Speaking Out – Page 3 – Shoshana Kessock

This Isn’t Your Community, Gamergate, It’s Ours

October 17, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Geek Culture, Speaking Out

Tonight, I want to write about Gamergate.

Actually, let me be clear. I don’t really want to write about Gamergate. I wish I’d never heard the term. I wish we could get in an epic Doctor Who TARDIS the size of the planet and go back to before two months ago (by god it’s been that long already) when all this madness started. If that’s when it started. Some folks say the Gamergate controversy was just brewing, waiting in the wings for an incendiary incident to drag all those feelings of misogyny and rage and resentment to the surface. I personally agree, that there’s been a lot of awful beneath the surface as the gaming community goes through its adolescent growing pains. As it grows from a haven for interactive technology, play, and those who sought to turn that into an identity, gaming has come to mean a lot of different things. And now, Gamergate has become that bone-rattling clash of cultures as what was once a subculture rockets towards the mainstream and the intrenched majority suffers from change-shock.

I’m not going to rehash the discussions about Gamergate here. There’s been a dozen analyses done by gamers, game scholars, thinkers, news mediums, and even cable news networks. The mainstream media has caught on and if you want to go through the entire history of this debacle, there’s plenty of timelines to catch you up. I would suggest this article talking about the knee-jerk rage of movements and even my own discussion about the decrying of the term gamer from a few weeks back. I’d also suggest this brilliant take-down by Brianna Wu, who went on HuffPo Live after she was threatened out of her home, where she takes on the so-called issues of Gamergate. But in talking about Gamergate, reading about it, seeing it go on for so long, I’ve become full up on it, saturated to the gills. I realized upon trying to write about Gamergate today that I don’t know what else needed to be said. It had been analyzed in relation to the Men’s Rights Movement, defended as a reactionary movement based on fear of change and deconstructed on the front page of the New York Times. The Verge has practically been camping out on the issue. Compared to all that, what else do I have to say?

Something. I need to say something. To get out of my system the feelings rising up whenever Gamergate is discussed. Whenever I see some ridiculous tweet or the comments section rebuttals to articles. Or worse, when I see a friend stand up and defend gamer-gaters as part of our gaming community. There is a feeling that goes full circle, back to the fundamnetal issue that most Gamergaters seem to ignore.

Guess what? I’m against the Gamergate movement and I’m a gamer too.

I’m a gamer. I’ve been one since I was old enough to have a gaming console, since I got my first computer, since I played Mortal Kombat in arcades and played online roleplaying games in chat rooms. I made gaming my business and loved every second of it. Still do. I call myself a gamer, proudly. I’ve been a gamer for twenty years and in half dozen different mediums. I don’t need to spit my cred and I don’t cred check others. I don’t decry the title or say that now is the end of gamers. I share my community proudly and speak loud and proud about my love for games.

But I am also a woman, and until recently, the tension between those two parts of my identity- that of being a woman and that of the community I love- were always at odds. For every ten great experiences in the community, there were awful moments. There were feelings of exclusion, of ridicule. There were moments of outright harassment and earnest moments of terror, of feeling unsafe, of feeling alone. This is not an unusual story. I’ve heard it from gamer women from the video game world to the LARP world, from tabletop RPG conventions to playing in D&D in the home of a friend. So I stand up to be counted with those who speak against inequality, who are demeaned and maligned and called Social Justice Warriors. I laugh like hell when people use that term as an insult because I wear that title proudly. Yeah, what?! I am a Social Justice Warrior. What’s wrong with being a warrior for a cause you care about? I don’t shout at people, I don’t harass. I stand for zero tolerance on bullying and harassment and for representation of all kinds in our community. That’s how I am a gamer, with social consciousness in my mind and happiness in my heart.

Then Gamergate happened. And all that awfulness just under the surface, all that mistreatment and harassment and misogyny that’s been there for years, it comes bubbling up. And because it’s couched in the language of some kind of ‘ethics’ discussion, because it’s hidden behind a supposed defense of the gamer hobby based on ‘assaults’ by those nasty, evil SJWs, then the real disgusting behavior gets marginalized. “Well that’s not us,” says the poor, maligned Gamergater. “We’re here to defend the gaming hobby and talk about journalistic ethics! We’re not about death threats!” And suddenly, they’re an equal part of the conversation. They get an entire segment on HuffPo Live to defend their ‘stance.’

And it makes me furious.

Their stance is built on supporting maligning women. In maligning any critic who stands up for unequal treatment in games. They stand to be counted with harassers – or they did, until the mainstream attention to those threats made them start looking like a lynch mob. Then suddenly, the language changed to “please, listen to us, we’re just misunderstood.”

And I’m just so tired of it. If I could, I’d wish it all gone.

I wish it was back before this pseudo-movement/ consumer revolt/ journalistic integrity thing / hate mob was born. I wish we were back in a time before I knew the name Eron Gjoni, before I knew that boyfriends could be so hateful as to record their relationships and pour them out on the internet to become the springboard for a malicious campaign against a woman designer. I wish we were in a time before I knew what the hell a false flag was, before I knew something called 8chan existed, before I knew they were the folks so bad they got knocked off 4chan. Before I had to learn about sock puppet twitter accounts made to feign actual discourse in an effort to troll. I want to go back to a time when misogyny in the gaming industry didn’t have a movement that got a B-list Hollywood actor like Adam Baldwin to use his social media reach to malign women and perpetuate attacks on social justice.

I wish I didn’t know that this post might attract all kinds of negative responses. I wish I didn’t know that I might get threats. I wish I didn’t know that somewhere, someone might read this and wish me harm.

I wish a lot of things about the gaming world. But right now, I wish this more than anything: I wish I knew what to say with more delicacy about a horror show of consumer superiority complexes and entitlement gone rampant. I wish that I didn’t go online every day and read about another person who has been harassed, about infographs full of half-truths and conspiracy theory language pointing to women in the industry and saying “Hah! I deny your experiences!”

I wish more than anything that I could put up my hands and say, “Jesus Christ, people, we are talking about a community of making games that has room for criticism, that has room for discussion, that has room for evolution of ideas! That has room for a better day where everyone can find themselves represented and respected, not just a target demographic! Where women can feel safe at play and at work within the gaming world! And where you, you over there, you with the angry look on your face and your hashtag full of hate, can accept social justice as a THING without flinging the internet equivalent of monkey shit.”

I wish I could just say: I’m a gamer too, and my opinions are just as valuable and valid as yours. And my opinion is that we need some change up in this community. And you don’t get to say no because this community isn’t yours. It’s ours.

So tonight, I wanted to write about Gamergate but I really wish it didn’t exist. I wish people could find some other way to express their concerns about journalistic integrity, if those are actual issues to be explored, without couching it in a language of hate. And I wish people could see that any actual conversation about issues was long ago tainted by the horror of rape and death threats, by the sad reality of women forced from their homes in fear.

By the real possibility of a goddamn school shooting because a woman criticized video games.

I want to write about Gamergate because there is some horror coming off this upheaval that gets lost in the news stories and the fighting on Twitter. It lies in the cracks between the MSNBC coverage and the New York Times article, the death threats and the IRC chats. It lies in the silence that fills up the minutes when you write a post about games, when you post that Tweet, when you say something on Facebook. It lies in that moment when you wonder, “Is this where someone on my feed comes and tells me I should die? That I should be raped to death? Am I going to be next?”

It comes in the conversations with your friends at IndieCade about who might be targeted next. Or who has been targeted. Who has gotten threats and who got things thrown at them. Who is going to be doxxed and who is afraid to walk alone.

It comes from waking up in a cold sweat in an LA hotel the night before IndieCade, wondering if you’re going to get into a dust-up with someone who read your Twitter account and thinks you should just die.

It comes from wondering if it’s all worth it, in the end. If this community is where I want to be.

Well here’s my answer: Screw that noise. I’m here to stay.

I’m a gamer. I’m a game designer. Brianna Wu stood up and said she is the Godzilla of bitches to those who would take her on. I might not be a kaiju, but I’m a gamer woman. I’ve taken slings and arrows all the damn time since I joined the community. I’m not afraid to be told that I don’t belong here because I’ve ALWAYS been told that. What else is new? So you’ve got Adam Baldwin on your side, Gamergate. I’ve got Chuck Wendig and Joss Whedon, Wil Wheaton and Patton Oswald. I’ve got women like Anita Sarkessian and Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu to look to as examples of women who have continued on after you’ve tried to warp their public image and destroy their lives. I’ve got people whose talent knows no bounds telling me that this is OUR community, ours and not just yours. And there’s a new day coming when maybe I can get on Twitter without hearing about someone I care about getting harassed into hiding.

I’m a gamer woman. I’m here to stay. And that’s all I gotta say about this damn Gamergate.

Gamers, Gatekeepers and the Golden Rule: Gamergate and the Real Ludic Century

September 8, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Geek Culture, Geek Social Fallacies, Speaking Out

I was at lunch the other day with my mother when a woman came by the table. She stopped to say that she loved my t-shirt, which had the Portal-inspired logo for The Mary Sue on it. I thanked her and she hesitated, looked at my mother, before saying, “It’s just terrible about Gamergate. I can’t believe it!” I perked up immediately. Out in the real world, outside of the household of other game designers I live with, I never expected to hear the word Gamergate used aloud. The woman told me upon further prompting that she ‘wasn’t a gamer’ but she’s on the convention circuit and knows people who are. She’s heard about the things that have happened, and she’s disgusted.

While we both nodded knowingly, my mother looked on perplexed. After the woman left, my mother looked up and said, “Gamergate? What are you talking about?”

Then I realized. She didn’t know. She didn’t know that for the last few weeks, along with working, I had dealt with death threats over vocally standing up for Zoe Quinn on Twitter. She didn’t know that women I respected, like Mattie Bryce and Jenn Frank, had quit because of harassment. She didn’t know about any of the insanity that has become Gamergate because my mother isn’t a gamer. To her, it was Thursday. To anyone embroiled in this nonsense, it was Day #Whatever since this craziness began.

In the past few weeks, the gaming community has been under siege, embroiled in an invented scandal that has turned into its own internet movement. It’s called Gamergate, and if you haven’t heard about it, I wish I could say you weren’t missing anything. Because to most of the world, you’re not missing anything. You’re only going about your life while the gaming community goes through some of the most serious growing pains I could have ever imagined. If you aren’t a gamer, or aren’t working in the games industry in some way, then Gamergate is just another strange word to you invented by the internet. But to those people who take these things seriously, who either associate with the gamer community or develop and write about games, Gamergate is nothing less than the catch-all word for a cesspool of rage, lies, and hate that erupted a few weeks back.

