[Morgoth]

And besides. What we have here is someone being offended by a joke and expressing that to the Developer. The Developer contacted the writer of said joke who agreed to change it to something else. Hardly a big deal.

The expression of outrage culture - to the extent that is a thing - I've seen in this instance is from Gamergate, and boy was that a massive surprise.

[Aptorian]

worry, on 07 April 2015 - 07:10 AM, said:

In that case I just think you're wrong, I guess. For one thing, it's quite deliberate. The premise of the joke specifically cites a "woman" turning out to be a "man", playing on the transphobic cliche of trans people as tricky predators of unwitting straight men. I don't see how you can get around it, even with this hypothetical dimwitted "man on the street" who's merely homophobic/misogynist rather than aware enough even to be transphobic (which I don't believe either). But if the joke teller is deliberately all of the above, and the average person in the intended audience is only some of the above due to ignorance/indifference (their bigotry horizons needs expanding I suppose), how is any of that a point in their favor?

Man, you are incredibly entrenched in the persecusion complex of transpeople.

My point is that the vast majority of people do not walk around thinking about other people's sexuality, their gender or their creed. Maybe this is a Danish culture thing but who you are and what you do or are into is a deeply private matter. It's none of the publics business. If I asked around I assure you that most if not everyone would say that they do not care who you fuck or what you believe in. Just keep it to yourself.

Being politically incorrect does not equal bigotry. Being racially or sexually insensitive does not equal some sexual phobia. Some people just do not care about your lack of priviliges. I imagine that this is an infuriating thing, especially if you're out to smash the Patriarch machine, but that's the problem. The vast majority of the normals do not have the excess social compassion or capital needed to worry about the extra needs of a minority they do not understand.

This post has been edited by Apt: 07 April 2015 - 09:42 AM

[D'rek]

Grief, on 06 April 2015 - 09:09 PM, said:

D, on 06 April 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Just to be clear, this limerick is nothing but random in-game flavour text with no actual bearing on the plot or mechanics of the game whatsoever, right? How on earth do people get that upset about it, no matter what it says? Changing the flavour text of a random object that barely affects the game cannot come even close to rationally being any sort of "win" or "lose" for any sort of societal group or agenda.

They want to argue about character design and gender choices, marketing, diversity in games, etc, then great, there's actually a reasonable discussion to be had there (I know, I know, most of these people are not interested in having a reasonable discussion). But this is just looking for something to complain about and forcibly turn into an issue. Nobody playing the game is going to have their gameplay experience significantly affected by whatever this tombstone says.

Just another occurrence of a small bunch of vocal idiots trying to get attention by making an issue out of nothing.

I'm not that sure that it being a small issue in terms of game signficicance is really that important. Quite often I think the small, throwaway things, can be the things that highlight the implicit assumptions in a work, and can be very important. In fact, a lot of literary criticism focuses on exactly that. Take Bertha in Jane Eyre. She's essentially a plot device, and I doubt that a lot of people who've read the book could even tell you her race off the top of their heads. Yet it is still very signficant, and the focus of some major pieces of discourse criticism.

That's a case where the object in question does have plot significance, though, and even then if the author decided to change Bertha partway through writing that book I doubt there would have been a huge backlash of people claiming it was a 'win' or 'loss' for their preferred social development agendas.

Sure, people can talk about the tombstone, can even have it influence their buying decision, but this is not a story that deserved this amount of press and vocal outrage or support as it is getting. Should've just been a few people sending letters to Obsidian, Obsidian talking to the tombstone author, Obsidian deciding to change it (or not) and the people who asked for it to be changed saying they are satisfied (or saying they are not satisfied). Maybe if they decided not to change it a few minor twitter passes or reddit threads from people saying "Obsidian didn't change this tombstone so I'm not buying the game" and trying to get a boycott going for those who might feel the same way.

Didn't need a massive twitter campaign to 'raise awareness' before they even sent anything to Obsidian asking for the change, didn't need a huge Gamergate tantrum, didn't need the woman on twitter bragging about 'winning' as if it was some big cause, and didn't need a ton of websites trying to do "analysis" of the issue.

