A lot of recent vocal misogyny might be a reaction to feminism, but the idea that misogyny in general is a reaction to feminism is... laughable.

I mean, what, men didn't let women vote because of 1600s era feminism?

I suppose the fact most western governments didn't let most men vote until anywhere from 50 to as little as 10 years before that is due to misogyny as well? Or is that just pinned on [strike]Satan[/strike] The Patriarchy?

I'll agree that misogyny in general being a reaction to feminism is absurd (though I can't help but question the very premise of "general misogyny"), but most of the vocal criticisms of the worst elements of female behavior in general and feminist ideology in particular I've encountered in the past several years have absolutely been a reaction to feminism.

Also? Criticizing feminism ≠ misogyny. Hell, for that matter, criticizing women doesn't necessarily equal misogyny. That word has been bandied about so much for everything the person saying it doesn't like for so goddamn long it's virtually lost all meaning.

Just wait for major general misogyny! He's really zooming up the ranks.

And... are you really saying there's no such thing as misogyny because there's also racism? Uh wut?


Criticizing feminism (or women) is not, de facto, misogyny. But... it often is. And in certain contexts it's reasonable to wait for extraordinary evidence it isn't.

There are conversations where I think 'that sounds reasonable, but we're on suspicious terri... aaah, there it is.'

Quote from: MrHurst;792434Not liking it doesn't make it less true. If it wasn't website administrators would have to deal with legal rigamarole in ejecting serious problem users. Run a couple sites a while and you will understand full well why people sit on that issue for a while. There are some true blue lunatics out there.

So you're arguing that the existing status quo in which speech can be, and is, censored on a whim is awesome because the alternative would be inconvenient to web admins?

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerAnita says that they've been investigated by the FBI; I have yet to see an independent statement confirming that.

Milo HolyfuckIcantsayhislastname of Breitbart tweeted that he confirmed that the FBI was investigating, early on.

Now, the strength and veracity of those death threats, is another matter entirely. The recent article following up with USU, paints the threats as incredibly weak, and the previous threats were much of the same weaksauce. Which makes her recent cancellation more of a political statement about our 2nd and 4th Amendments (conceal carry); if she thinks Gamers are "Toxic", heaven help her if she pisses off the NRA!

Quote from: WillA stronger argument would be to point out that, on the smaller scale, misogyny causes a huge amount more day to day suffering than feminism.

The problem becomes, what definition of "misogyny" and "feminism" are we using?

My definition of misogyny tends to be more extreme than "people being mean to me on the Internet!"

Quote from: Will;792489Just wait for major general misogyny! He's really zooming up the ranks.

And to think, just a few years ago everyone was lamenting about how horrible it was that he was a private. It's nice to see the brass recognize true talent.

Quote from: WillAnd... are you really saying there's no such thing as misogyny because there's also racism? Uh wut?

Who said anything about racism? In much of the western world any man who didn't own property wasn't allowed to vote until (very nearly) the same generation in which women were granted the right. I imagine this probably did disproportionately affect blacks in some places, just as economic inequality continues to disproportionately affect them in different ways today, but it was by no means exclusive to them.

Seriously, are there any concrete differences in position between GamerGate and anti-GamerGate? That is, if I say "I am pro-GamerGate" - does that say anything definite about my position on anything?

It seems like no one is publicly standing up in favor of death threats, or in favor of lack of journalistic integrity. Instead, virtually all of the debate is about identity politics and/or judgement of particular people or groups, such as opinions about the behavior of Zoe Quinn and/or Eron Gjoni as people.

Quote from: jhkim;792531Seriously, are there any concrete differences in position between GamerGate and anti-GamerGate? That is, if I say "I am pro-GamerGate" - does that say anything definite about my position on anything?

It seems like no one is publicly standing up in favor of death threats, or in favor of lack of journalistic integrity. Instead, virtually all of the debate is about identity politics and/or judgement of particular people or groups, such as opinions about the behavior of Zoe Quinn and/or Eron Gjoni as people.

Pretty much this.  Whatever it's origins, right now it looks like to me like you have two groups talking right past each other.  One's going "Yeah, there are a lot of misogynist assholes out there, but forget that right now, look at all the GAME JOURNALISM CORRUPTION!"  While the other is saying, "Yeah, there's a lot of game journalism corruption out there, but forget that right now, look at all the MISOGYNY!"