I won’t go into a full breakdown of the events of Gamergate, because this article did a fantastic job of it for me. But I will give the basics and go from there. Once upon a time, before we ever knew what the hell a Gamergate was, a jilted ex-boyfriend of Zoe Quinn (the developer of Depression Quest) decided that it was all right to created a blog to vent his spleen about his break up with Zoe. This guy’s exhaustively long post included insinuations that Zoe Quinn had slept with reviewers and even her boss to receive professional advancement and good reviews for her game. The fact that these reviews did not exist was irrelevant. The fact that this is a typical tactic often employed against women to discredit them, by insinuating that they could not achieve anything without doing so on their back, is pretty obvious. However, this blog post set off a monstrous response by so-called seekers of ethics, who loudly decried Quinn’s behavior as an example of the nepotism going on in the game design world. And by loudly decried, I mean they threatened her life, harassed her, doxxed (spread her personal information to the internet), harassed her family, and hacked her accounts. All in the name of ethics in games.

If you see the sick irony in this, you’re not alone. Many designers, journalists, and game enthusiasts rose to Quinn’s defense, and so touched off a back and forth explosion across the gaming world. Gamergate supporters targeted anyone who they deemed ‘Social Justice Warriors’ for harassment on social media if they dared stand up to speak out about the behavior of the internet mob. People from designers like Tim Schaefer and Elisabeth Sampat down to folks like little ol’ me spent countless hours dealing with folks who ‘just want accountability in games journalism!’ Or so they say. It’s hard to hear what point they’re making over all the abuse, the hate, the harassment, and the death threats. I got six. Zoe got thousands. Then Anita Sarkeesian put up her latest video on Tropes vs. Women and received death threats so vile and serious, she had to flee her home.

But sure. This is about ‘ethics.’

And so it went on. And still is going on today. Even though Zoe Quinn has gone online and proven that much of the so-called truths about Gamergate were created by some folks with WAY too much time on their hands from 4chan, coordinated in IRC channels that Zoe watched and recorded, the vocal offended party of gamers who believe that Gamergate is actually a thing. They feel that the games world is under attack by a group of ‘social justice warriors’ out to change their community, open it up to all kinds of games that don’t fit their definitions and aren’t what they grew up with. They talk about a conspiracy of these SJWs to take away their way of gaming and change the face of games.

It’s too bad they never got the message: that change has already been happening. And it didn’t take a conspiracy to do it.

Contrary to popular belief, the gaming world has never been what is stereotypically believed. First, gamers were never all male. Sure, they were predominantly male for a long time and of a specific demographic, but it was never universal. They were also never predominantly western/American, though that’s the only narrative we seem capable of digesting. To hear people talk about it, games only came from America or Asia, and that’s about it. And finally, despite the overwhelming discourse to the contrary, gaming was never predominantly digital. There was a whole group of gamers that did not just play digital, that were board game, card game, wargaming, tabletop RPG and LARP enthusiasts. However all these people did share one title, now so badly covered in filth that it might never recover. They were all gamers.

In a recent article by Leigh Alexander, she gives a brilliant break-down of the rank stagnation that has overtaken large portions of the gaming world. Marketing towards the perceived male demographic long ago created the idea that the world of gamers was occupied and defined by men, for men. Women and anyone outside of the normative were just outsiders, objectified, marginalized, and ultimately inconsequential to the overall market and culture of gaming. She paints the picture of Gamergate as the death throes of a festering heap of glass-eyed, vacant, culture zombies, unaware of the way they have been turned into rapt consumers of a vapid ethos backed by a marketing machine. And she’s got a lot of points about the consumerism, the lack of exploration of anything outside of the normative, the disgusting rage aimed at anyone trying to change the status quo.

But one thing about this article bothered me almost as much as the shouts of the haters on the internet. In the article, Leigh Alexander says that ‘Gamers are Over’, an idea echoed by many since this nonsense began. I get that what she means is that the long-since static culture of male-dominated, consumer driven gaming world is dying a slow death, and that Gamergate is just the death rattle. However, in the same breath as people have begun speaking about this new world of gaming, they spew victrol against the gaming community that was based on the stereotypes that have plagued games forever. And in that same breath, those declaring gamers and gamer culture as over are becoming the very gatekeepers they are railing against. Except now, the gaming world that was before, full of “young men queuing with plush mushroom hats and backpacks and jutting promo poster rolls” in their “listless queue” (quote: Alexander), is relegated in all its facets to something meant to be burnt to the ground and left behind, a relic of this new ludic century (a term created by Eric Zimmerman his a manifesto about the future of games). And the conversation becomes a shouting match of absolutes, all over one issue: what will the gaming world look like going forward?

This isn’t a conversation of absolutes. It can’t be. Because the gaming world was never JUST a world of young men in their basements banging away at the latest AAA shooter. The new gaming world isn’t JUST going to be a world where every game is inclusive and thoughtful (although wouldn’t that be nice). It is going to be complex, full of different kinds of people playing games and exploring what different play spaces have to offer their lives. It’s going to be the casual gamers and the LARPers, it’s going to be the people playing League of Legends and Magic professionally alongside the people designing personal stories on Twine and in Unity. It’s going to be Warhammer 40K and Farmville, Dystopia Rising and Destiny, World of Warcraft and Fiasco. And it’s going to be all these games in conversation with journalists, thinkers, scholars, writers and critics. It’s going to be Anita Sarkeesian and John Romero. It’s going to be Eric Zimmerman and the Nordic LARP scene. It’s going to be hardcore fans of Killer Queen rubbing elbows with NERO players and hardcore Netrunner players.

It’s everyone. It’s all of us. And nobody gets to define games because they’re all games.

And you’re all playing them. And whether you want the term or not, that makes you a game player. A gamer. What have you.

That’s the future of gaming in my eyes. That is the real ludic century.

So yes, this new world is full of a lot of different kind of people. However, mark me on one thing:

This new world has room for all kinds of games. What it doesn’t have room for is harassment. It has no room for discrimination or othering. That is the kind of socially-regressive, morally bankrupt bullying and soap-box insensitive rhetoric that we have seen throughout this Gamergate and perpetuated, hopelessly unchecked, for decades. In the past, the kind of angry internet ranting or socially unacceptable behavior that has become equated with gamer culture has been swept under the rug with a sigh and a ‘what can you do.’ Well, we can do a lot actually. We can speak out. We can create the community we want and make sure it has room for everyone to be treated well. We can make sure that games don’t perpetuate that culture by creating a hostile environment for people based on race, gender, religion, sexuality, body type, culture, ethnicity or economic standing. Those are the ground rules because they are, in my eyes, the lowest common denominator for a society that is evolving and growing in the twenty-first century.

This new expansive gaming world has no place for definitions on who can be a gamer, but it does need a golden rule. And that golden rule is: don’t be a dick.

(And it should require no explanation that being a dick includes harassment, threatening, discrimination, objectification, exclusion based on identity, or perpetuation of shame culture. But since this hasn’t been a no-brainer in the past, it bears repeating.)

These horrible few weeks, full of harassment and fear, are the growing pains of a culture long ago poisoned by its own fears of inadequacy, of a medium and its supporters struggling for legitimacy and battling for supremacy of identity. And these fights have cost us so many who just walked away, shook their heads and said ‘the hell with THOSE guys.’ Or worse, folks who have come to hate this time of change because of the fear that the good they’ve had from being a gamer in the past is now being cast in a negative light by the screeching voices of the trolls and harassers on the internet. But I refuse to look at this new age of gaming as a place where anyone, not the haters and not those shouting that ‘gamers are over,’ can take the lead to sanitize gaming of the corners they don’t like. This is a big sandbox. We can all play in it.

But just remember that Golden Rule. Because it’s the difference between rational conversations, and Gamergate. And I for one am getting tired of the latter and could do with some more of the former.

Because It Really IS A Problem: Turning A Blind Eye To Inequality In Games

August 27, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Geek Culture, Speaking Out

Just yesterday, I watched the second part of Anita Sarkeesian’s brilliant analysis of ‘Women As Background Decoration’ in her series Tropes vs Women. It depicts the various, often graphic, ways in which women are included in games as background characters to be brutalized, demeaned and murdered in the course of video games. Her video (which I will link to below) shows examples of these female characters, faceless and often nameless, being used as props to depict scenes of extreme violence in an effort to make a game seem more ‘gritty’ and ‘dark.’ It’s not an easy video to watch, as the violence is pretty awful, so viewer discretion advised.

This video viewing came on the heels of multiple conversations I’ve had in the last few weeks about inclusivity in the gaming world. It seems that, more than ever, the divide exists between those who believe there is an issue with the status quo in the gaming world right now and those who are striving to sustain it. The more advocates stand and speak up for inclusivity within game narratives and within game design and development, the more they are rebuffed by vocal voices in the gamer population. Worse, these advocates are often belittled, attacked, harassed and even threatened for speaking out. Even those who do not advocate but instead offer support have come under attack on social media for being public allies. One needs only to look at the response to Anita Sarkeesian’s work, and the people still raging against her work, to know that the haters are still out there. And they can get LOUD.

One example: a hateful Patreon called “The Sarkeesian Effect” in which two YouTubers, Jordan Owen and Aurini, plan a slanderous documentary telling everyone about a mythical conspiracy perpetuated by the ‘social justice warriors’ to push their advocacy agenda upon the unsuspecting population. Tune in next week as they create videos about mind-controlling high fructose corn syrup and the secret of the Lindbergh Baby. Seriously, you can’t make this shit up.

We’re still having the fight about whether or not being inclusive is important in the gaming world.

And I don’t get it.

How is it by now that people STILL think that the status quo is okay? How, after all these conversations being had and stories told about people silenced and pushed aside, can people still believe that ignoring the inequality in our world is all right? I’ve heard all kinds of excuses and statements, so here’s a breakdown of a few of them.

