Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Pretty sure Ash wasn't saying that. He's saying that a lot of current feminists are actual Cultural Marxists using feminism as a friendly disguise.

Oh, so he's just buying into right-wing conspiracy crackpottery. The intersection of feminism and marxism is mostly an attempt to reconcile Marx's blanket class-based approach to inequality with a more modern and nuanced version that accounts for other factors like sex, gender etc, and to try and understand the interaction between economic inequality and gender inequality; to what extent does one cause or reinforce the other etc. "Cultural Marxism" is not actually a thing, it's a desperate attempt by certain atrophied right-wing "thinkers" in the USA to force cultural shifts they disagree with(like "being polite to black people" and "not assuming the only two states of being for a woman are childlike innocence or degenerate whoredom") into the classic "better dead than red" rhetoric they know already has a foothold in the American collective psyche - it's much easier to argue against basic levels of politeness and consideration for other people being applied universally if you paint it as an academia-led conspiracy designed to undermine "Western values" in order to pave the way for Communism.

 Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Would you have jet packs and a cyborgs in a game that's trying to be somewhat faithful to World War 1?

Why not? German (especially Nazi) super weapons are a common theme in fiction around the two world wars.

In fact, set it up around something like Turtledove's World War series, feth yeah I'll play that game!

Faithful was the key word there.
I don't think Franz Ferdinand was killed by a Serbian T-1000 who happens to be an agent of NOD.

Also, it was the British who had super weapons back then - many an infantryman gak himself when he saw the Mark 1 slowly rolling toward him

Wasn't Nicole Horne from Max Payne the villain?

 Yodhrin wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Pretty sure Ash wasn't saying that. He's saying that a lot of current feminists are actual Cultural Marxists using feminism as a friendly disguise.

Oh, so he's just buying into right-wing conspiracy crackpottery. The intersection of feminism and marxism is mostly an attempt to reconcile Marx's blanket class-based approach to inequality with a more modern and nuanced version that accounts for other factors like sex, gender etc, and to try and understand the interaction between economic inequality and gender inequality; to what extent does one cause or reinforce the other etc. "Cultural Marxism" is not actually a thing, it's a desperate attempt by certain atrophied right-wing "thinkers" in the USA to force cultural shifts they disagree with(like "being polite to black people" and "not assuming the only two states of being for a woman are childlike innocence or degenerate whoredom") into the classic "better dead than red" rhetoric they know already has a foothold in the American collective psyche - it's much easier to argue against basic levels of politeness and consideration for other people being applied universally if you paint it as an academia-led conspiracy designed to undermine "Western values" in order to pave the way for Communism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism

Nope. Its actually existant.

For Reference I am a Socialist.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Pretty sure Ash wasn't saying that. He's saying that a lot of current feminists are actual Cultural Marxists using feminism as a friendly disguise.

Oh, so he's just buying into right-wing conspiracy crackpottery. The intersection of feminism and marxism is mostly an attempt to reconcile Marx's blanket class-based approach to inequality with a more modern and nuanced version that accounts for other factors like sex, gender etc, and to try and understand the interaction between economic inequality and gender inequality; to what extent does one cause or reinforce the other etc. "Cultural Marxism" is not actually a thing, it's a desperate attempt by certain atrophied right-wing "thinkers" in the USA to force cultural shifts they disagree with(like "being polite to black people" and "not assuming the only two states of being for a woman are childlike innocence or degenerate whoredom") into the classic "better dead than red" rhetoric they know already has a foothold in the American collective psyche - it's much easier to argue against basic levels of politeness and consideration for other people being applied universally if you paint it as an academia-led conspiracy designed to undermine "Western values" in order to pave the way for Communism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism

Nope. Its actually existant.

For Reference I am a Socialist.

Why aren't people paid for house work? Well they are in a way. You would be indirectly paid by the member who brings home a wage, but that puts a odd work boss idea in the relationship. Hmm.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Wasn't Nicole Horne from Max Payne the villain?

Yep

Is this the Payne residence?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Would you have jet packs and a cyborgs in a game that's trying to be somewhat faithful to World War 1?

Why not? German (especially Nazi) super weapons are a common theme in fiction around the two world wars.

In fact, set it up around something like Turtledove's World War series, feth yeah I'll play that game!

Faithful was the key word there.

Turtledove's World War series was more faithful to WWII than pretty much every WWII game, and it involved an alien invasion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:
Why aren't people paid for house work? Well they are in a way. You would be indirectly paid by the member who brings home a wage, but that puts a odd work boss idea in the relationship. Hmm.