[Studlock]

Are you for real Apt, like sure we disagree about the intent of a joke and if that joke is directly related to transphobia but not that transphobia exists, it is a observable, demonstratable part of North American society. Might not be in Danish society (though I doubt it--the Danes might be progressive but I don't know if there that progressive) but see as Obsidian is an American developer whose largest market is America we can concede that we're talking about transphobia in a American context. It's not a percusion complex it's legitimate percusion. I'm honestly a little appalled that your straight up dismissing it to win an Internet argument. I'll post links to academic sources later if you want. I don't even care about the game anymore it's your dismissal of transphobia that's worry me.

[Grief]

D, on 07 April 2015 - 02:37 PM, said:

Grief, on 06 April 2015 - 09:09 PM, said:

D, on 06 April 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Just to be clear, this limerick is nothing but random in-game flavour text with no actual bearing on the plot or mechanics of the game whatsoever, right? How on earth do people get that upset about it, no matter what it says? Changing the flavour text of a random object that barely affects the game cannot come even close to rationally being any sort of "win" or "lose" for any sort of societal group or agenda.

They want to argue about character design and gender choices, marketing, diversity in games, etc, then great, there's actually a reasonable discussion to be had there (I know, I know, most of these people are not interested in having a reasonable discussion). But this is just looking for something to complain about and forcibly turn into an issue. Nobody playing the game is going to have their gameplay experience significantly affected by whatever this tombstone says.

Just another occurrence of a small bunch of vocal idiots trying to get attention by making an issue out of nothing.

I'm not that sure that it being a small issue in terms of game signficicance is really that important. Quite often I think the small, throwaway things, can be the things that highlight the implicit assumptions in a work, and can be very important. In fact, a lot of literary criticism focuses on exactly that. Take Bertha in Jane Eyre. She's essentially a plot device, and I doubt that a lot of people who've read the book could even tell you her race off the top of their heads. Yet it is still very signficant, and the focus of some major pieces of discourse criticism.

That's a case where the object in question does have plot significance, though, and even then if the author decided to change Bertha partway through writing that book I doubt there would have been a huge backlash of people claiming it was a 'win' or 'loss' for their preferred social development agendas.

I'm not sure if I think that plot significance is particularly the key, or even a particularly relevant, issue. I mean, if I put something sexist/racist/whatever in a piece of art, and it's completely non-related to the plot, does it make much of a difference? I'm also not sure how far I would agree that Bertha's specific race has much in the way of plot relevance in Jane Eyre.

Do I think it "needed" all the things you list -- probably not. But that's not necessarily the same as it not meriting them to some extent. I'm not sure backlash is a very useful measure here. If lots of people are voicing an opinion that something they see as transphobic isn't acceptable -- even if it's a pragmatically small thing -- is that a bad thing? Indeed, doesn't the fact that it's a pragmatically small thing actually serve to make the point more effectively? And doesn't the fact that it garnered such a counter-reaction suggest that maybe a large voicing of support isn't all that bad either? Issues like this can often become ideological battlegrounds, which makes the original issue seem blown out of proportion when viewed in isolation, but I'm not sure that this means that the level of attention it recieves is a bad thing. In isolation, certain people having to drink out of certain water fountains looks pretty trivial too.

Particularly regarding the specific example of Jane Eyre, there is a major piece of literature -- Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea -- that is pretty much directly backlash against the race chosen for Bertha being percieved as a "loss", and there is plenty of influential criticism surrounding this. Is it a twitter campaign? Sure, it isn't. It also happens a good while after Bronte's death. But then, if Bertha's race is a "loss", then it should be noted that one of the things Rhys is criticizing is the biased ideas that meant there would not be a backlash at the time over Bronte's use of race, and perhaps the fact that there is a backlash now when there wouldn't be in the past is a positive thing.

[Aptorian]

Studlock, on 07 April 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

Are you for real Apt, like sure we disagree about the intent of a joke and if that joke is directly related to transphobia but not that transphobia exists, it is a observable, demonstratable part of North American society. Might not be in Danish society (though I doubt it--the Danes might be progressive but I don't know if there that progressive) but see as Obsidian is an American developer whose largest market is America we can concede that we're talking about transphobia in a American context. It's not a percusion complex it's legitimate percusion. I'm honestly a little appalled that your straight up dismissing it to win an Internet argument. I'll post links to academic sources later if you want. I don't even care about the game anymore it's your dismissal of transphobia that's worry me.

