Um, you really shouldn’t ever try to hang out with feminists, none of us completely agree with each other.”
Thank you for participating so much in the discussion – likewise I don’t think I agree with everything you say, but you defend your ideas well. Also, pretty much anyone who exhibits a basic understanding of what censorship is and isn’t is seen by me through a glowing haze of love these days, no matter what else they’re saying.
and Courtney:
I realise of course that this is a charged issue for you, but there’s something i urge you to consider:
“Also from people who’ve had traumatic accidents and feel that’s comparable to another human being raping you”
I agree with the crux of your point you used this statment to illustrate. But your point is made in the first half of that sentence.
Just like noone gets to tell you how to deal with your trauma, you don’t get to quantify other peoples trauma. You don’t get to imply that trauma due to accidents is inherently lesser. Doing so makes you guilty of exactly what you argue against.
Hi Adam – I’m not trying to quantify peoples’ trauma, and reviewing the sentence, I don’t feel like I’ve done that. I do not think that an accident resulting in physical or mental trauma serves as a good comparison or reference for an intentional crime. Not that one is worse or better, but that it’s not a fit comparison. Hence my trying to highlight the difference between a non-intentional act (an accident) and an intentional one (another human being raping you).
I’m open to suggestion as to how I could have better communicated my point. I’m just not seeing where I “quantified” anyone’s trauma, or said that it was lesser. I said that it was different to the point of not being a fit reference point of my PTSD, which I stand by.
It’s not that your language is incorrect, so to speak.
However, only one of your examples made sure to quantify that it was an unfit comparison. In reality, they’re all unfit comparisons.
I mean, youre right, it is different to the point of not being a fit reference point to your PTSD. But, does a fit reference point to your PTSD exist? Or, more to the point, would that be based on the event that caused the PTSD, or the attributes of the PTSD itself?
And, of course, its worth noting this: If I say “A is not in the same league as B”, there is techincally no information provided that can lead you to figure out which of A or B is in the major league, and which is in the minor.
However, upon reading the sentence, which would you assume was the major leaguer? The context of how we use comparitive statements (and, colloquially, non-comparitive statements), is that the lesser always comes first.
I’m not trying to attack you here at all, This is just kind of a sore point for me, I’ll admit.
I guess it kind of boils down to this: If you knew a friend of yours had suicidal thoughts after the trauma they suffered in an accident, would you feel comfortable using the sentence “an accident is not comparable to someone being raped” in a conversation with them about their trauma?
I don’t see Kirby or anyone trying to say that one type of trauma is major and another is minor, or even that one is worse than another. She’s highlighting the differences between causes of trauma to say that it’s not logical to treat all trauma the same. It’s also not about addressing survivors of trauma by denying or validating their feelings, but when trying to relate to different types of trauma (particularly when Kirby’s trauma and that of other victims has been denied), it’s useful to point out that not all causes of trauma are the same.
For example, as a counselor I wouldn’t treat a war veteran the same as a person who had a car accident. Both of those people have had trauma. The war vet may have never seen combat but may be dealing with the implications of being in a war zone. The accident survivor may have serious injuries that will take months or longer to heal. It’s not appropriate to presume that one of those traumas is “worse” than the other, but the differences between them must be recognized in order to address them appropriately.
I’m concerned that you’re asking for a reference point for different types of trauma, because it seems to me that you’re saying “people who haven’t been raped can’t imagine rape, but people who haven’t been in an accident can imagine that, so it’s easier to relate to an accident than rape.” If that’s not what you’re saying, I apologize. But on this blog, I haven’t seen anyone say, “your reaction to that accident isn’t valid because I’ve been through worse,” which is what I think you’re seeing in Kirby’s statements.
Oh, no im not saying that at all. I don’t think theres any real reference for trauma that can be made without a pretty intimate knowledge of the person suffering from it. I mean, you can have two people who lost their legs in the same accident dealing with entirely different traumas. Person A might be dealing with the trauma of a missing leg, person B might deal with the missing leg fine, but find themselves terrified if they’re startled by a loud noise. Those are two entirely different things to deal with. You dont treat peoples traumas differently based on what event caused them, but on how the trauma manifests, no? That’s not actually my issue at all, i agree entirely with courtney on her sentiment, its abhorrent to imply that theres something WRONG with a person because they haven’t “gotten over” their trauma.
My contention is with the language.
Again, my question is this: If you’re talking to someone you know is suffering trauma due to an accident, would you feel comfortable using the particular phrasing of “an accident is not comparable to being raped”
Again, in my case, the event that i found most traumatic was being mugged by a couple of guys that beat me with a pole.
Ive also been robbed at gun point. I have personal experience with how the two differed. More than you might think actually, certainly more than I would have thought before having both occur.
BUT, even knowing that, when i was dealing with the worst of the trauma after the beating, I would not have wanted to hear the words “being beaten with poles is not comparable to having a gun pointed at you”.
Colloquially, the terms “does not compare” or “is incomparable” is a loaded term, even if it isnt by a dictionary definition.
I mean:
“Listening to the CD didn’t not compare to seeing them live” has a particular meaning.