Given that most people who advocate women stay at home are in fact people who believe in male supremacy (and yes, this includes several people on Dakka), is this really surprising?

1. I can choose to remain completely oblivious, or indifferent to the harassment that many women face in gaming spaces.

Having witnessed verbal harassment in pretty much any online game, I can assure you what I choose to do or not do has no effect on its existence and likely continued existence.

2. I am never told that video games or the surrounding culture is not intended for me because I am male.

I don't think I've been told anything isn't intended for me, perhaps I can just attach that to my being generally awesome, or my gender, I mean, if we're just gonna spitball.

3. I can publicly post my username, gamertag or contact information online without having to fear being stalked or sexually harassed because of my gender.

This is patently absurd and incredibly subjective, if in these modern times you as an individual regardless of what's between your legs can post your personal information publicly online without fear, more power to you.

4. I will never be asked to “prove my gaming cred” simply because of my gender.

I've never been asked to prove my gaming credentials, is that a thing? I've certainly been skeptical that certain commentators haven't played the game they're commenting on

5. If I enthusiastically express my fondness for video games no one will automatically assume I’m faking my interest just to “get attention” from other gamers.

This happens? Perhaps associate with less skeptical friends. I've certainly been pleasantly surprised to find out individuals I would not have thought to enjoy video games in fact do enjoy them and play them regularly, I don't recall being skeptical. In the few instances this has happened, it was age no gender that would have me thinking they're not into games.

6. I can look at practically any gaming website, show, or magazine and see the voices of people of my own gender widely represented.

And why is that positive or negative? Should I be more emotionally involved with people's wee wee's and hoo haa's? People are people.

7. When I go to a gaming event or convention, I can be relatively certain that I won’t be harassed, groped, propositioned or catcalled by total strangers.

I don't think I can be relatively certain of that due to my gender, but what do I know, I've only been the victim of violent assault by both sexes, people scare me in general.

8. I will never be asked or expected to speak for all other gamers who share my gender.

No one asks anyone to do that, they just do, speculating as to why they choose to make everything about gender doesn't sound like a fun game.

9. I can be sure that my gaming performance (good or bad) won’t be attributed to or reflect on my gender as a whole.

But I'll be mocked for sucking all the same, which if I do mess up and let my team down they'll be the first to call me a bad word. I won't connect that to my gender, I'll connect that to the fact that I'm currently sucking at game x.

10. My gaming ability will never be called into question based on unrelated natural biological functions.

I've gotten guff for going to the washroom at inopportune times during online gaming, so I guess I feel your pain?

11. I can be relatively sure my thoughts about video games won’t be dismissed or attacked based solely on my tone of voice, even if I speak in an aggressive, obnoxious, crude or flippant manner.

I'm sorry but on the internet my thoughts have been dismissed and attacked by just about everybody.

12. I can openly say that my favorite games are casual, odd, non-violent, artistic, or cute without fear that my opinions will reinforce a stereotype that “men are not real gamers.”

This is a stereotype? I don't think I've ever gone true scotsman on anyone in relation to gaming as a whole, I have made the logical conclusion that individual x isn't that into the game we're talking about but that's just general inference based on body language and tone. I'm not seeing the gender thing here, plenty of people do the no true scotsman in just about any context because they're insecure, that's not in my experience a gender specific thing.

13. When purchasing most major video games in a store, chances are I will not be asked if (or assumed to be) buying it for a wife, daughter or girlfriend.

Yeah I'm sure that could be annoying.

14. The vast majority of game studios, past and present, have been led and populated primarily by people of my own gender and as such most of their products have been specifically designed to cater to my demographic.

Wasn't it like a few question ago we were talking about the no true scotsman thing? Well, there are plenty of people from both genders producing video games, Some of whom have been attacked by their own gender for making the games they want.

15. I can walk into any gaming store and see images of my gender widely represented as powerful heroes, dastardly villains and non-playable characters alike.

I can also see dragons and elves and robots and powerful images representing both genders. But then again I'll be told a badass individual of the opposite sex wielding a gun or a sword is just some trope and it's somehow negative or something.

16. I will almost always have the option to play a character of my gender, as most protagonists or heroes will be male by default.

I would say in the majority of the games I play gender doesn't enter into it, I tend to prefer strategy games. If men of war had included female russian soldiers, I'd be all for it. In the case of some of the rpg's I've played like skyrim, my first character was a famele argonian archer/thief. I think the problem with listing 25 generalizations is it's the buzzfeed lazy way to communicate with a wider audience.