By all means post some articles. It might be interesting.

I am not arguing that transphobia doesn't exist but when I read yours and Worryworts comments on the issue, I often get the impression that you believe there is this unified agreed upon agenda that singles out the minorities and intentionally tramples them into the dirt. That the patriarchal society has developed a system where the cisgendered normals all inherently hate the transgendered, believe the worst and are out oppress them.

I find this to be a paradox. A minority can't both be the subject of a large scale prosecution and at the same time be an ignored and marginalized subgroup. That's some kind of smoky back room conspiracy thinking.

I think that the people who a personally invested in these issues spend so much time analyzing the subject, that they mistakingly assume that the rest of the people who are included in this unified field of phobias and subcultures are equally aware of the issues at hand.

I doubt that.

[D'rek]

Grief, on 07 April 2015 - 07:56 PM, said:

D, on 07 April 2015 - 02:37 PM, said:

Grief, on 06 April 2015 - 09:09 PM, said:

D, on 06 April 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Just to be clear, this limerick is nothing but random in-game flavour text with no actual bearing on the plot or mechanics of the game whatsoever, right? How on earth do people get that upset about it, no matter what it says? Changing the flavour text of a random object that barely affects the game cannot come even close to rationally being any sort of "win" or "lose" for any sort of societal group or agenda.

They want to argue about character design and gender choices, marketing, diversity in games, etc, then great, there's actually a reasonable discussion to be had there (I know, I know, most of these people are not interested in having a reasonable discussion). But this is just looking for something to complain about and forcibly turn into an issue. Nobody playing the game is going to have their gameplay experience significantly affected by whatever this tombstone says.

Just another occurrence of a small bunch of vocal idiots trying to get attention by making an issue out of nothing.

I'm not that sure that it being a small issue in terms of game signficicance is really that important. Quite often I think the small, throwaway things, can be the things that highlight the implicit assumptions in a work, and can be very important. In fact, a lot of literary criticism focuses on exactly that. Take Bertha in Jane Eyre. She's essentially a plot device, and I doubt that a lot of people who've read the book could even tell you her race off the top of their heads. Yet it is still very signficant, and the focus of some major pieces of discourse criticism.

That's a case where the object in question does have plot significance, though, and even then if the author decided to change Bertha partway through writing that book I doubt there would have been a huge backlash of people claiming it was a 'win' or 'loss' for their preferred social development agendas.

I'm not sure if I think that plot significance is particularly the key, or even a particularly relevant, issue. I mean, if I put something sexist/racist/whatever in a piece of art, and it's completely non-related to the plot, does it make much of a difference? I'm also not sure how far I would agree that Bertha's specific race has much in the way of plot relevance in Jane Eyre.

Do I think it "needed" all the things you list -- probably not. But that's not necessarily the same as it not meriting them to some extent. I'm not sure backlash is a very useful measure here. If lots of people are voicing an opinion that something they see as transphobic isn't acceptable -- even if it's a pragmatically small thing -- is that a bad thing? Indeed, doesn't the fact that it's a pragmatically small thing actually serve to make the point more effectively? And doesn't the fact that it garnered such a counter-reaction suggest that maybe a large voicing of support isn't all that bad either? Issues like this can often become ideological battlegrounds, which makes the original issue seem blown out of proportion when viewed in isolation, but I'm not sure that this means that the level of attention it recieves is a bad thing. In isolation, certain people having to drink out of certain water fountains looks pretty trivial too.

Particularly regarding the specific example of Jane Eyre, there is a major piece of literature -- Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea -- that is pretty much directly backlash against the race chosen for Bertha being percieved as a "loss", and there is plenty of influential criticism surrounding this. Is it a twitter campaign? Sure, it isn't. It also happens a good while after Bronte's death. But then, if Bertha's race is a "loss", then it should be noted that one of the things Rhys is criticizing is the biased ideas that meant there would not be a backlash at the time over Bronte's use of race, and perhaps the fact that there is a backlash now when there wouldn't be in the past is a positive thing.