“We don’t have an inequality problem, this is the modern day!” Yes, and there has been civil rights and women’s movements forever trying to gain reform for groups that have been pushed down and created as the minority. And in all that time, we still have women making less money and being told they don’t belong in industries like technology and game design. Anyone who looks around and doesn’t see inequality is probably not listening, as there are countless stories out there about racism, sexism, queer and trans phobia, anti-semitism, fat shaming, ect. If you don’t hear those stories, it means you aren’t trying hard enough to open your ears to another’s experience.
“Well I don’t see race (or other differences).” That’s nice for you. And that’s a way of saying “I don’t discriminate,” an homage to the melting pot that is the United States and our modern world. However, not seeing race doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It also doesn’t mean that others are colorblind and that they don’t discriminate. Also, it doesn’t mean that the identities of others should just be considered blanket ‘human’ and that’s it. Identities are made up of the things we take on as markers that define who we are. Part of that is our culture, our religion, our race, our sexuality, and so on. Those things help define us and impact the way people treat us. Some folks can’t escape those contexts, don’t want to just be seen without their differences, because that shouldn’t have to be the case. What makes a person different doesn’t make them lesser automatically, or wrong, or bad. And by denying a part of their identity by saying ‘you don’t see it,’ that means you’re ignoring it as though it doesn’t mean anything, isn’t important enough for you to acknowledge and respect, or that you are simply looking past it because you still consider it a stumbling block to interacting with the person. Please stop all of these, please. People are complex. What makes them up is potentially important to them. Step outside yourself and wonder how you’d feel if someone said to you: “Oh it’s okay, I just don’t see you as a man.”
“Well, I’m of a minority group, and I haven’t been discriminated against! So this isn’t a problem.” I’m really glad that you haven’t experienced these issues, be you a woman, a person of color, or what have you. That’s awesome and I’m happy for you! However, listen to the stories of others around you. There are others who HAVE experienced these issues. And by saying it’s not a problem, you’re ignoring their life experiences and minimizing the issue.
“People keep saying I’m privileged because I’m white or cisgendered or straight or whatever! I’ve had it hard too! I resent being called privileged!” I get that. It’s hard out there for a lot of people, for many reasons. But one has to step outside of themselves for a second to look at the system in place that we’ve existed in for so long. It puts certain people in default positions of acceptance as ‘normal.’ Consider then, in that context, whether you’re part of those groups and what that means. Then look at the story of other people of different groups, see how they’re treated differently. Compare. Contrast.
“Well how do we address this? It’s not fair to just reach out to minorities and bring them up! That’s just reverse prejudice.” Okay. Let’s get one thing straight here. There is no such thing as reverse prejudice, not as an institution. Some people of minorities can be angry and resent and even hate majority groups and their members. But the kind of prejudice and bigotry we’re talking about here is based on the long-standing institutions of racism, sexism and all the other -isms that have made minorities just that – minorities, not the majority. This othering of groups has been around for ages as part of the way society works while those who are not among the minority inherently profit from their place in society. Let me say that again: because you’re part of a majority group, you have privilege. You might not have asked for it, but you’ve got it. I as a white woman have privilege of my own because of my race. I have other parts of me that put me in minority positions however, such as being a woman in a male-dominated society, or being disabled. But overall, I have privileges I must be aware when I navigate in the world. Ignoring them do not make them less so.

Those are the major things I keep hearing about when we talk about advocacy. When we talk about the plurality of voices out there in the nerd and gamer community. We talk about how to advocate and then hit a hard wall with people who just won’t hear it. Who are dedicated to ignoring problems.

And worse, there’s people out there who are dedicating their time and effort to battling those who are trying to bring about social justice work. They label them ‘social justice warriors’ and ignore the work they’re doing. Or even worse, they attack them. They harass. They send rape, death and bomb threats. They use anything they can to discredit, shame and silence.

No, we don’t have a gender problem. That’s why we have so many women designers harassed. So many women designers who get death threats. I get them. I’m a tiny fish in my side of the gaming pond, and I get death threats. I got three when I spoke out against sex being used against someone in their professional life recently on Twitter. I stood up for Zoe Quinn having the right as a female dev to not be harassed, to not be trolled, to not receive death threats and such. And I got three emails that I buried in a folder with the other ones and try not to remember they’re there.

Harassment has no place in gaming.

It will only continue for as long as we say ‘this is just the way things are’ and ignore it.

We say it’s just 4chan. It’s just reddit. It’s just those guys over there. It’s an Over There Problem.

But there are plenty of people who aren’t Over There folks, who are the folks every day who look around and say the things I listed above and do not recognize the problem for what it is and do not engage and keep silent.

If you knew someone getting death threats for doing their job, what would you do?

If you knew someone who got emails with pictures of beheaded women in it threatening rape, what would you do?

If you knew someone who was told they have no business doing their job because of their gender, what would you do?

Well guess what?

Now you know one. And I’m not alone. And it’s time for this bullshit to end.

UPDATE: The day I post this, the horseshit gets real. Anita Sarkeesian was threatened so badly she had to flee her home to protect herself. Here’s the link to the article talking about it and before the video is a link of just a few of the tweets she received. Naysayers that complain ‘there is no problem with harassment’ or ‘where’s the proof?’ – well here it is. And this is absolutely the most disgusting thing ever.

WARNING: The image below is VERY Graphic in its description of violence. But it bears being held as an example of the horrible sickness going on in the gaming community.

Nazi Redux, Year Two: Or, It’s Still Not Okay To Cosplay As A Nazi

August 23, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Convention Report, Cosplay, Geek Culture, Speaking Out, Uncategorized

My GenCon wrap-up post has been delayed once more to bring you this late breaking bulletin:

It’s still not okay to cosplay as a Nazi.

In case you forgot. Just checking in.

You’d think a girl wouldn’t have to put this up a second year. I had a post up last year about how it was impossible to miss the presence of Nazi memorabilia being sold at GenCon. How there were cosplayers who thought it was cool to walk down the street wearing their Nazi gear. Over the year that issue remained relevant as such instances of Nazi cosplay and memorabilia being sold were reported at other conventions, such as NYCC. Apparently, it wasn’t just a GenCon thing.

"Selling Nazi gear right across from Cap hoodies? Not cool!" — “Selling Nazi gear right across from Cap hoodies? Not cool!”

Last year’s article then got reposted in A.A. George’s post about race issues at GenCon and so the issue has come up with a huge number of people talking about it. And y’know what I’m hearing a lot of? Apologizing. I’m hearing apologizing and excuses made FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WEAR NAZI GEAR. And not in the context of, y’know, historical reenactment where they’re going to get punched in the face by the Allies, like Captain America did to Hitler.

Some of these apologies are in two posts that have gone up in response to A.A. George’s article, found here and here. I’ll save you reading through the entire things because, frankly, they’re not all that impressive to begin with. They rely on Fisking their way thru George’s piece, going line by line to dissect terms rather than actually addressing the issue with courtesy and respect. So I’ll hone in on the salient points to THIS conversation, namely where they talk about my article.

The first article lies here and here’s a screenshot. The quoted part is the original article by A.A. George while the second half is the opinion of the article’s author:

No, but pinup girls in Nazi uniforms are. And last year there was Nazi military stuff. This year at the same booth there was vintage anti-Japanese propaganda posters. Are these really necessary to make games about bad guys at cons? Are these somehow necessary to display Nazis as the villain of some pieces? Or are they a contextless representation of racist crap, being sold to people right across from where folks are buying cool t-shirts? It’s someone using the GenCon space to financially profit from selling hateful memorabilia with ZERO context to a game. The same would be cosplayers who are walking around the con. There being zero context for their costumes in some cases, we’re looking at folks doing their shopping or playing their Pathfinder games, and looking up to see a dude sporting the old ‘fetishized militaria’ costumes.

That’s my response to THAT article. A conversation then came up on Google+ where someone defended the very fact that making Nazis a taboo subject would… create Nazis. Hang on for a ride here, folks, this is what we’re up to: (Names filed off this quote for anonymity of the poster)

Anytime you make it taboo, you plump it up, invigorate it, make it more virile. Anytime you make it off-limits, you make it off-limits to mock, you make it off-limits to parody, you make it off-limits to deconstruct, to integrate, to drain the power from it into a wider form of expression. Every time you say “no Nazi imagery is acceptable,” you reinforce the idea that just the appearance of a thing, just the visual stimulation of a thing, is so powerful that rational people must reject it for fear that they become tainted merely by association.

Congratulations, you’ve just built your own enemy and fêted on your own blood. You’re kind of an idiot.

There are very few more dangerous statements, ideas, or strings of expressions than, “that part of history is too close to home for freedom of expression.” Freedom of expression is how you contextualize history. Freedom of expression is how you get beyond history. Freedom of expression is how you make new history. So long as Austria and Germany have strict and constant vigilance against the threat presented by Nazis, they will always have Nazis. They build Nazis. They make Nazis. They have least themselves to the very idea that the Nazi has power over them, so much so that the very whiff of National Socialism is outside the purview of what can be discussed or represented.

You want Nazis? Because that’s how you get Nazis.”

First, whoa there tiger. You create Nazis by not allowing people to be Nazis? No, last I checked, people become Nazis because they choose to personally associate with the symbols, beliefs, and ideas of a hate-based party. Countries that have strict laws against the presence of Nazis, neo-Nazis, and fascists of the like are, last I checked, trying to check the creation of hate groups within their country. Which in my eyes is not a bad thing.

“But wait! What about freedom of expression! If we’re not careful, soon we’ll be treating Nazis like You-Know-Who in Harry Potter! We’ll be censored! Oh no!” Oh we could do a dance about what freedom of expression really means, and the fact that freedom of expression is in fact NOT universal no matter what we think (cannot shout fire in a crowded room, ect.) and also does not take away from the fact that when you express, you must be responsible and accountable for the repercussions of said expression. Which includes people saying you’re offensive and even potentially harmful at an event when wearing and exhibiting Nazi paraphernalia.

What’s so sad is I agree on one point: freedom of expression allows people to address difficult subject matter. It’s what makes us able to explore it. But there is such a thing as exploring it in a manner that is respectful for the nightmare that it caused. It’s all about context, as is so many things. And where, for example, games like Achtung! Cthulhu or Weird World War engage with Nazi material, as does many games that touch upon WWII, it’s the context of “UR MER GERD, NAZIS ER COOL!” that is blatantly problematic. This isn’t a question of white-washing them out of history, of a chance of us forgetting that Nazis are one of the worst evils around. I don’t feel that by saying that you can’t cosplay as a character that we’re risking future generations not knowing about the evils of Nazi Europe. It’s about creating a space in which people don’t walk into a convention hall, or past a booth, and overhear some dudes going “wow, look at this cool Nazi gear! It’ll look great in my collection!”

Which is exactly the context by which I ran into that booth the year before. I went into that booth to buy patches for my zombie-fighting LARP armor and ran smack into Nazi imagery, paraphernalia, and a couple of guys talking about adding some of it to ‘their collection.’ I fled that booth as fast as my legs would go. I wanted to be nowhere near it. Too bad it was right across from the booth of a friend of mine. I had to pass it every damn time I came to visit them. This year? It was right across from a booth I normally visit to buy t-shirts. I didn’t go anywhere near that t-shirt booth or any of those around it. That’s my business gone, my dollars not spent at any of the booths in the vicinity of the nazi gear. And maybe that’s just me. But that’s a financial repercussion: I voted with my wheelchair wheels and got the hell away from that booth for the second uncomfortable year.

This conversation, having been brought up by the Tor.com article, has highlighted some nasty, uncomfortable parts of the gaming world that seemingly think it’s benign to wear these things, to display them. That some sort of freedom of expression will be indelibly damaged by a rule against Nazi cosplay and the selling of Nazi paraphernalia at conventions. Sure, you have the right to wear these things thru freedom of expression. But there’s a big difference between you CAN wear something and you SHOULD.

Once again, I reiterate a previous stance I have: gaming spaces are shared spaces. And the impact displaying hate-associated imagery in that larger convention space, especially without the context of ‘Nazis-as-despicable-villains’ is harmful to those for whom historical Nazis are a personal nightmare. The display of such callous disregard for the feelings of others on the matter in the face of “BUT I WANNA COSPLAY!” is crude and tasteless at best and harmful and cruel at worst.