By definition of course, it is literally the the exact same statement as: “seeing them live didn’t compare to their album”
but the placement of the words changes the meanings of those sentences as they are actually used.
It’s actually the word “comparable” I dislike. I feel its a loaded term.
Im not trying to demonise her for using it, or even saying that you actually have to agree with it, and I appologise if it comes off that way (again, a hot button topic for me. sometimes it causes me to come off more agressive than i intend)
Im just asking people to think about the word, and the context it is generally used in.
Actually, I noticed that you didnt use the term at all in your response. In fact, I thought you spoke (typed) on it very well, in a sympathetic and neutral manner. Thank you.
And, just to clarify, my examples using music were in no way meant to belittle sufferers of trauma, That was merely to showcase the word “comparable” in a neutral setting, and hopefully illustrate why I feel the term is loaded in a way that makes it inappropriate…
Okay, I get what you’re saying too. I don’t have that association with “comparable” (I tend to think of it in terms of “compare and contrast” where you point out what the two things have in common and different) but I see what you mean with your examples. Thanks for explaining about the language – I thought it was a conceptual issue rather than a descriptive one.
Okay, I get what you’re saying now – thank you for being patient with me. So really, what I meant was more, “people who’ve had traumatic accidents and feel that’s the same kind of trauma as another human being raping you”…but even that feels like it’s doing the same thing you pointed out above.
I think it kind of is, yes.
It’s inherrent in our language. When we ARE cmparing things, we always tend to put the “lesser” things first.
You always say “I like ice cream, but i LOVE chocolate”, rarely the other way round.
And that kind of follows through, even when your intent is anything but…
How about this?
*People who’ve had traumatic accidents and assume their insights from the experience are directly applicable to the experience of being raped.*
Does that convey the right tone?
I realize that I am just a stranger on the internet, but still want to say that you are awesome. I have not heard of you before all of this “dickwolves” stuff. Would that everyone could be as rational as you in this situation. Kudos to being a good human being.
Alright, you managed to entice me into breaking the advice I’ve been trying to psychic-ly beam into Mike’s head throughout this debacle (“please, STOP POSTING, STOP MAKING IT WORSE.”), and write a comment.
On neckbeards.
I don’t know what the people at FNPA think the word ‘neckbeard’ means. The only way I’ve ever heard it used, or used it myself, is in the sense of friendly teasing (assuming one believes such a thing can exist) about the advanced degree of nerdiness someone is projecting.
The stereotypical ‘neckbeard’ is a professional unix guru, middle-aged, bald, with copious facial hair, who probably works at a university where he spends his days in a windowless basement office next to the server room, attempting to install linux onto every inanimate object in reach, while brushing his neckbeard with a debian-powered neckbrush.
I wouldn’t say that it necessarily carries a connotation of ‘fat’ or ‘poor hygiene’, although both of those might come with the territory… just an implication that nerdy activities have a much higher priority for such a person than shaving frequently… or perhaps, ever. I have neckbeardy days myself. Months, sometimes.
It certainly doesn’t have a connotation of ‘misogynist’. I suspect that the person responsible for FNPA is simply very angry, and cast about for whatever looked like the harshest nerd-related epithet they (pronoun copout!) could find, and tried to pour as much vitriol as possible into it.
I hope that ‘neckbeard’ doesn’t permanently acquire these new connotations as a result, as I find it a useful and humorous word. ‘misogynerd’ seems useful too, but I don’t know if you’ve really nailed that one yet.
/me resumes brushing his neckbeard…
I’m not going to comment on the majority of this post because honestly, I’m not entirely sure where I stand on the issue at the moment and it would be kind of stupid of me to start arguing with other people before I’m done arguing with myself.
But in regards to the teaching moment at the bottom, there’s something I’d like to add that’s often neglected by people crying “You’re CENSORING ME! Freedom of speech!”: Freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the 1st amendment of the American constitution, only applies to A) The USA (though there are other countries with similar laws), and more importantly B) Government censorship.
Freedom of speech has absolutely NOTHING to do with someone telling you to get off their blog/forum/stage/whatever, because the owner of a private space has 100% control over what they want to allow and forbid in that space. You are not having your rights violated because someone is telling you to shut up and stop talking to them. If someone says “stop talking about rape”, and you don’t, and then get all pissy because they banned you, maybe stop for a moment and think about whose fault that might be. Hint: It’s not the person that banned you.
So… I’m not sure what my overall point here is. I guess that I disagree with the statement that the final paragraph is censorship. You aren’t restricting people from voicing their opinions, you’re just saying that they have to do it somewhere else.
Thank you, thank you very much for everything you’ve written and assembled on this subject so far. “Misogynerd” made my day, and will probably make my vocabulary as well.
I’m especially glad to see the comments about how rape can happen to women and men and trans people (okay, you didn’t mention trans people, but I think you implied that they can be raped, too). Also, women contribute to rape culture, too, when they allow rapists access to their children or their friends when they know or even encourage violence to happen. If we spent our time only focusing on the majority of victims or perpetrators in any situation, the situation (in this case, rape) will never end.
Thank you for this post. Especially the last couple points. Heard and heartfelt.