Honestly, I don't know all that much about Jane Eyre, so I can't reliably even attempt to counterbutt anything there. My understanding of it was that the character of Bertha is Creole, and also insane (though her husband doesn't hate her because of either of those reasons, he hates her for some other reason). Does the book link the two? Or is it just that because she's the only Creole and only insane character in the book people interpret it as a statement that Creole are insane?


Anyways, yeah, lots of good points in your post above. It's not so much that I think people shouldn't have any response to something like this... if they really are affronted or believe it should be changed then I guess they should respond.

But this notion that *everything* should be a battlefield and as soon as any possible issue of contention is found one should rally the troops and begin a public outcry campaign instead of just politely expressing yourself to the author/builder/creator/etc... I find this notion to be pretty depressing.

No, I don't think the comparison to segregated drinking fountains is apt. That's a public utility made available and visible to citizens in public. Policies enforcing segregation of drinking fountains is a direct enforcement of a cultural norm by the government - a very literal persecution by the government itself. In contrast, no one is forced to or banned from (in most countries, anyways) reading a book, playing a video game, watching a movie, etc.

Now, obviously Obsidian is free to choose to keep the epitaph that affronted people in their game if they want, just as people are free to make their public outcry campaign. I'm not advocating any suppression of speech on either side. Just because it is legal to do so does not mean that someone should do something, of course, and I think that can apply to all parties in this instance.

Given that there is no other mentions of social outrage-inducing problems in this game, it seems like overall Pillars of Eternity is a pretty good game on the social diversity and acceptance front, except for this one joking tombstone.

So if that is enough to rally the troops and start an outcry campaign, where does it end? Should we start rallying the twitters to denounce MBotF for its evil (and evil pedophile) depictions of openly gay men?

I like to think I'm a pretty open-minded person, and I embrace any art which favourably depicts marginalized minorities, but I can also recognize that {a} not every character and object in every artistic work can be given a comprehensive background, and {b} stories are boring if every character in them is perfect. The scale of this little tombstone gives it, IMO, such little impact that I can't find see this as any sort of 'win' for any of the sides that are up in arms about it. If anything, it's just a 'loss' for tolerance and open-mindedness.

[Gnaw]

worry, on 07 April 2015 - 05:37 AM, said:

To what degree is "just a joke" a better defense of indifference than it is hatred? If a joke has a butt, is "just a joke" even an honest description? Must the butt of the joke defer to that defense, time and again?

Completely ignoring all else involved in this discussion: yes, the butt has to defer. Until their group has enough social power to make some other group the butt of their joke. That's the nature of jokes. Take that to its logical conclusion and you'll find the pun is the highest form of humor with the prat-fall coming in second. In the former, the audience is the butt and in the latter, the comedian. All other humor is the comedian and the audience preying on 'the other'.


Edit: Oh gawd, I'm going to so regret posting that aren't I? *ducks*

This post has been edited by Gnaw: 07 April 2015 - 10:15 PM

[worry]

Culture doesn't require conspiracy. That's part of the point. If the zeitgeist is that trans lives are jokes (which requires zero overt hatred), trans people pick up on that. Hatred exists for sure: in the US several trans people are murdered every year just for being trans (I think almost 10 have been reported already this year). It creates an atmosphere where discrimination can be legislated without roadblocks: http://www.slate.com...first_vote.html or http://www.advocate....0-fine-wrong-ba
And because these seem like such petty issues, the actual civil rights advocacy gets little coverage and when it does the response nearly always others the trans community.

It's hard to find information on hate crimes outside of murder for trans people that are divorced from LGBT stats in general, but you can see here that 1 out of 5 trans people will face a hate crime in the next 12 months: http://brandongaille...ime-statistics/
And we know that he suicide attempt rate for trans adults is a staggering 41%: http://williamsinsti...eport-Final.pdf which is like nearly 10 times that of the general population.

If we boiled your posts down to a point, it seems to be that people just aren't aware rather than being overtly hostile. The status quo is not one of hatred, but indifference and "jokes" that claim to mean no harm. IF we granted that, then why should the trans (and ally) population settle for the "stalemate" between one side that is pro increasing awareness and the other that is pro status quo?