And you know what’s the worst part? I said all of this last year! Most of this post is almost verbatim what I said in last year’s post after engaging with the booth and first their sexist stuff and then their Nazi gear. This comes up again, and again. And again. And what worries me is that it isn’t going to be addressed. People who are afraid of their precious ‘freedom of expression’ being violated by so-called ‘social justice warriors’ are going to scream at the heavens when I mention that contextless Nazi cosplay and paraphernalia for sale is uncomfortable. They’ll slap that old “Oh this is just those crazy Social Justice Warriors” again on it and ignore.

Y’know what? You can’t say that you’re all about engaging with arguments when you ignore their content for the sake of saying that it’s just something brought up by social justice warriors. I loathe that term so much. It is the most reductive, diversionary tactic by those who are too lazy to actually engage with issues and want to hand wave away the credibility of anyone bringing these topics up. But for those who want to avoid talking about issues, who just want to have things their way and not consider the comfort of others, then the answer will always be “Get a thicker skin.”

Well my skin’s pretty thick. That’s how I got into this fight in the first place. To speak up for something that I find repugnant against a cacophony of apologists and excusers. And I’ll bring it up again, next year, if the topic comes up again. Which, considering our luck so far, it almost assuredly will.

A Context On Equality: GenCon, Ferguson And One Week In August

August 21, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Convention Report, Geek Culture, Speaking Out

This past week in August, I had a lot going on. I returned from a fantastic academic conference called DiGRA in Snowbird, Utah only to take a few days off and then headed to GenCon in Indianapolis. My friends and I drove the twelve hours over two days to Indy and spent “The Best Four Days In Gaming” running Dresden Lives, being on panels, spending time with friends and (of course) gaming. I’m going to post a Top 10 Highlights from GenCon in my next post, but first I had to look at something else going on at the same time as GenCon, a moment in history occurring just a few hundred miles away that echoed a narrative going on in the gaming community with much more serious results. I’m speaking of course about the events going on in Ferguson, MO and the death of Mike Brown at the hands of police officer Darren Wilson.

If you have not heard of the shooting of Mike Brown and the protests going on in Ferguson even as I write this, you must be living under a rock. Yet for the first few days of these events, unless you were keyed into social media, you wouldn’t have heard much about the tragedy. A young man is shot dead by a police officer and immediately questions arise as to the validity of the shooting. Protests break out around Ferguson as it becomes clear the police are blatantly mishandling the investigation. And then the cops decide it’s a great idea to roll in with riot gear, armored assault vehicles, and semi-automatic weapons into the neighborhood. They tear gas whole streets of people of all ages, including young children. People march in the streets of Ferguson with their hands up, crying “Don’t shoot!” The media reports mass violence, a neighborhood out of control. Audio and video on the ground tell a whole other story, spread through social media like wildfire. The whole world is watching.

I was watching too, from GenCon. I caught news every chance I got at my hotel room, and checked Twitter constantly. I could not forget that while I was having my fun at GenCon, there was a moment in history going on, memorializing this fallen young man who was the victim of ongoing institutional racism. This kind of systematic oppression by the police has existed, apparently, in Ferguson for a very long time. Yet the stories that came out of this tragedy, spread across social media, tell the tale of an America in which people of color are treated deplorably. To many, this was no surprise. You only have to talk to folks who hear stories about PoC victimized by police, suffering aggressions of every kind. This is the world we still live in. We still have to have dialogues about race.

It’s no surprise then to me that when A.A. George wrote a strong piece about race still being an issue at GenCon, he received a hell of a lot of flack. This article came out three days before the convention and drew a lot of attention to the question of how people of color, women, the disabled, the queer community and pretty much anyone outside of the dominant narrative of the gaming community have been treated. A.A. George joined me at GenCon on a panel called “Why Is Inclusivity Such A Scary Word?” alongside Elsa S. Henry, Jessica Banks, Strix Beltran, and Tracy Barnett to talk about our experiences facing down the battle for inclusivity in the community. The comments section on A.A. George’s post on Tor grew, and got filled with some strongly worded opposition to his opinions about the lack of racial diversity in the gaming community. (If you’d like to waste some of your time you can even check out an exhausting response from someone named Louis Correia who’s willing to tell you all about how these issues don’t exist). People stood up and said that they don’t see color, that we don’t have to talk about race, that if people of other groups wanted into the community they can just come and have fun because there is no issue. And two hundred miles away from Indianapolis, the events in Ferguson were unfolding, fed directly into our Twitter stream and the slow-reacting mainstream media, all for the world to see.

Please understand me because I am going to be VERY clear here. These two situations are, by no means, equal. The death of Mike Brown and the systematic abuse of the people of Ferguson by law enforcement officials cannot in a million years be put alongside the dialogue about race and representation in the gaming world. I want to say that before someone stands up and in outrage shouts about ‘how dare I’ blah and blah and so on. Yet the fact that so many responses to A.A. George’s article claimed that issues of representation and inequality are non-issues shows a staggering lack of awareness to the national conversation of inequality. And having those kinds of responses when people are being tear gassed and arrested, their civil rights violated, only a few hundred miles away from our safe hotels and gaming tables staggered me.

There are folks who are far more qualified than I to speak about racial inequity. I toss in my hat when talking about women in the gaming world, about religious representation of Jewish culture at large, of the issues of being bisexual and seeing representation of one’s self and being treated fairly with disabilities. I stand with ears open and mouth shut and support those who are so much more articulate than I about the issue of combating racism. But with those ears open, I hear a lot of talk about a color-blind gaming world, where people are treated equally and it’s all about the fun. That’s what we came here for, after all, the fun. And there’s no need to get our stupid ‘social justice warrior’ stuff into the gaming.

How utterly, utterly absurd and totally absent of any world context.

Just because we step up to the gaming table, grab our dice, and sit down for some Pathfinder, or for a good game of King of Tokyo, doesn’t mean we’ve suddenly divorced ourself from issues of inequality. It doesn’t mean that the people who have faced racism or any other -ism suddenly forget that the world can be a hostile place if you aren’t normative. And it’s not as though gaming culture isn’t rife with the same problems of inequality as the rest of the world. We all want it to be a magical, fantastic, utopian world where we play out our fantasies and don’t have to worry about real world concerns.

Guess what? The world doesn’t work like that, and neither does the gaming world. You can’t just shuck the concerns that exist out there and pretend they don’t exist. And the folks who usually try tend to be the ones for whom those problems won’t really BE a problem. They’re the ones who are willing to ignore issues for the sake of the status quo being perpetuated.

The gaming world is a normative one, built on a history of a pretty single-group kind of community. And now, in a time when that normativity is being questioned, the backlash is staggering. It mirrors a conversation that has been rumbling up across the country about equality on a larger scale. Equality in gay marriage, in classist economic issues, in the fight for feminism against a torrent of hate, and especially in the issue of race. And just when people want to shut their ears, ignore the problem, or abuse those who would stand against such inequality, they would also turn a blind eye to the tragedy that took a young man’s life for the fact that he’s black in America. Worse, they’d scream their heads off to the sky about how we’re making an issue out of nothing. That we should just calm down. Get a thicker skin. Get over it.

Or in the context of the games world, stop trying to ruin their fun.

Once more I will say, these two situations cannot be considered equal. By comparison to what happened in Ferguson and what is STILL happening in St. Louis, the problems of the gaming world are miniscule. Nobody is losing their lives over inequality in the art in a game master’s guide, or dying for being excluded from a gaming session based on their identity. I’d be a damn fool to put the two on the same level. But there are those suffering from professional backlash, harassment, trolling, doxxing, death and rape threats, and other such tactics because of the inequality in our industry. And that provides examples that we are, despite all our claims to be colorblind and welcoming, NOT over issues of bigotry.

The events in Ferguson brought me to a place of humbled, terrified certainty that we have all missed the point. While we’ve worked hard to create fictional worlds and fun experiences, the world outside has been experiencing upheavals. Some of us have been interacting with it, but the trolls and hatred of internet tough guys and self-appointed social justice warrior bashers have distracted from issues far larger than issues in the gaming world. It gave me the context to say that while we must continue to stand up for representation within the gaming world, for inclusivity in all spheres, the attacks of the haters is almost laughable in the face of the repercussions of such hate elsewhere. True, harassment hurts a hell of a lot and no one should ever have to put up with the trolls – I stand by my previous statements regarding a zero tolerance policy on trolling, bullying and harassment. Those who choose these roads must still be confronted and rebuffed. Yet the actions of those who WOULD harass seems so small now, so petty.

Issues of inequality everywhere are serious topics, meant for serious people. They are not the place for internet tough guys who use their online anonymity to discount the experiences of others in favor of narrow thinking. And placing their behavior side by side with the events going on in the outside world put their relevance to the bigger picture in context.

I am tonight in solidarity with Ferguson and my hopes for justice for Mike Brown and his family. My solidarity also goes to those like A.A. George, who are getting hate from the outraged haters out there, and to anyone trying to bring up issues of inequality in whatever their community is and in whatever capacity. There are serious issues going on and they require serious discourse to work them out to build the communities and the overall world we’ll want to leave as a legacy. Haters and unethical harassers need not apply.

PS: Included below are links to places that you can donate to help the cause of Mike Brown’s justice fund or even to help the protesters down in Ferguson. Consider donating if you can.

GoFundMe – Justice for Michael Brown

Campaigns for #MikeBrown #Ferguson

Ferguson Support – Ways To Support The Fight

Outrage In The Age Of The Internet

July 16, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Speaking Out

I read an article today about a performance of The Mikado in Seattle recently that had people (rightly so) up in arms. The play was dominated by white actors putting on yellowface (that would be dressing up to appear stereotypically Asian) and being downright offensive in their portrayal of the play’s characters. Sharon Pian Chan, a columnist for the Seattle Times, called out the play publicly while the director called the comedy “fun.” One could not have a more perfect example land on their desk the day I wanted to write about appropriation, outrage, and the terror of being wrong in today’s internet.

By the way, seriously, who thought this was a good idea? Photo from the performance of The Mikado.

The last few years the internet has become a wonderful and terrifying forum for discussions about social justice, appropriation, feminism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, and any number of other issues. Mediums from Facebook to Tumblr and Twitter are filled with pages where people of all walks of life have come together to discuss, deconstruct, and often decry portrayals of identities or content in the world that is problematic. Song lyrics to movie content, books to television, there is scrutiny aimed at those putting out content, from politician to producer. And thanks to these forums, and the quick response time the internet has, we can share our opinions instantly and even reach those whose content we want to comment on to share with them our feedback.

So let’s talk about feedback for a second. Let’s talk about discourse, conversation, and the sharing of ideas. And let’s talk about fear.

As a creator in today’s environment, nobody wants to be seen as getting anything about equality wrong. There exists a standing terror by many who create today of being seen as in any way being against equality. They scrutinize their work, consider carefully each portrayal, and wonder before they comment online or put out a press statement about their product just how it will appear to the public. Is the portrayal of their lead lady character sexist? If a writer was aiming for a strong woman character, has it fallen into the trope of the ‘Strong Female Protagonist’ which is aimed to appear strong but instead falls back into safe stereotypical tropes, only under a different mask? Is the art in a gaming book inclusive and are any of the fantasy races bad allegories for already existing minority groups? Is the piece of art coming from a place of privilege and has that privilege been checked?