I'll just say this.  Anita Sarkeesian and/or Zoe Quinn may be dishonest people, but if Gamergate wants to have any effect, it needs to stay on target and stick to the message.  Forget the SJW crap, leave them and the pottymouth 14 year olds getting their misogyny on to their own devices, and just focus on the journalism sites.  Because everytime someone makes a reasonable case for ethics in gaming journalism but tacks on stuff about militant feminists or the dishonesty of Sarkeesian and Quinn, they're tying in game journalism ethics with that whole, ultimately irrelevant mess.

Quote from: Novastar;792519The problem becomes, what definition of "misogyny" and "feminism" are we using?

My definition of misogyny tends to be more extreme than "people being mean to me on the Internet!"

Well, yeah. When I'm talking harm I'm talking about big stuff, like 'you make less money' or 'women should wish real hard for raises' or 'women can shut down rapepregnancies' or 'she shouldn't have dressed that way if she didn't want to get raped' and so on.

I tend to weigh 'women being brutally raped and people shrugging' a lot more than 'feminist on campus makes me feel bad.'

Quote from: woodsmoke;792530Who said anything about racism? In much of the western world any man who didn't own property wasn't allowed to vote until (very nearly) the same generation in which women were granted the right. I imagine this probably did disproportionately affect blacks in some places, just as economic inequality continues to disproportionately affect them in different ways today, but it was by no means exclusive to them.

So explain to me exactly how women getting votes 10-50 years after men isn't related to misogyny. (And in the US, it's more like 60-70 years, depending)

Quote from: Will;792559Well, yeah. When I'm talking harm I'm talking about big stuff, like 'you make less money' or 'women should wish real hard for raises' or 'women can shut down rapepregnancies' or 'she shouldn't have dressed that way if she didn't want to get raped' and so on.

I tend to weigh 'women being brutally raped and people shrugging' a lot more than 'feminist on campus makes me feel bad.'

The problem, as with MRA, is that you have crackpots who have appropriated the term who push ideas like "PIV" sex being rape, cheescake images being about hating women, etc.

When you get into discussions calling these out, you usually get "But that's not *MY* feminism." Funny how that is a legitimate excuse, but when it comes to Gamergate or MRA, no it's no longer a valid excuse.

Honestly, the whole gendersphere and assorted "social justice" spaces are extremely toxic and draining if you spend too much time in them.

Quote from: Iosue;792543Pretty much this.  Whatever it's origins, right now it looks like to me like you have two groups talking right past each other.  One's going "Yeah, there are a lot of misogynist assholes out there, but forget that right now, look at all the GAME JOURNALISM CORRUPTION!"  While the other is saying, "Yeah, there's a lot of game journalism corruption out there, but forget that right now, look at all the MISOGYNY!"

I'll just say this.  Anita Sarkeesian and/or Zoe Quinn may be dishonest people, but if Gamergate wants to have any effect, it needs to stay on target and stick to the message.  Forget the SJW crap, leave them and the pottymouth 14 year olds getting their misogyny on to their own devices, and just focus on the journalism sites.  Because everytime someone makes a reasonable case for ethics in gaming journalism but tacks on stuff about militant feminists or the dishonesty of Sarkeesian and Quinn, they're tying in game journalism ethics with that whole, ultimately irrelevant mess.

I think this is about all that needs to be said about the issue. I like how this seems to be ylthe only thread on the internet were people can discuss this in a civil way.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;792572The problem, as with MRA, is that you have crackpots who have appropriated the term who push ideas like "PIV" sex being rape, cheescake images being about hating women, etc.

When you get into discussions calling these out, you usually get "But that's not *MY* feminism." Funny how that is a legitimate excuse, but when it comes to Gamergate or MRA, no it's no longer a valid excuse.

Honestly, the whole gendersphere and assorted "social justice" spaces are extremely toxic and draining if you spend too much time in them.

I don't know about GamerGate, but with MRA? I have yet to see a single long-term MRA type who didn't turn out to be a misogynist.

Also, 'MRA' itself is generally internet-heavy posturing and a relatively small group, while 'feminist' includes easily 1/3 of the US.

So. I think it's more of an excuse simply because 'feminist' is quite clearly a broader, more diffuse group.

Quote from: Daztur;792576I like how this seems to be ylthe only thread on the internet were people can discuss this in a civil way.

I've found many others, but they aren't as common as they should be. It's like trying to find a clear-eyed, even-handed discussion of American politics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html

Ok, so 1 in 5 US folks identify as feminist, the vast majority actually believe in equity, and you can argue just where the line should be drawn between those two points.

As for MRA... there are older men's rights groups, so I suspect the Trilby brigade are basically a recent posturing variation latching onto older movements. Not sure about population numbers, but I'd be flabbergasted if 'MRA' was anywhere near 1 in 5 of the US.