[Grief]

D, on 07 April 2015 - 09:46 PM, said:

Grief, on 07 April 2015 - 07:56 PM, said:

D, on 07 April 2015 - 02:37 PM, said:

Grief, on 06 April 2015 - 09:09 PM, said:

D, on 06 April 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Just to be clear, this limerick is nothing but random in-game flavour text with no actual bearing on the plot or mechanics of the game whatsoever, right? How on earth do people get that upset about it, no matter what it says? Changing the flavour text of a random object that barely affects the game cannot come even close to rationally being any sort of "win" or "lose" for any sort of societal group or agenda.

They want to argue about character design and gender choices, marketing, diversity in games, etc, then great, there's actually a reasonable discussion to be had there (I know, I know, most of these people are not interested in having a reasonable discussion). But this is just looking for something to complain about and forcibly turn into an issue. Nobody playing the game is going to have their gameplay experience significantly affected by whatever this tombstone says.

Just another occurrence of a small bunch of vocal idiots trying to get attention by making an issue out of nothing.

I'm not that sure that it being a small issue in terms of game signficicance is really that important. Quite often I think the small, throwaway things, can be the things that highlight the implicit assumptions in a work, and can be very important. In fact, a lot of literary criticism focuses on exactly that. Take Bertha in Jane Eyre. She's essentially a plot device, and I doubt that a lot of people who've read the book could even tell you her race off the top of their heads. Yet it is still very signficant, and the focus of some major pieces of discourse criticism.

That's a case where the object in question does have plot significance, though, and even then if the author decided to change Bertha partway through writing that book I doubt there would have been a huge backlash of people claiming it was a 'win' or 'loss' for their preferred social development agendas.

I'm not sure if I think that plot significance is particularly the key, or even a particularly relevant, issue. I mean, if I put something sexist/racist/whatever in a piece of art, and it's completely non-related to the plot, does it make much of a difference? I'm also not sure how far I would agree that Bertha's specific race has much in the way of plot relevance in Jane Eyre.

Do I think it "needed" all the things you list -- probably not. But that's not necessarily the same as it not meriting them to some extent. I'm not sure backlash is a very useful measure here. If lots of people are voicing an opinion that something they see as transphobic isn't acceptable -- even if it's a pragmatically small thing -- is that a bad thing? Indeed, doesn't the fact that it's a pragmatically small thing actually serve to make the point more effectively? And doesn't the fact that it garnered such a counter-reaction suggest that maybe a large voicing of support isn't all that bad either? Issues like this can often become ideological battlegrounds, which makes the original issue seem blown out of proportion when viewed in isolation, but I'm not sure that this means that the level of attention it recieves is a bad thing. In isolation, certain people having to drink out of certain water fountains looks pretty trivial too.

Particularly regarding the specific example of Jane Eyre, there is a major piece of literature -- Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea -- that is pretty much directly backlash against the race chosen for Bertha being percieved as a "loss", and there is plenty of influential criticism surrounding this. Is it a twitter campaign? Sure, it isn't. It also happens a good while after Bronte's death. But then, if Bertha's race is a "loss", then it should be noted that one of the things Rhys is criticizing is the biased ideas that meant there would not be a backlash at the time over Bronte's use of race, and perhaps the fact that there is a backlash now when there wouldn't be in the past is a positive thing.

Honestly, I don't know all that much about Jane Eyre, so I can't reliably even attempt to counterbutt anything there. My understanding of it was that the character of Bertha is Creole, and also insane (though her husband doesn't hate her because of either of those reasons, he hates her for some other reason). Does the book link the two? Or is it just that because she's the only Creole and only insane character in the book people interpret it as a statement that Creole are insane?


Anyways, yeah, lots of good points in your post above. It's not so much that I think people shouldn't have any response to something like this... if they really are affronted or believe it should be changed then I guess they should respond.

But this notion that *everything* should be a battlefield and as soon as any possible issue of contention is found one should rally the troops and begin a public outcry campaign instead of just politely expressing yourself to the author/builder/creator/etc... I find this notion to be pretty depressing.

No, I don't think the comparison to segregated drinking fountains is apt. That's a public utility made available and visible to citizens in public. Policies enforcing segregation of drinking fountains is a direct enforcement of a cultural norm by the government - a very literal persecution by the government itself. In contrast, no one is forced to or banned from (in most countries, anyways) reading a book, playing a video game, watching a movie, etc.

