So a couple of days ago, as you probably have heard, Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn testified at the United Nations about online harassment of women. The two, along with a number of other victims of/experts on online harassment also paid a visit to Google Ideas to share their thoughts on the matter.
This is, in essence, what #GamerGate has achieved over the past year: By launching an unprecedented wave of organized harassment, mostly aimed at women, the Gators have brought about a new awareness of the seriousness of online harassment. And they’ve given the women whose lives and careers they’ve tried most energetically to destroy an influence they never would have had otherwise.
Naturally, Gators have been losing their shit over all this.
And so, as a public service of sorts, I would like to share with you the 13 most ridiculously hyperbolic pronouncements from Gators I have seen thus far in response to Sarkeesian and Quinn’s recent adventures. (On Reddit, anyway; I have not (yet) ventured into the wilds of 8chan or the Twitter hashtag to collect further examples, and I’m not sure I will.) Major props to the folks in the BestOfOutrageCulture subreddit, who have been energetically and hilariously documenting the man-steria, and who found a number of the examples below.
1) “We are literally fighting to save the world from an international alliance targeting the most fundamental human rights.“
In a KotakuInAction post with more than 300 upvotes, someone called frankenmine declares:
Make no mistake, we are literally fighting to save the world from an international alliance targeting the most fundamental human rights. …
The problem is not the UN panel and report itself. The problem was not the Google Ideas meeting. The problem was not the Congressional hearing. …
The mere ability to get access to these platforms shows that McIntosh and his ilk is building up a progressively larger and more influential network fairly quickly. At the rate he’s going, he might be able to infiltrate actually influential organizations, at the corporate and/or governmental levels, fairly soon.
The McIntosh in question is Jonathan McIntosh, Sarkeesian’s video-making partner. Unable to believe that a mere woman could actually be in charge of her own life many GamerGater’s believe that McIntosh is the evil puppetmaster pulling Sarkeesian’s strings.
2) “Now GamerGate has to save the world from authoritarian, women-infantising control freaks?”
In another KotakuInAction post, this one with more than 1600 upvotes, _Mellex_ makes, well, basically the same assertion:
So now GamerGate is being mentioned in the same breath as the United Nations, and apparently KIA is at the forefront of stopping unnecessary government overhaul of internet protocol. What in the actual fuck? …
Ethics in games journalism: That’s what this was all about. And now GamerGate has to save the world from authoritarian, women-infantising control freaks?
These guys do an awful lot of world-saving for dudes whose greatest accomplishments basically consist of being belatedly banned on Twitter for harassing women.
3) “It’s amazing that it falls to gamers to play a key role in this pushback against authoritarianism.”
LEGALIZE-MARINARA gets a hundred upvotes for this comment, made in response to _Mellex_’s post:
It’s amazing that it falls to gamers to play a key role in this pushback against authoritarianism.
Not big upping myself. I ain’t even a gamer, and I’m pretty late to this whole thing, and nor do I think it’s fair that so many politicians have abandoned their responsibilities in this manner. But that’s the reality we’re faced with.
So humble, these guys.
4) “If they win, if they get what they want, they kill free speech. For good. And the foregone conclusion is THX 1138 or Demolition Man.”
Ok, I cheated a little. This is evidently a rant from 8chan, which I found reposted on TheBestOfOutrageCulture subreddit. It’s a bit tl;dr, so I’ve edited a little and bolded the best bits.
Media is a tool. And corporations like to co-opt every single format for one purpose; to sell you sub par shit that you don’t need.
And the biggest threat to that is your ability to have just as big a soapbox to criticize their product as they do to push it.
That’s why they want to take away your ability to say mean things on the internet. It isn’t about poor little Anita. It’s about poor little Pfizer. Anita is a patsy. She’s a tool. Get everyone to rush to the defense of the damsel, take away the right to criticize and now you’ve got people going to jail for saying anything but “Coke is it! Coke is the best! Disney is the greatest! Nike totally doesn’t rely on third world child labor! Apple is an ethical company!” …
SJWs are useful idiots, savvy at narrative with their communications degrees, with social access to trend setting cliques. Those SJWs are the innoculation against those in the media who might break the narrative. They got Patton Oswalt. They got Sarah Silverman. They got Louis CK. They got the video games industry under lockdown. They have everyone in Hollywood except Eli Roth. …
The final result? Draconian control of THE most valuable social tool since Guttenberg. …
Gamers are the only thing holding the line right now, and I’m telling you, we can’t stop. Because if they win, if they get what they want, they kill free speech. For good. And the foregone conclusion is THX 1138 or Demolition Man. Then we all have to live in the subways, or live like them. And we ain’t got the cash to live in the good parts.