All of these questions and more have become part of the creation process for many making art. And that, in my eyes, is a wonderful, amazing thing. Within my lifetime, these kinds of questions about content in media would never have even been considered. I watch movies from my childhood in the 80’s and wince when I see big-name actors making clearly offensive gay jokes that today would launch a thousand blog posts. (Want to check out one that still makes me wince every time, check out how Mr. Green as a professed gay man in the movie Clue is treated. Comedy or no, that’s painful to watch). We have come in such a short amount of time to a place where inclusivity and equality, not just political correctness, is not only the baseline when people are reviewing a work, but it has become the baseline for many creators when they are making their product. And though we have miles to go in many arenas and conversations must still continue to bring better representation and equal inclusion for many groups, we have come a long way in a short time.

That’s why a recent trend has set my hackles on end. That trend is what I call communication by outrage.

Here’s an example: A creator puts together a piece of work – let’s use a game for example – and discusses said work on the internet. That creator has included in their game a culture to which that game designer does not belong. When discussing the game in public, the creator is asked about the issue of cultural appropriation by the internet audience, and whether the creator considers appropriation an issue. What did the creator do to mitigate appropriation issues? The creator is given a chance to respond, and the conversation continues.

This is communication, a back and forth dialogue in open and honest faith that both sides want to hear the other’s opinions and converse to reach a better understanding of the other’s opinion. This is what I thought the internet was all about, along with being the land of fanfiction and cat videos.

But this is not what I’ve seen a hell of a lot of lately. Instead, many times I’ve noticed this happening:

Creator: I came up with this game called Stories Of The Conquered: World War II. In it, we’ll get to explore the cultures that were damaged by the Nazis, such as those of the Jews in Eastern Europe.

Some Responses: You might want to think about how that might come across. It sounds like you’ll be touching some communities that faced serious tragedy during the Holocaust. Do you have designers on your team who have some experience with this subject matter first hand from their own culture? Or have you considered-

Outrage Responses: THIS IS APPROPRIATING AND I AM OFFENDED.

Creator: Okay, well, I didn’t think it was offensive-

Outrage Response: IT IS OFFENSIVE! YOU SHOULD STOP BECAUSE IT IS BAD NO MATTER WHAT AND YOU ARE BAD FOR DOING IT.

Creator: OKAY GEEZ I’M SORRY FOR BREATHING DAMN SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS ARE SO ANNOYING!

First Response: Um, still an issue to discuss here?

Creator: I’M DONE WITH THIS CRAP I’M SORRY OKAY!

Outrage Response: YOU STILL SUCK.

See what’s happening there? Overdramatic as my example is, both sides of the conversation emphasized by me mashing my caps lock are entrenched in their positions after one side feels attacked by the other.

This also occurs when people who are speaking up for issues become attacked as well. We’ve all heard horrific stories of people harassed by trolls, harangued on social media for standing up for issues. This same dialogue of outrage is going on here.

Speaker: This piece of work is riddled with problems when dealing with female representation.

Creator: HOLY COW YOU TAKE THINGS SO SERIOUSLY THERE’S ONE WOMAN IN THERE!

Speaker: That’s part of the problem. Let’s talk about how that woman appears and how this flunks the Bechtel test-

Creator: OMG YOU ARE OPPRESSING ME AND MY FREEDOM.

Creator’s Supporters: YEAH FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION! YOU FEMINISTS SUCK, SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS RUINING OUR FUN!

Speaker: ………..

Again, a dramatization but my point stands. In no way is it considered all right for folks to troll and harass someone for standing up for what they believe in as an advocate for social change. We hear stories about this kind of trolling and we decry the folks who would harass activists and supports of equality. So when did it become okay to use similar shouting rhetorics to pressure people into silence? Isn’t the purpose of activism to cause change? If so, the pressure of shame and mob mentality less causes change than it does fear.

It’s not a matter of what a person or a creator believes anymore, or even what they actually put into their products or their art, but the perception of what others infer by their work. A creator must not only consider how issues of representation and appropriation are handled in their art (as they should) but now must consider the kind of backlash they might receive should they include anything considered hot button or problematic. Even the best intentioned work is scrutinized and may incur furious responses, without allowance for nuanced conversation. Where once the inclusion of questionable content might have started dialogues, a lot of those dialogues now have become shouting matches between entrenched viewpoints. One side is the offended party, shouting the parlance of internet discussion until the words become nothing but buzzwords without meaning any longer. When terms like social justice warrior is flung at anyone who is trying to bring up relevant points but are lumped in with loud voices meant to silence and shame. These days, you can’t actually use the term check your privilege without someone getting furious and indignant, sure they’re about to incur the wrath of someone uninterested in their ideas.

Worse yet, a good number of these conversations are no longer about the issues, but now aim at the individual.

Creator: I’m running a World War II game where players can choose to play Nazis.

First Response: Wow, I’m a little uncomfortable with that. Here’s why.

Outrage Response: YOU LET NAZIS IN YOUR GAME! OMG THAT IS AWFUL! I AM OFFENDED BY YOU! YOU ARE AN ASSHAT AND A HORRIBLE PERSON AND I NEVER WANT TO GO NEAR ANYTHING YOU DO EVER AGAIN BECAUSE THEN I WOULD SUPPORT A NAZI LOVER.

Note that it isn’t ‘offended by your choice’ but offended by YOU. While actions and choices can be used to judge and identify a person’s ideas and ideals, personal attacks don’t actually engage any kind of communication. They just work to further drive a wedge between those two entrenched sides until any conversation is impossible. Then we are left with the two shouting groups, offended and hurt, with no hope of an understanding or actual exchange. This is why the term communication by outrage is meant ironically. Outrage can be felt, but the bellowing at one another from across the gulf that has become all too common doesn’t actually facilitate communication. It doesn’t foster growth. It fosters fear.

Too many good people, thoughtful people who are interested in learning more about inclusivity, equality, and so many issues that face our communities are terrified these days to speak or act. They’re afraid to be in the crosshairs of shouting voices calling into question every word, picking apart and scrutinizing every syllable. They’re afraid to be seen as other than they are, misconstrued and called racist or bigot or misogynist. They’re afraid to be wrong. The same goes for those involved in the discourse of activism. Not only are people afraid to speak up because they can incur the wrath of the angry hoards of trolls to harass them, but they’re afraid to end up on the wrong side of an issue and be labeled all the things they hate by the angry masses.

In other words, conversations have gone from this:

"Hey, dude. Enough with the pitchfork crap over how I look. It's wrong. Put down the fire and let's talk about this." — “Hey, dude. Enough with the pitchfork crap over how I look. It’s wrong. Put down the fire and let’s talk about this.”

….to this:

"YOU ARE TERRIBLE AND YOUR IDEAS ARE TERRIBLE AND I CANNOT HEAR A WORD YOU ARE SAYING BECAUSE I AM SHOUTING MY OWN IDEAS SO LOUD!" — “YOU ARE TERRIBLE AND YOUR IDEAS ARE TERRIBLE AND I CAN’T HEAR WHAT YOU’RE SAYING BECAUSE I’M SHOUTING MY OWN IDEAS SO LOUD!”

…at which point everyone else gets involved:

"WE ARE ALL OUTRAGED TOO! OUTRAGE FOR ALL! ...What we we outraged about again?" — “WE ARE ALL OUTRAGED TOO! OUTRAGE FOR ALL! …What are we outraged about again?”

….which leads to a great deal of this:

"HOLY COW I WANT TO MOVE TO THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT AND BECOME A LUDITE!" — “HOLY COW I WANT TO MOVE TO THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT AND BECOME A LUDITE!”

I want to emphasize one thing: this communication by outrage is by no means the only discussions going on out there. There are true social justice conversations, real exchanges of ideas, yielding understanding and growth within communities. They are dominated by folks who might be offended, outraged, angry, and frustrated but instead of falling back on personal attacks, instead extend ideas rather than entrenched rhetoric. They express themselves rather than personally attack folks. These conversations take place on the very social media where people are bellowing at each other, fostering progressive dialogues in environments where aggressing on another person is still considered, y’know, unacceptable. And there are websites, blogs, speakers and groups that are reaching out to point out problems, like the above website did calling out the performance of The Mikado that does so with anger and serious axes to grind that does not fall into the parlance of outrage.

This isn’t about tone policing. This is about the loss of nuance in conversations, the lack of acknowledging people as complex creatures that can both believe problematic things and still be human beings worthy of being treated as such. This is also about recognizing that people even with the best intentions can misstep or misspeak and that browbeating one another only produces fearful silence instead of discourse.

I’ve seen a lot of this lately, a lot of this shouting and a lot of this fear to speak for fear of getting ganged up on, mislabeled, misconstrued. And maybe I’m dating myself here, but I remember days when I would sit around with friends and talk about issues, either in person or online. We wouldn’t be afraid of misspeaking, but would be able to earnestly say what we felt and explain ourselves or apologize as needs be. Recently, I tried to have a conversation about serious issues only to have friends balk out of fear of ‘saying something wrong.’ Even in the most safe of spaces, the fear of being on the wrong side of a conversation has led to a growing culture of silence that only seeks to limit the sharing of ideas and the growth of our communities. So let’s think before we pick up the pitchforks and call people names for their choices, before we further turn the greatest tool of communication in history into a tool for destroying conversation and progressive thought.

Orange Is The New Black: Body Positive But Not Bi-Positive?

June 18, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Speaking Out, Television

((Warning: Included in this post are mild spoilers for Season Two of Orange Is The New Black. You have been warned!))

Okay, I’ll admit it: I never thought I was going to like Orange Is The New Black. I heard about it when it first went up on Netflix and thought to myself, “What do I care about the story of some entitled blond chick who goes to prison?” But I was won over by my better angels (aka all of my friends on Facebook and Twitter) and ended up marathon-watching Season One last year. And while I still had very little interest in the adventures of the ‘entitled blond chick’ (aka Piper the Eternal Narcissist), I was absolutely captivated by the rest of the show and it’s amazing characters.

More than anything, I was excited to see a show that was all about diversity in it’s cast and that tackled serious issues about women in prison with such a razor-sharp wit. I think I found my happiness with Orange is the New Black, however, in its body positivity. Because for once we have a show in which the cast isn’t what you’d call the Hollywood standard. It is body diverse and for that reason, absolutely gorgeous. The show gives the audience the stories of a plethora of types of women, from the very young to the elderly, from the absolutely beautiful to the not traditionally so. And instead of relegating those who aren’t your typical television beauty to the background, each of these women are given a place of distinction, their characters carefully crafted to be unique, interesting, heart-breaking and hilarious.