Now, obviously Obsidian is free to choose to keep the epitaph that affronted people in their game if they want, just as people are free to make their public outcry campaign. I'm not advocating any suppression of speech on either side. Just because it is legal to do so does not mean that someone should do something, of course, and I think that can apply to all parties in this instance.

Given that there is no other mentions of social outrage-inducing problems in this game, it seems like overall Pillars of Eternity is a pretty good game on the social diversity and acceptance front, except for this one joking tombstone.

So if that is enough to rally the troops and start an outcry campaign, where does it end? Should we start rallying the twitters to denounce MBotF for its evil (and evil pedophile) depictions of openly gay men?

I like to think I'm a pretty open-minded person, and I embrace any art which favourably depicts marginalized minorities, but I can also recognize that {a} not every character and object in every artistic work can be given a comprehensive background, and {b} stories are boring if every character in them is perfect. The scale of this little tombstone gives it, IMO, such little impact that I can't find see this as any sort of 'win' for any of the sides that are up in arms about it. If anything, it's just a 'loss' for tolerance and open-mindedness.

The difference between government imposition and a privately created artwork is definitely a good point.

I think it's worth noting that most of the discussion I've seen -- from those that aren't saying "Obsidian removed the limerick, this is censorship and awful" -- has been pretty positive about their handling of it (and I agree that the twitter person treating it as some sort of personal victory is rubbish).

I do agree that jumping to a campaign, before trying alternative methods, is far from ideal. But then, I partly wonder if this is simply selection bias. I expect that for every time we hear about something like this because of the way it blows up, there are plenty of cases we never hear about because they're resolved without any fuss.

At the same time, while I don't think it's the ideal way of going about things, I do think that this sort of thing getting attention is good, and the positive there possibly outweighs that the specific issue could be resolved in a less dramatic fashion. I guess I think that the vocal existence of campaigns against transphobia and other such issues is a good thing, even if that means accepting that sometimes they might be vocal when a less vocal approach could work too. I don't like the idea of everything being a battlefield, but I do think that occasionally you'll get battles worth fighting that spring up on battlefields that maybe aren't ideal, and that it can still be worth fighting them. I agree that starting a battle as the first or only option isn't ideal, but at the same time, I'm not that sure it's been a negative either. I wonder if Obsidian particularly feel it has been, they might, or might not, I've not seen anything either way really. I think it's also worth differentating between vocal condemnations of Obsidian, and vocal arguments between the pro-removal and anti-removal (with lots of GG crossover) crowds. I've seen more of the latter than the former, and while I think there are fine reasons to be wary of the former (as you've raised), I think the issue has brought out a lot of opinions that probably deserve the campaign considerably more than Obsidian.

This next part will basically be a total tangent discussing Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea, because I find it interesting. Like I said earlier somewhere, it's not about not having characters who are imperfect, but rather about how the work/author treats those characters.

Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea is essentially written as a response to Jane Eyre, describing the life of Bertha (Antoinette in Rhys' novels -- with naming and re-naming playing an important role) before marrying Rochester, and giving her perspective on the story to an extent. Rhys comments that, upon reading Jane Eyre, Bertha "seemed such a poor ghost, I thought I'd like to write her a life".

Actions that Bronte portrays as mad (and often, notably, animalistic) are given background, and often presented as understandable except for the insistence of the British characters of misinterpretting them (something which happens to the other non-British characters too). The book has a sense of inevitability, given that its events are dictated by Jane Eyre to a degree. Through this it suggests that the characters are being forced -- in an almost self aware manner -- into their actions (such as the burning of the house) by Bronte, because of the same restrictive British expectations, interpretations and discourse present in the British characters. In Wide Sargasso Sea, Rochester consistently portrays Antoinette as irrational, often for his own ends and to justify his own actions (marrying her for wealth, for example). The book thus creates a sort of underlying parallel argument; that Jane Eyre likewise portrays Bertha as a mad, animalistic, Creole, and does so for its own dubious purposes. There is no objective reason a mad wife could not be English, or needs to be Creole, of course. Bertha is dehumanized a lot in Jane Eyre, in order to justify Jane marrying Rochester, and her being Creole is essentially another means to render this acceptable, and critcs have argued that this detail gives a lot of insight both into British attitudes and the manner in which certain works can reinforce very problematic cultural discourses and problematic conceptions without being overt about doing so. If you're interested in looking into this sort of discussion on those books particularly, my post draws particularly on "Three Women's Texts and a Critique of Imperialism" by Spivak, who argues that what she sees celebrated as the "feminist" conclusion of Jane Eyre is essentially made possible by the marginalization of another group (in that it alignsEnglish Women with English Men and making the Non-Enlgish into the "other", and so any move away from gender binaries is predicated upon emphasis on racial binaries). If you read this (it's a bit theoretical), I don't agree with all of it, and think that it's stronger on the first two texts than the third, particularly.