Well, someone’s got a vivid — if somewhat derivative — imagination.
5) “Not being a cuck is harassment.”
In a r/KiA comment with more than 900 upvotes, SinisterDexter83 sarcastically suggests that Sarkeesian and her allies are trying to declare everything and the kitchen sink to be a form of harassment.
Asking for evidence of harassment is harassment.
Questioning harassment is harassment.
Criticism is harassment.
Disagreeing with the harassing tactics of radical feminists is harassment.
Holding an opinion that contradicts the dogma of radical feminism is harassment.
Voicing an opinion that contradicts the dogma of radical feminism is harassment.
Holding an opinion that contradicts the dogma of radical feminism without voicing it is an especially sinister, underground form of harassment.
Continuing to have your own opinions after you have been informed of the official radical feminist dogma is harassment.
Not being a cuck is harassment.
He continues on for some time in this manner, but, really, what can beat “not being a cuck is harassment?” It’s Peak #GamerGate.
6) “Corporate enterprise is pushing this brand of feminism to isolate countries and decimate societies for profit.”
More conspiracy-mongering from this r/KiA comment. Sarkeesian and Quinn are puppets of an evil corporate plot to “decimate the public” because apparently decimating customers is a great way to make money?
Google Ideas, a think tank in NY, allowed the harassment to get high profile…
Google changes their monetization and wants more profit…
A new narrative (which is old to us) is put before the UN to spread worldwide.
What people should realize is that we’re seeing the rise of the corporate feminist which is a different type of feminism. This thing was okayed by a think tank to influence rates of growth for corporate enterprise. …
People are focused on fighting SJWs, they missed the bigger story and the article… Corporate enterprise is pushing this brand of feminism to isolate countries and decimate societies for profit. They mislabel gaming to justify cultural imperialism (we’re telling you what to make for our sake) and enact corporate friendly laws that decimate the public.
I’m not quite sure how the evil folks at Google secretly convinced a battalion of angry gamers to send multiple death threats to Anita Sarkeesian over the course of several years, but I’m sure there’s some perfectly reasonable explanation for it.
7) “This is only the beginning. … If this … spirals out of control from here I could see a full blown revolution down the road.”
A comment in KotakuInAction, with more than two dozen upvotes, suggests that if Gamergate and other “free speech” movements like it don’t succeed, the masses might ultimately have to resort to revolution:
More and more it’s becoming evident that movements like Gamergate are necessary. If no one fought for the rights these people are trying to take away we probably would have lost them long ago.
I’m gonna make this prediction, so mark my words.
This is only the beginning. Between the authoritarian right and authoritarian left and whatever group has an agenda to push we’re going to start seeing more and more attacks on our rights.
Privacy and free speech are going to be constantly attacked and they’ll use whatever excuse they can to try and legitimize their cause. Harassment, terrorism, sexism, bigotry, criticism, you name it and they’ll use it to try and take away your rights.
Gamergate will just have been the precursor, eventually I think there’ll be more movements based around fighting for freedom of speech ethics. If this only spirals out of control from here I could see a full blown revolution down the road.
Well, of course you can. Because you clearly have no understanding of history and only a tenuous connection with reality.
8) “When the lunatic horde comes knocking, we stand up, stand strong, arms linked and spirits high, voices joined in harmony, millions of different pitches mingling into a rising crescendo of unity and strength.”
In an r/KiA comment with more than a dozen upvotes, Ferlion123 gets all inspirational:
Where do we go from here?
We go to our families and we go to our friends. We go on with our jobs and our lives. And when the lunatic horde comes knocking, we stand up, stand strong, arms linked and spirits high, voices joined in harmony, millions of different pitches mingling into a rising crescendo of unity and strength.
We will go on with our lives until the call comes, and when it does we will stand before the tide upon our shores and before our fires will they disperse. We will stand before any rush and we will not break or fall.
What we do is EXACTLY what we’ve been doing. We stand on our own legs, allies at our side, and we finish this fight.