Three characters have appealed to me since the beginning of the series and represent that body positivity in spades. Kate Mulgrew, a particular favorite of mine since she played Captain Janeway on Star Trek: Voyager, plays Red, the Russian cook who rules the prison kitchen with an iron fist and fabulous red hair. Mulgrew’s storyline on the show includes Red’s constant battle with getting older, including her serious back pain issues, her vanity over her hair going grey, and comments about her figure. Though she’s certainly no spring chicken, Mulgrew brings an incredible passion and power to Red that helps fire the show through the second season.

You don’t have to go much further than Danielle Brooks to talk about a body positive character on OITNB. Brooks plays Taystee, an inmate intent on preparing herself for a good job and a better life once she gets out of prison. Though Taystee is often on the receiving end of jokes about her weight on the show, she is proud about her body and gives back as good as she gets. One of my favorite scenes involves her telling a hilarious story about being naked and covered in food on top of a bulldozer. That kind of representation of a sex-positive larger woman on television is more of what I like to see: women joking around, not making jokes out of their weight to get a laugh. There’s plenty of serious conversation for Taystee too, like when she prepares for a job fair in Season Two and gets the receiving end of comments about being larger. The show doesn’t pull any punches about the reality of being a larger woman, and Brooks plays to that content and to the fantastic character she portrays so well.

I think for body positive stories, however, I can’t look any further than Dascha Polanco’s portrayal of Daya. While most fans go crazy for the love story of Piper and Alex on the show, I spend most of the episodes rooting for Daya and her totally forbidden love affair with Matt McGorry’s guard character John Bennett. Sure, theirs is the love that is totally a felony, but Daya is so earnest and Bennett is a super sweet character. It’s such a problematic situation and fraught with so many issues (can a woman give consent when she is in a position of no power? the law says she can’t!) but the storyline is evocative, heart-breaking, and so well done. A friend had told me about the relationship storyline before I started watching (rassum frassum spoilers) and so when I turned on the show, I honestly expected to see Daya played by some traditionally Hollywood body-typed actress. Those are the actresses which, typically, got great love story lines like these. Yet here was Dascha Polanco, a full figured woman, playing Daya and being called beautiful. And there’s no mistake, she absolutely is. Polanco plays Daya with an innocent, sweet radiance that lights up the screen, and makes her one of the prime reasons to watch Orange is the New Black.

It’s for the sake of actresses like Polanco, and Brooks, and Mulgrew that I watch the show. It is for Laverne Cox and her absolutely fantastic portrayal of Sophia, a trans woman in prison, who is breaking new ground for trans representation both on and off screen (check her out on the cover of Time magazine if you haven’t seen). Basically, I watch the show for them:

And one hundred percent not for her:

enhanced-buzz-9307-1373909458-47 — Yes, dear. Yes you are.

This leads me into the part about the show that I do not like, and that is the seeming inability of the show to utilize the word bisexual. For those uninitiated into the Piper Chapman drama-fest, Piper goes to prison and leaves behind her wet blanket of a fiancé Larry. In prison, she meets up once more with her ex-girlfriend Alex, with whom she used to traffic drugs and who Larry knew nothing about. No surprise, Piper ends up hooking up once more with her ex-girlfriend, played by the phenomenal Laura Prepon, and so begins the ‘will they-won’t they’ of the Piper/Larry/Alex fiasco.

A great deal of discussion goes into Piper’s sexuality on the show, which the writers seem to want to portray as complex and nuanced, as all sexuality truly is. However, in most of the show’s exploration of Piper’s sexual identity, they confine the discussion to the terms ‘straight’ or ‘lesbian’ or ‘gay’. Piper herself explains that she likes both men and women (see the above photo) but stops short of using bisexual as a term. In fact, there’s almost zero acknowledgement by many characters that bisexual is an actual choice and that one does not have to choose one way or the other.

One of the most brilliant exchanges in the show about Piper’s sexuality comes when she gets back together with Alex. Larry bemoans the situation to Cal, Piper’s weird but extremely cool and often wise brother.

Larry: So is she gay now?

Cal: I’m going to go ahead and guess that one of the issues here is your need to say that a person is exactly anything.

And with that statement, I think we get more of the showrunner’s feelings on the subject than anything else. The show battles the notion that people are able to be confined to labels, that relationships are more complicated than just one word, and that identity is not built upon a single classification. And in so many ways I applaud that idea, because the world is nuanced and not made up of check boxes on a form. Yet there is a serious issue in my eyes in the way they sweep Piper’s bisexuality under the rug. Her drunken statement above, or her often confused back and forth over whether or not she is gay, is the embodiment of the struggle that many bisexual people go through in this world. The struggle to stand up and not wince when people ask, “So you’re a lesbian?” (as her parents and friends did) or to deal with women who will say that she is a “straight girl” who is just confused (like Alex does at the end of Season One), these are constant issues that bisexual folks face. They are labeled as confused straight people or people who cannot get off the fence and ‘make a decision’ about their sexuality. They are identified as one or the other, straight and confused or a gay and in denial, all the time. These are labels bisexual folks have to deal with all the time. Piper is stuck with them on the show constantly. So if she must deal with those labels, and the writers have no problem dropping them constantly, then what’s the problem with the label of bisexual?

This mixed message of embracing the complexities of human sexuality while seeming almost ashamed of a term that accurately represents Piper’s situation seems curiously uncomfortable in a show that is so good at pushing boundaries. The often awkward conversations on the show between Piper and Larry about the Kinsey scale and being “turned gay” in prison are nothing next to the inability of the show to embrace an identity that is part of the LGBTQ spectrum, a title that is swept under the rug all the time and derided by many. If the show wants to be positive towards bisexuality, it would help if it didn’t seem to want to make the term disappear.

One must at least celebrate that Orange is the New Black is exploring this issue in the first place. For years, bisexual characters were relegated to innuendo or vague hand-waved relationship statuses on shows. I remember growing up realizing that Susan Ivanova on Babylon 5 was bisexual but being so disappointed at how behind-the-hand and indirect the show was about her attraction to the show’s resident telepath Talia Winters. I wanted to see more relationships with women explored by Jadzia Dax on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and crowed when I started seeing more representation on the shows I loved. Now we have Delphine Cormier and her newly discovered attraction to Cosima on Orphan Black, the fantastic Captain Jack Harkness on Torchwood, Doctor Remy Hadley on House, Oberyn Martell on Game of Thrones and Bo the succubus on Lost Girl. Orange is the New Black is joining a long line of shows who are now including bisexual characters. It would however be nice to see, for all its exploration, a level of comfort with bisexuality as an identity label than what we’ve seen so far.

Maybe the idea of Orange is the New Black is to tell us to throw off labels, to ignore classifications, and to embrace the nuanced nature of each person we meet. Yet when bisexuality and the term has been much maligned, white washed, hidden and ignored in the media for years, I’d get behind the show a little more solidly if it didn’t seem so concerned with labeling Piper anything but. Because right now, for all its positive and progressive representation, I will say I’m feeling a serious lack of actual representation here.

(Though I’ll be very honest: I don’t even think if they fixed this that I’d ever like Piper. That would take a miracle.)

Postscript: Included below is a gallery of some of those characters I mentioned above that have explored bisexuality as part of their character portrayal on their shows. This is in no way a complete list of bisexual characters on television, just a few of my favorites. A lot of them, you might notice are from scifi/fantasy shows. That’s because that’s a lot of what I watch. Feel free to comment on some of your favorite representations as well, I’m always interested in hearing about others.

Oberyn Martell and Ellaria Sand – Game of Thrones

Not All Men, But Enough To Make Me Furious

May 30, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Sexual Harassment, Speaking Out

Warning: This post is about the Isla Vista shooting in California. It will have discussions about sexual violence, murder, misogyny, feminism, and more. It will also have personal content. And it’s long. Reader discretion advised.

For the third night in a row, I woke up in the early morning before dawn, and I couldn’t catch my breath. I sat up in my room and tried to calm down. The last two days, I didn’t remember my dreams. Today, I absolutely do. I got up, washed my face, and now I’m sitting here typing this.

I haven’t been able to get a good night’s sleep since the Isla Vista shooting.

In the grand scheme of things, I’ve got a lot on my mind right now. I just graduated grad school. I was just on the west coast for an unbelievable WyrdCon. I’ve got a fantastic book project I’m working on. I’m facing some crazy health issues. There’s a lot on my mind. Yet since I heard about the shooting in California while I was in LA, I haven’t been able to sleep well. I’ve woken up in the middle of the night, every night. I’ve been keyed up, stressed, losing my temper. And it’s getting worse. Because so has the coverage of the event and the subsequent response in social media to the discussion of misogyny and violence against women.

The events of the Isla Vista shooting and the discovery of the manifesto by Elliot Rodger has sparked a debate around the world that has been bubbling up just under the surface for ages. (Do yourself a favor: don’t read it or watch the YouTube video of that monster if you want to sleep again). The news is tackling questions of the objectification of women, of feminist thought, and masculine entitlement and even the toxic fallacies of masculine culture. Most of all, the fantastic hashtag #YesAllWomen erupted with stories of women’s experiences around the globe, sharing the horrors and the cautionary tales, desperately trying to get the world to hear them. This hashtag, over one million tweets strong, has been instrumental in casting a light into the dark corners of accepted misogyny, casual mistreatment and brutal violence against women that has been a part of our so-called liberated, modern culture. Here, I thought, here is a chance to see this issue tackled in a meaningful way once and for all.

And then. And then came the other responses. The trolls, who have made it their business to harass women (and men) who commented on #YesAllWomen, who go out of their way to verbally harangue, threaten, and terrorize those who’ve spoken up to share their stories. The MRA, with their truly heinous beliefs about women. The media outlets that chose to spend their time focusing on what could have gone wrong with a wealthy (read: entitled) young man like Rodger, demonizing his mental illness as opposed to focusing on the narrative of his pathology.

But what really bothers me is the Not All Men issue and conversation hijacking.

In the days since the shooting, I have heard more misdirection away from the story of women than ever before. The whole ‘Not All Men’ issue has been a problem for ages. A woman will speak up about misogyny, about mistreatment, and the conversation will inevitably be utterly hijacked by some (usually well-meaning) guy who is desperate to distance himself from misogyny culture. “Not all Men!” is the rallying cry, but what that guy is trying to say is, “I’m not like that! I don’t do that! Look at me, I’m with you! So don’t lump me in with that bullshit!”

Yes. We know. We know that you don’t want to be lumped in with monsters who objectify, oppress, harass, stalk, beat, rape, torture and murder women. What good person wants to be? But in the rush to justify yourself away from that culture, those screaming Not All Men are exercising their self-righteous fury at the women’s voices who are trying to just get themselves heard. They’re shouting over the conversation to make it about THEM, to make THEMSELVES feel better. It’s self-centered and lacks empathy. And it makes me as a woman so inordinately angry that I can’t think straight after a while.