17. I do not have to carefully navigate my engagement with online communities or gaming spaces in order to avoid or mitigate the possibility of being harassed because of my gender.

I would say I do have to navigate online communities or gaming spaces carefully, the internet is a hostile place at times. To infer the internet even has the initiative to discriminate in its targeting implies a clarity of purpose that simply isn't there, quite often it's as simple as give a man a mask.

18. I probably never think about hiding my real-life gender online through my gamer-name, my avatar choice, or by muting voice-chat, out of fear of harassment resulting from my being male.

The thing is, I've been harassed online and it wasn't because of gender, it was because I was online. Is it ever possible that connecting everything to your own gender might be a bit of a complex? I mean yes, it could totally be on account of your gender, but the safer bet 100% of the time is because the person harassing strangers on the internet is an donkey-cave, regardless of their gender.

19. When I enter an online game, I can be relatively sure I won’t be attacked or harassed when and if my real-life gender is made public

The thing is there is no relative certainty when it comes to human interaction online, this is why you have admin control on team speak. I constant;y see people getting kicked from groups for taking the piss out of other players. And the reason range from an individuals perceived lack of skill to their tone of voice to who knows, why am I speculating on the intent of online trolls? Just kick them from the group.

20. If I am trash-talked or verbally berated while playing online, it will not be because I am male nor will my gender be invoked as an insult.

But I'll be trash talked just the same, so why make it about my gender when it's simply about the other person being disturbed and douchey?

21. While playing online with people I don’t know I won’t be interrogated about the size and shape of my real-life body parts, nor will I be pressured to share intimate details about my sex life for the pleasure of other players.

This has never happened to me in terms of being interrogated about my own physical attributes, I've certainly heard other's un-asked for bragging about their own physical prowess. Yeah I guess I can count my lucky stars that no one has requested my measurements online as of yet. Consider my privilege checked.

22. Complete strangers generally do not send me unsolicited images of their genitalia or demand to see me naked on the basis of being a male gamer.

Yeah I've never had that happen, sounds like a legitimately bad experience.

23. In multiplayer games I can be pretty sure that conversations between other players will not focus on speculation about my “attractiveness” or “sexual availability” in real-life.

It's occurred many a time, but then again it was always in joking fashion. Do you even lift bro?

24. If I choose to point out sexism in gaming, my observations will not be seen as self-serving, and will therefore be perceived as more credible and worthy of respect than those of my female counterparts, even if they are saying the exact same thing.

The problem is sexism is often simply "things I don't like" and inherently subjective. There are simply so many things to be critical about when it comes to games When it comes to being perceived as credible and worthy, again it's subjective, I tend not to focus on the sex of individuals whose opinions I share or oppose but perhaps I'm just not divisive enough, I gotta work on that.

25. Because it was created by a straight white man, this checklist will likely be taken more seriously than if it had been written by virtually any female gamer.

There we go, injecting sexual preference and race into a commentary on gender, gotta do the triple threat and evoke every divisive ghost in the attic. You know what is more effective, telling a genuine viewpoint and hoping that those we disagree with are still human and capable of basic empathy. Presenting a buzzfeed style list just doesn't seem like an effective way to shed light on the female experience in gaming and thus an effective means of us silly men to check our collective privilege.

I have to agree with matty, choose your battles, if you're just nitpicking everything it just feels like you're the hypochondriac and the reader is the doctor and they're forced to wade through you're paranoia to try and actually figure out what the problem is.

I'm going to my friend's place tomorrow night to play video games, she's a lesbian and her gf loves video games, I'm more concerned with not coming off like a snob cause I'm generally not a console player and more into pc games than offending anyone on account of their gender.

One of the core problems of the entire discussion is that most people think that it actually is about a gender conflict - when in fact...it's not.

It's a minority-in-a-surrounding-majority issue. Your "white male privileges" aren't worth a lot if you move into a neighborhood with mostly black people. Your "straight" privilege is worth nothing in a gay club.

Gender, to some people, is just one reason to insult others. Making the entire thing a purely gender issue while disregarding the core conflict is just lusting for attention and trying too hard.

It works both ways. How does "outing" yourself as a japanese dating sim lover will make a "white mal" look like? He'll be looked down upon and be called a "creep" or worse. Where's his privilege?

A bunch of guys online telling women there really isn't a problem and that they don't understand? This is unexpected and surprising.