[worry]

Couple bright spots lately:
Zoe Quinn spoke during a congressional briefing on sexual/domestic violence, on the topic of online abuse and the crowdsourcing of harassment. Attendees could observe it in real time as the associated hashtag was flooded with GG inanity and vitriol.
http://www.theverge....t-cyberstalking

GG group expelled from Calgary Expo for entering through dishonest means and then disrupting panels:
http://www.themarysu...ergate-evicted/

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

Apologies for the lack of links as I'm on my phone, but Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn spoke at the UN for a report on gendered cyberviolence.

Gamergate did what it does best. Responded in such a way that proved their points.

[Morgoth]

TheRetiredBridgeburner, on 29 September 2015 - 06:16 AM, said:

Apologies for the lack of links as I'm on my phone, but Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn spoke at the UN for a report on gendered cyberviolence.

Gamergate did what it does best. Responded in such a way that proved their points.

That's always my favourite part.

Well, no, I mean, I would like a world where people didn't act like that at all, online or otherwise. However, I do find it delicious how they have lifted Sarkeesian into the light.

[Tsundoku]

A real game rather than a virtual one, but it's kinda awesome.

EDIT:
For those who refuse to trust me and just click on the link - it's a woman playing in a Spanish men's (non-League, admittedly) soccer match in disguise, and doing VERY well.

http://www.news.com....da9e965d913787f

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 06 November 2015 - 05:18 PM

[amphibian]

It's a very cool prank.

Women who can (or want to) really hang and/or excel like she did in a soccer game are very rare and should be warmly welcomed by everyone on the field.

Been trying to do this in my grappling class as well. It's made tough by the usual demographic of class being women and men in their mid twenties to late forties. That means the women often are having kids and moving up in their careers as well, so we have to say goodbye for a while with happiness and a slight twinge of regret.

Durn babies and jobs, always ruining pursuits of happiness via hobbies.

[Itwæs Nom]

amphibian, on 06 November 2015 - 08:00 PM, said:

It's a very cool prank.

Women who can (or want to) really hang and/or excel like she did in a soccer game are very rare and should be warmly welcomed by everyone on the field.

Been trying to do this in my grappling class as well. It's made tough by the usual demographic of class being women and men in their mid twenties to late forties. That means the women often are having kids and moving up in their careers as well, so we have to say goodbye for a while with happiness and a slight twinge of regret.

Durn babies and jobs, always ruining pursuits of happiness via hobbies.

sorry but I really had to google it...

amphibian grappling

[worry]

Meanwhile, here's what GG is up to: http://nymag.com/fol...nist-rumor.html

[worry]

A little inter-topic action: http://www.vice.com/...nder-jubbal-503

Following the terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday night, the majority of the world recoiled in horror. But individuals active within Gamergate – either a movement dedicated to harassing women and what the group calls Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) in the games industry and/or campaigning for better transparency and ethical standards within the media, depending on who you ask – had a different reaction. They used this tragedy to present a Gamergate critic, Canadian journalist Veerender Jubbal, as one of the Paris terrorists.

This post has been edited by worry: 18 November 2015 - 02:50 AM

[Andorion]

I was just reading this. How vindictive can they be?

[EmperorMagus]

Andorion, on 18 November 2015 - 03:24 AM, said:

I was just reading this. How vindictive can they be?

The ignorance some people choose to surround themselves with amazes me. Their vindictiveness does not.