Isn’t it enough that talking about this issue is difficult? That women across the internet and the world have laid themselves bare with stories of unspeakable traumas just so this issue can be pushed forward into the light? Isn’t it enough that women have gone out on a limb to say “Here, see the pain I’ve been in, the things that have happened to me?” Do they also then have to sit and listen to bruised egos trying to justify themselves in the face of evidence of systematic privilege? The whole Not All Men conversation is a compounded insult to injury that brings bile up in my throat every time I hear it. I started out gently correcting people, recognizing their attempts to distance from the horrors of rape culture. I politely pointed out that yes, though individual men might not enact mistreatment of women, they are part of a larger group that does and need to recognize their place in that system. I started out polite. But after the insert huge number here time I said “I know YOU don’t do that BUT” I finally ran out of patience.

Guys. We know. But this part of the story isn’t about you. You get to have your own conversations about masculine culture and how much it blows. You get to have your own conversations about violence against men in our culture. You get to have conversations about the other issues that plague men, like classism, or racism, or homophobia. You get to have ALL the other issue conversations you would like. And we as women will be right there to empathize, to listen, to help as we can. But this story is ours. And we as women need to get it out there without being reminded that ‘we are all alike in our misery’ or ‘your misery is not as bad as our misery.’

Folks, this isn’t the Misery Olympics. Nobody is trying to take away the individual struggle that you have had by talking about their own trials and tribulations. Nobody is saying that just because they have faced systematic oppression that you have not individually had issues due to your own position in society. Nobody is taking away your right to your own pain. But if your first knee-jerk position when you hear someone talking about systematic abuse of power by a group that you belong to is to defend yourself, is to steal the narrative away to shout loudly ‘But I didn’t do it so I am not culpable’ then you are part of the problem. You show by that very action that you believe your story is more important than that of the women around you, who are desperately trying to be heard. You show your lack of empathy, your self-involvement, and your disregard for the other person’s pain.

“But my life has been hard too! I’ve had _____ happen to me because I’m a man! I don’t get extra cool things in life because I’ve suffered too.”

Yes. We KNOW. And it sucks. It all sucks. Every terrible thing that’s happened to a person sucks. It’s all awful, horrible, and terrible.

But it’s not the same story.

As half the population of the human race, women share a special narrative. It goes around the world and can be shared by women almost everywhere. Only the most lucky can say they can opt out of this shared story. You can sit down as a woman at a table in Peoria or Paris, Stockholm or Santa Barbara, and if you bring up the mistreatment faced by women, the stories will come out. The heads around the table will nod. Or those who are afraid to speak up, ashamed, will simply look you in the eye and you’ll know. They get it. They understand. Even if they protest that ‘it’s not that bad’ or ‘you should just get over it’. Even if they say ‘you just need to focus on the positive’ and ‘we need to move forward and be strong.’ Women will look at one another with that shared experience of walking home alone with their keys in their fists, hoping that the guy walking thirty yards back isn’t after them. With stories about trusting the wrong person and ending up with a glass full of roofies. Of the violation of their personal space by men touching their asses, their chests, grabbing on them, pushing up against them. They’ll share the stories of harmful words, terrifying encounters, and violence.

And some people are trying to push this shared narrative down once again. They call it beating a dead horse. They say ‘We ALL have issues, together! United! So we need to stand together and forget what divides us!’

I saw a post on Facebook calling all this discussion ‘hysteria’ and I nearly vomited. I wanted to climb through the internet, grab the person who posted it, and scream. I wanted to say, “Don’t you get it? These things happen! They happen to so many of us I can’t keep count!”

They happened to me.

I don’t share my own narrative with sexual assault often. I have my own issues with processing just what happened to me. I don’t talk about it, refuse to break down about it, demand a degree of control over my emotions from myself. Yet some days, I go to bed and remember things I wish had never happened or that I could forget.

I remember going to my first sorority party and getting drunk for the first time. I remember getting a ride home and the guy in the backseat with me deciding that we were going to hook up right there, in front of his friends, even though I said no.

I remember my first serious boyfriend forcing me into sexual acts in the front seat of his car only mere feet from my front door. When I asked him why he did it instead of waiting until I was ready, he said, “I needed it, and it’s not fair. I gave you a ride.” I remember that I was so naive that I didn’t know what to call these events. I remember being told “You shouldn’t have gotten so drunk” or “He is your boyfriend, what did you expect?” or “What’s your problem anyway? It’s not that big a deal.” That wasn’t the last time he did it either, because I believed those people. I believed I was just being hysterical.

I remember walking home late at night after work to have a guy follow me from the train station. He would make vulgar, violent threats and each day, he got closer, walked a little further, until he followed me right to my apartment building. I turned on him and screamed that I’d wake up the neighborhood, then raced inside. The next day, I didn’t see him again, only to find out that was because he’d assaulted a woman in the vestibule of her building. It hadn’t been me, but it had been her.

I remember going to a bathroom to change clothes at a convention. It was a single room bathroom and the lock had problems. No sooner was I down to my underwear but a guy pushed open the door. From his instant leering, he knew I’d been there. He blocked the doorway, grabbed at his crotch, and complimented my chest. When I told him to leave, loudly, he called me a filthy slut who wanted it. He only left when a woman outside shouted at him and asked if I was all right.

I remember waiting out in Gothenburg for my bus to Knutpunkt and being approached by a man. He asked me was I there alone, and if I had a boyfriend with me. When I politely tried to end the conversation, he shook my hand and then used that opportunity to hold me in place while he came in to give me a sloppy kiss and lick on the cheek and grope my chest. I was so stunned I didn’t have a chance to say something. I just sat there, feeling the need for a shower.

And then I remember the little things. The casual comments calling women sluts. The jokes about rape that my guy friends thought were hilarious. My mother’s warning that I can’t go out in that skirt because ‘men have only one thing on their minds’ and then being proven right when a guy slipped his hand under my skirt on the bus. Waking up on a subway car to a guy groping himself next to me while he stared down my shirt.

Okay, so some of those aren’t little.

The list goes on. This is part of my narrative, of the stories I live with and can share with #YesAllWomen because I’m part of that long storytelling tradition now of trauma that lives under your skin, in every interaction with a new man, in the dreams that won’t let you sleep. This is part of my story and I will be damned if I will sit back and listen as people try to hijack that worldwide narrative at a time when it’s finally coming out of the shadows of shame and fear and into the light.

So say ‘Not All Men’ in front of me and see what happens now. Not All Men? But enough men. Enough men to fill a million tweets and how many more stories never told. I remember mine, though. And today I’m putting them out here in the hopes that this post will let me sleep a little.

Slut Hulk: David Goyer and Craig Mazin Set A New Low For Discussing Comics

May 21, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Film, Geek Culture, Speaking Out

When I woke up this morning, I didn’t think I’d be writing a post on my blog defending She-Hulk. Or the right for comic book characters to not be called sluts and sex objects by Hollywood screenwriters. But hey, it’s a Wednesday, the sun is shining, and The Mary Sue put out an article about David Goyer and his comments on a podcast called Scriptnotes. And that changed what I did with my afternoon.

The short version is that David Goyer, a writer for DC Comics who is going to be working on the upcoming Superman / Batman movie, went on a podcast called Scriptnotes hosted by a John August and Craig Mazin. He and other panelists talked about other characters in comics that would be translated into film and how, and things went straight to pretty awful sexism the moment Goyer was asked to talk about She-Hulk. Here’s the transcript (thanks to The Mary Sue):

Craig Mazin: The real name for She-Hulk was Slut-Hulk. That was the whole point. Let’s just make this green chick with enormous boobs. And she’s Hulk strong but not Hulk massive, right? … She’s real lean, stringy…

David S. Goyer: She’s still pretty chunky. She was like Chyna from the WWE.

Mazin: The whole point of She-Hulk was just to appeal sexistly to ten-year-old boys. Worked on me.

Goyer: I have a theory about She-Hulk. Which was created by a man, right? And at the time in particular I think 95% of comic book readers were men and certainly almost all of the comic book writers were men. So the Hulk was this classic male power fantasy. It’s like, most of the people reading comic books were these people like me who were just these little kids getting the shit kicked out of them every day… And so then they created She-Huk, right? Who was still smart… I think She-Hulk is the chick that you could fuck if you were Hulk, you know what I’m saying? … She-Hulk was the extension of the male power fantasy. So it’s like if I’m going to be this geek who becomes the Hulk then let’s create a giant green porn star that only the Hulk could fuck.

I really have no idea where to start.

First off. David Goyer. I could go into explaining how She-Hulk was created as cousin to the Hulk in the comics. So them sleeping together would only work if this was Marvel’s Game of Thrones. But I’m going to sidestep that. I’m going to instead look at the logic behind your statement and the disturbing context that you’re applying to women comic book characters. And hang on, Craig Mazin, because you’re not escaping culpability for this sexist bro-fest. We’ll get to you in a second.

2051136-she_hulk — Because having big boobs and being in comics makes She-Hulk a slut, according to Goyer and Mazin.

If David Goyer is to be believed here, then since most comic book writers were men, the characters they were creating were to fulfill a need in male readership. Since, you know, men were the only people reading those comics. (Never the case, since I owned a She-Hulk #1 as a little girl). The writers therefore were trying to build a character that men, who use the Hulk as a power fantasy, could then focus on as a sex fantasy when they emote into the Hulk. They couldn’t possibly be trying to create a full-rich character with her own story that might appeal to men in other ways besides her sexuality. Because, as we know, the only way for a character in comics to be received by comic book fans is through their need for escapist narratives about giant muscles or through sex fantasies about ‘overly sexualized women’.

Heck, Craig Mazin seems to agree with him as he said: “The whole point of She-Hulk was just to appeal sexistly to ten-year-old boys. Worked on me.”

If that’s to be believed, than the comic book industry spends all it’s time aiming their writing not at their audience’s minds and hearts, but at their insecurities and need for escapism or at their testicles. And if you’re a woman, then not at all.

From here, I’ll separate my comments regarding Goyer and Mazin. Because Mazin spent a good deal of today trying to backtrack away from his comments on Twitter, claiming not only that he can’t be sexist because he has a daughter and wife, but that his comments were about the sexist aims of comic book writers at the time. But in his attempt to point out sexist tropes, apparently, he had no problem calling a character in the comics a slut because of her representation in the art as having large breasts. You know, like every other female character in comics ever. So is it then that every woman in comics was written as appealing to the male libido only and therefore that they’re ‘sluts’?

That’s a loaded word, Mr. Mazin. It means sexually promiscuous and is generally aimed to cast a female character in a negative light, generally to create shame about the character’s sexual conquests or activities. That’s why it’s called ‘slut shaming’. It is a derogatory term. There were a million ways you could have said ‘I believe that She Hulk as a character was created in an overly sexualized way.’ Instead, you went straight to calling her a slut. What’s slutty about her character? Her work as a lawyer, or being an Avenger? Maybe it’s the fact that by comparison she actually usually wears more clothing than the Hulk? I’m curious why that was the name you chose, Mr. Mazin, if you did not mean to be derogatory about the character’s sexuality. If slut your go-to word on the subject, that says something about the way you think about the character. And about women being portrayed as sexual in general. Backtrack all you want, but the word choice is telling and repugnant.