 Ahtman wrote:
A bunch of guys online telling women there really isn't a problem and that they don't understand? This is unexpected and surprising.

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Never attribute misogyny to that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

That doesn't mean that men and women aren't the targets of misogynists and misandrists online, only that to infer that as the cause of the harassment an individual might receive can easily become a complex and in many ways is difficult to prove. I'm overweight, sometimes I get the feeling people are treating me a certain way on account of my weight. If I start the thought pattern that any person I encounter that I don't gel with or doesn't seem to like me has to do with my weight I'm going to A give myself an aneurysm and B develop some serious self image issues and C not give anyone a fair shake.

This is no different than kanye west accusing critics of racism, when it's not his race they take issue with, it's his genral habit of just being the worst.

I don't think many people are under any illusions that anonymity when combined with total freedom will be without it's downsides. I think the problem is that we're watering down the definition of harassment and annoyance quite often is a more honest description.

 Ahtman wrote:
A bunch of guys online telling women there really isn't a problem and that they don't understand? This is unexpected and surprising.

This isn't what I said. The point is that women (for the most part) don't just get hated on just for being women. If that was the case, then they'd be hated on as well if it was the other way around, if they were the majority. They are hated on because they are a minority. This happens with pretty much every minority that lives in a majority culture and it's explainable by mere human logic. It's not good, and noone ever said that, but this (mostly) isn't about misogny, even as much as some want it to be.

As I said in my examples - if the very same minority suddenly becomes a majority, it's different. A woman claiming to like dress-up? So...? Everyone will be like "Hey, that's cool. You play games." A man outing himself as a dress-up game lover? "LOL NECKBEARD CREEP".

Context.

 Sigvatr wrote:
One of the core problems of the entire discussion is that most people think that it actually is about a gender conflict - when in fact...it's not.

It's a minority-in-a-surrounding-majority issue. Your "white male privileges" aren't worth a lot if you move into a neighborhood with mostly black people. Your "straight" privilege is worth nothing in a gay club.

Gender, to some people, is just one reason to insult others. Making the entire thing a purely gender issue while disregarding the core conflict is just lusting for attention and trying too hard.

It works both ways. How does "outing" yourself as a japanese dating sim lover will make a "white mal" look like? He'll be looked down upon and be called a "creep" or worse. Where's his privilege?

This is correct, though of course the point is that most of the western world is not a majority black area or gay club. Thus, white male privilege is a significant factor in most social situations for most of us.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Oh I don't think many of the ideas being presented come from malice.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Never attribute misogyny to that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Stupidity can lead to misogyny and vice-versa: one doesn't exclude the other.

I'll make sure to remind the individuals whose only social contact is world of warcraft how good they've got it because they can pee standing up can be considered hidden when naked in snowy condtions. They better check themselves, they risk wrecking themselves.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


This is correct, though of course the point is that most of the western world is not a majority black area or gay club. Thus, white male privilege is a significant factor in most social situations for most of us.

Exactly, that's my point. We can all agree that those things happening to e.g. women online are bad. But using those events to make up a point that just can't hold critical inspection is poor behavior.

Using the term "privilege", however, is easily misleading and it's highly recommendable to stay away from using it. It's highly frowned upon in higher fields as it has an extremely negative bias. Minority / majority (sub) culture are the neutral terms to use. "Privilege" is mostly used by people who like big words or want to impress like-minded people. The correct terms are not only neutral, they also explain the issue by themselves and are thus vastly superior.

 Sigvatr wrote:
This isn't what I said.

I didn't say you did. In fact I didn't use any names at all. This is a multi-page/multi-poster thread, why would you immediately assume you were being talked to?

There isn't a white male sub-culture.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
This isn't what I said.

I didn't say you did. In fact I didn't use any names at all. This is a multi-page/multi-poster thread, why would you immediately assume you were being talked to?

Reply directly to my post, content fitting to my post's content, not the first time you're getting on my back


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There isn't a white male sub-culture.

Where did I say so?

How does one cash in on this so called straight white male privilege?

I could sure as hell use every advantage I can get right now.

If you want to know what white privilege is, HBO's the wire is coming out on HD soon. It's a far more effective way to contemplate how good you have it as a white person. It is far more effective than hearing another white person whine on about silly crap online The only person I've ever heard talk about checking privelege was holding a 7 dollar star bucks coffee in one hand a university sweater in the other. I'm sure they'll feel blessed actually receiving a paycheck in the ever expanding industry of people who took gender studies in college starting a blog in which articlese generally start with "eveyone needs to x".

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
This isn't what I said.

I didn't say you did. In fact I didn't use any names at all. This is a multi-page/multi-poster thread, why would you immediately assume you were being talked to?

Reply directly to my post, content fitting to my post's content, not the first time you're getting on my back


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
There isn't a white male sub-culture.

Where did I say so?

You implied it. However I am glad to see you resile from that position and admit that the white male is the dominant culture in the western world.

Inferring anything from someone's race or gender seems like stereotyping to me.

Sigvatr wrote:Reply directly to my post

I posted after your post, which isn't the same. If I had replied directly to you I would have quoted you.

I could sure as hell use every advantage I can get right now.

You are most likely already benefiting from it. It has never been about getting things, but about not having to deal with things up to the point of not even having to realize it exists. Pretending that it doesn't exist is one of the benefits of being one of the in-group. It doesn't mean you get extra free things, it means you don't get extra bs. It doesn't mean you won't ever get pulled over but it does mean you most likely won't get pulled over for no reason. It doesn't keep you from being mocked for being a poor athlete but it does keep people from assuming you are a poor athlete just because you are a guy. I've never heard anyone say "you throw like a guy!" as an insult but I have heard for decades "you throw like a girl!" used as an insult.

 Ahtman wrote:


You are most likely already benefiting from it. It has never been about getting things, but about not having to deal with things up to the point of not even having to realize it exists. .

I've had to deal with most of the points made, the difference was I didn't internalize the various occurrences as happening on account of my gender. Perhaps I should be more negative and focus on what makes us different rather than our collective humanity. If a store clerk constantly asked me if a game was for my signifcant other, I can see that being more common for a certain gender, and I can also try and empathize and I would agree that could get annoying. I've also encountered plenty of female clerks at eb so does that count as progress? I think so. Just as a thought experiment, if someone were to ask me who the makeup I'm purchasing is for, or infer it's for a significant other, I can see that assumption being fairly safe as makeup is more often purchased and utilized by the female gender. But men using and purchasing makeup is certainly more accepted today than in the past, progress I would also think that. I think talking about gaming a whole as a boys club isn't productive, you really would have to break it down by genre of game. The other problem is the assumption that all games regardless of genre's require or even allow for an obvious identification of a player's sex, or frankly any way to tell if the player is lying about that. Really, unless the game you're playing online involves team speak or voice chat, tying the annoyance you're experiencing or the harassment being directed towards you as in response to your gender is pathological in the extreme.

Again, my main point is you can paint any garden variety online donkey-cave or troll as subscribing to any ideology you want to serve your own ends but it's pretty obvious. The reality is humans, that's both men and women don't do well when given total freedom and anonymity. If the only solution is censorship, give me freedom or give me death. I'm resigned to the fact that the internet, like the world, is full of terrible people doing terrible things to each other.

You can list anecdotal evidence all you want, but it doesn't really effect trends nor does it make research showing it is a problem disappear.

 Ahtman wrote:
You can list anecdotal evidence all you want, but it doesn't really effect trends nor does it make research showing it is a problem disappear.

Negative human interaction online is a problem? Someone better do something.

But Ahtman, the fact that research shows certain people here is wrong and deeply ignorant offends them, and we can't have thaaa~aat, they're a white guys!

 Melissia wrote:

nomotog wrote:
Why aren't people paid for house work? Well they are in a way. You would be indirectly paid by the member who brings home a wage, but that puts a odd work boss idea in the relationship. Hmm.

Given that most people who advocate women stay at home are in fact people who believe in male supremacy (and yes, this includes several people on Dakka), is this really surprising?

No it's not surprising. It's kind of a keystone almost. You learn one piece and then a lot of things that didn't make sense now kind of make sense.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:


This is correct, though of course the point is that most of the western world is not a majority black area or gay club. Thus, white male privilege is a significant factor in most social situations for most of us.

Exactly, that's my point. We can all agree that those things happening to e.g. women online are bad. But using those events to make up a point that just can't hold critical inspection is poor behavior.

Using the term "privilege", however, is easily misleading and it's highly recommendable to stay away from using it. It's highly frowned upon in higher fields as it has an extremely negative bias. Minority / majority (sub) culture are the neutral terms to use. "Privilege" is mostly used by people who like big words or want to impress like-minded people. The correct terms are not only neutral, they also explain the issue by themselves and are thus vastly superior.

Just out of curiosity, what does the term "intersectionality" mean to you?