Now we can move on to David Goyer. Because on the day when DC unveiled the new title of their Superman/Batman movie, David Goyer decided to go ahead and show just how little he thinks of not only comic book fans but of the female characters in comic books in general. He started with his view of female characters as sexual fantasies, created only to entice male libido, but he also then went on to insult comic book fans in general. Quoted from the Mary Sue article:

Goyer was asked how he would translate the J’onn J’onzz aka Martian Manhunter to film. As Goyer is one of the people in charge of bringing the DC Universe to live action, this was definitely a topic where his ideas carried weight. In response to being asked about the hero, Goyer asked, “How many people in the audience have heard of Martian Manhunter?” After hearing some light applause and cheers, he added, “How many people that raised their hands have ever been laid?”

First, a powerful female character like She Hulk is just there for sexual titilation. Then, Goyer falls back on the stereotype of comic book fans as unable to get laid.

David Goyer, can I ask you a question: why do you work in comics?

By the way you spoke in this interview about not only the material you work with (example: comments on how ‘goofy’ Martian Manhunter is) and then your clear insults at comic book fans, I don’t understand why you’d work in comics. Your clear disdain for the subject material and the fans comes through in the whole interview. On top of that, it’s obvious how incredibly out of touch you are with the industry in general. And with these comments, you’ve made it abundantly clear that one of the people entrusted with bringing the next big DC movie to the world has little regard for female characters in comics or the audience of your film. Is this the person who should be working on the first big screen introduction of Wonder Woman?

Oh yes, and Mr. Goyer? I didn’t miss the bit of body shaming you put out there too. She Hulk in the comics is exceptionally fit and athletic, a muscular match for her cousin the Hulk. (COUSIN, Mr. Goyer. Not someone for the Hulk to sleep with. COUSIN.) But do I hear you referencing Hulk as anything but a male power fantasy? Nope. For She Hulk however you went ahead and called her ‘chunky’.

(Though I did notice you mentioned Chyna there in reference. Maybe because she played She Hulk in the porno? Could that be your ONLY point of reference for the character, Mr. Goyer?)

Let’s recap: Body shaming, slut shaming, fan shaming.

This is what commentary on comics and comic book films comes down to these days? Two guys bringing their sexist (‘But I’m not REALLY sexist!’) ideas to the table? We’ve heard these voices for years now, perpetuating the same garbage and framing the view of female characters through the lens of male lasciviousness. Heaven forbid that we could divorce ourselves of the male assumption that everything in comics is for them long enough to consider female characters as entities unto themselves. Goyer and Mazin are just echoes of the same old song and dance, just caught out in the open being blatant about it. Slut Hulk. Just something to bang. It’s all been said before. Now it’s just caught on podcast.

What amazes me is in his comments, there’s indications that Goyer felt like one of those stereotyped nerds growing up. He says ‘those people like me’ who were getting beaten up. So now, as a screenwriter and someone in the driver’s seat of providing creative content to the comic book world, seems Goyer might be suffering from a little self hating nerd syndrome.

DC Comics, do yourself a favor. Hire someone to work on your movies and your comics that doesn’t clearly hate on your own fan base quite so much.

“I Don’t See _____, I See People” Or The Dangers of Denying Diversity

April 17, 2014 by Shoshana, posted in Speaking Out, Uncategorized

(Warning: I am delving into a discussion of diversity, politics, anti-semetism, and more. I do so with only the intent of exploring my complicated feelings on the subject, in light of a lot of activities going on lately in the world. Please take this as a meditation on the subject and no manifesto, a thought in progress with no intent to insult, but instead to create consideration. I try to understand how to speak about diversity and acknowledge that I trip and fall in the holes of my own ignorance more often than I succeed. Let’s see if I can get this out without finding a pit hole again).

These days, everyone is talking about diversity: how it’s important, how it needs to be a part of our world, how it should be handled in our work and what’s the best language to use. I myself have talked about it, written about it, sat on panels about it (when it comes to geekdom and gaming) and more. There are battles going on about social justice both in the real world and especially across the internet. From people speaking out about the harassment of women in the comic book world to discussions about Ru-Paul using the transphobic term ‘she-male’ on the popular Ru-Paul’s Drag Race, we have been having more conversations than ever regarding how to bridge the gaps between what is considered ‘normal’ in our cultures and those who have been struggling with bigotry and intolerance for years. While the internet rages over the appropriation of words and how to best handle online harassment of activists, one particular part of the argument has stuck with me over the last few months.

When discussions of diversity and fighting for equality has come up, one of the popular responses I’ve heard from people is: “Well, I’m not part of the problem, I don’t see race/religion/ethnicity/sexuality/gender. I see people.” The implication here is that by seeing past these things to treat everyone as individuals, as people rather than a collection of identifiers, then the entire issue of bigotry has been sidestepped in favor of a utopian melting pot of empathy. In it’s purest form, I love this idea. I love it so much I can’t tell you. The idea that we can look at one another with empathy and respect and see and accept one another for the person we are rather than a pile of identifiers is amazing.

It’s also dangerous.

The dream of the Melting Pot, where cultures will merge into one another and we will all become one big culture, isn’t entirely a dream anymore. People from across the world are coming together, sharing communities, building creative endeavors, working together, falling in love, making babies, and growing old together. Today we share our cultures, our cuisine, our holidays, our music, our futures and our hopes with people whose ancestors and ours might never have interacted. Or worse, whose ancestors and our ancestors might not have exactly been buddies. Things are changing and the face of our world, especially in the US, is rapidly shifting. So then why is it so dangerous, so worrisome, to say that differences no longer exist?

Because fact of the matter is… they do. And to ignore them is to ignore the reality of those who are different from you, and the way that those differences are treated by the rest of the non-melting pot society.

Fact: People who are different than the ‘norm’ have different life experiences, different needs, different wants. Hell, everyone has different wants and needs in this world, and trying to wash them all into a single group is to deny individuality, the experiences, and the trials and tribulations faced by others. Saying you do not see people by the factors that make them up is denying a part of their heritage and experience in favor of your comfort, in an effort to minimize the issue.

Fact: Bigotry still exists around the world. And just because an individual chooses not to notice differences, doesn’t mean that discrimination isn’t still happening from elsewhere.

It’s this particular part of the problem of white-washing, or ‘normalizing’ all people, that I want to focus on.

I’ll use an example that is close to my heart. Anti-semetism.

Just last week, have saw an instance of a shooting at a Jewish Community Center and then a rest home for the aged in Kansas. (And can I get up on my box for a moment and say A REST HOME?! What in the cowardly HELL?) The 73-year-old shooter was identified as a former leader of the Klu-Klux-Klan in the area, and there were questions for a bit about whether or not the shooting was going to be labeled a hate crime. The shooter was reported to have shouted ‘Heil Hitler!’ when he got into the cop car.

Ahem. Moving on.

The flyer circulated in Donetzke Ukraine, telling Jews to register with the gov. — The flyer circulated in Donetzke Ukraine, telling Jews to register with the government or risk deportation and seizure of property.

Today we have reports that in the town of Donetzk in the Ukraine, Jews exited their synagogue on Passover to men in masks handing out flyers saying that Jews will have to report to the government who they are or face deportment and loss of their assets. The flyers were supposedly from the local government, though now there are indications that they may have been faked in an effort to create destabilization and propaganda against the local government. Who the hell knows what’s going on in the Ukraine right now, and who is doing what, but one thing is for certain. Jews in an Eastern European city came out of their synagogue and were handed flyers that told them they were going to need to register themselves with the government. This of course less than a hundred years after the LAST time a government asked Jews to identify themselves publicly – and we remember how well that went.

(And yes – I went there. I referenced the Holocaust. Because you can’t get away with this issue today without that ghost haunting every headline).

These are two extreme realities of anti-semetism in the world today, one in the US and one in the Ukraine. But every day there are incidents of neo-nazi activity, of anti-semetic behavior, of micro-aggressions. A friend of mine was on the subway recently in New York City when a woman got on and started screaming about killing all the Jews. My friend was sitting next to an Orthodox girl, who started shaking in fear, so my friend grabbed the girl’s hand and assured her that she was safe, she was going to be protected. On the Orthodox girl’s far side another pair of women grabbed her other free hand. The woman ranted, raved, and eventually left the train without incident. This story, while awful in pointing out how in the heart of liberal America (New York) we have instances of anti-semetism right out in the open, also highlights how folks are willing to do something to fight this bigotry. People stand against these things. Outrage is lobbed across the internet when we hear about these things. Anti-fascist activists get out in the street, protest, stand up, even get hurt – as in the case of neo-nazis knifing feminist activists in Malmo, Sweden. But mostly, when these things happen, we hear disbelief. “I can’t believe this is happening, in today’s day and age!”

Why? Why are we surprised? People have always scapegoated and mistreated those that are other. Those of us who consider ourselves liberal, or open-minded, or progressive, or whatever you want to call it believe that this can be cured with time, with evolution of mankind. And I hope that we’re right. But in the meanwhile, we have to also understand and accept that not everyone feels this way. To pretend that they do, to pretend that everyone agrees with this view of a unified mankind into one homogeneous population at peace with one another is to deny not only the beautiful diversity that we’re trying to celebrate, but to woefully underestimate the bigotry that still exists and festers in this world. It is the ugly side to recognizing differences. And the more that we try and pretend that these differences don’t exist, that we strip those differences back to indicate a person is just ‘a human being’, the more we underestimate the hatred born of people who aren’t so interested in accepting the melting pot world. We forget that there are those out there who are still dedicated to a hatred so unfathomable to me as to be monstrous.

There’s a saying I like to employ about the people in my life, when people ask me about how I’m friends with someone who has a problem, or a personality issue that gets on their nerves. “But Shoshana,” they ask, “that person is a dick! They do such annoying things!” And my response is always: “I get that. But I try to embrace my friends with their flaws, not despite them.” While I would never consider the differences between people as flaws, the structure of the idea there is still sound. To state that I embrace a friend without acknowledging their flaws would be wrong: you’ll always be treating that person unfairly, as you are picking and choosing what personality traits of theirs you appreciate and which you’ll ignore until they become a problem for you. In cases of diversity, I would change the saying and say: “I embrace my friends for all that they are, not just for the parts I find acceptable.” Because it is the height of disrespect to a person in my eyes to say that you appreciate them as a person without appreciating the parts of themselves that you might find distasteful, but that remain parts of their identity and life experience.

Differences exist. But we honor them. We respect them. We do not make them the lever upon which we grind our ax. We do not use that difference as a way to push our pain off on others. And we certainly don’t try and pretend those differences don’t exist, because to do so is to deny the fundamental freedom of choice and independent thought that we so celebrate as part of the human condition. We have the right to be different. Let’s not pretend for a minute that we aren’t in a race to be more PC.

C’mon, human race. I believe we’re better than this. We have to be.