Is this plagiarized from somewhere? I have no idea, but I’m pretty sure Ferlion123 means it all quite sincerely.
9) “Now we are the only things that stand between them and world domination.”
In an r/KiA comment with 70 upvotes, Neo_Techni seems to have a hard time telling the difference between anime and reality.
It started with censorship, and the censors won. It was inevitable that they’d get drunk on that power and try to censor the world. Now we are the only things that stand between them and world domination.
It’d make a great anime so long as funimation doesn’t get to touch 1984 it up
No, I’m not quite sure just what that last, er, “sentence” is supposed to mean either.
10) “I can imagine SJWs one day coming up with a reason to defend diseases from being cured.”
In response to a comment in which someone called deathonwingz suggests, at least half seriously, that “I get the feeling this won’t be over until we’ve cured cancer, stopped world hunger, colonized mars and done many other things,” commenter FiveThou writes
Now you say that, but I can imagine SJWs one day coming up with a reason to defend diseases from being cured. “Viruses are living things that share our planet. How dare you be so cruel to them.” “Don’t go to see the doctor – he’s only going to AIDS-shame you.”
11) “You weren’t necessarily sent to the gulags for criticizing Brezhnev, but you never worked again.”
Tigers_ suggests that the power of Sarkeesian et al is comparable to that of the Soviet authorities in the era of Brezhnev. I suppose we should give him half a point for not going with a full-blown Stalin comparison.
I’ve been wanting to find a way to address these issues in an entertaining and accessible fashion for a few years now. Real life issues hold me back, but there’s also the incessant fear of something like that destroying any hopes I have at a career of my chosing for engaging. It’s not like there isn’t a massive risk. You weren’t necessarily sent to the gulags for criticizing Brezhnev, but you never worked again.
12) “Think feminism doesn’t kill people? Fucking yes it does, Srebrinca was possible because of feminist mindset.”
Xyluz85, meanwhile, gets no points for reining in rhetorical excess with this comment, not specifically referencing Sarkeesian but made in the wake of her UN visit.
It’s not about the fear that they can win this, it’s more about how big the damage will be when the time comes feminism goes away. And it get’s more horrifing by the day. I learn more and more about this mindset, and what it does to people. Think feminism doesn’t kill people? Fucking yes it does, Srebrinca was possible because of feminist mindset, Haiti women-only food pretty sure killed some people, lynchmobs killing innocent people surley happend.
I think I’ll just end this post here.
Oh, wait, I almost forgot TREASON.
13) “Don’t listen to the leftist lies: both Zoe and Anita (assuming she is a citizen of the United States) have committed a felony by explicitly and directly lobbying foreign governments for the abolition of Net Neutrality and the “licensing” of internet content providers.
HonorableJudgeHolden provided “evidence” for this assertion in the form of a meme-enhanced “info”graphic.
This is the only Reddit comment or post I’ve quoted here, in this Gamer’s Dozen, that #GamerGaters considered too ridiculous to upvote.
If you want to see what Sarkeesian and Quinn actually said at the UN, here’s a video of their testimony, courtesy of Laughing Witch.
So, which part of that comment set of the mod filter the first time around? All the links, using -tard as a suffix like that isn’t wildly ableist, or mentioning Ron Paul?
Hm, either R0n P4ul is still in the mod filter, or it’s upped its anti-ableism game. I’m guessing the former since the latter would make a fair number of words set it off since WP’s filters aren’t particularly smart.
In any case, yeah could you maybe not ableist slurs? That’d be great, thanks.
As for the rest of it, I can’t tell if you’re trying to say that GG is astroturfed, or that the libertarian movement is. Or both. Could be both I suppose.
As someone from the third world who now lives in the first, please permit me to disagree. Privilege is a very good way of describing the difference, because privilege is about the luxury of being able to choose to be blind.
People in Africa often have mobile phones, wifi, education, plumbing, medicine, and all the other great things industrialisation has given us. However, in the first world these things are just assumed to be one’s birthright (and to an extent they are) whereas back home their absence is something that can actually occur in real life. “What would life be like without electricity” isn’t a hypothetical so much as a real thing that happens to people; as a result, everybody else (even the wealthy) is aware that it’s not a birthright.
I’m from a wealthy district of Johannesburg, which is a wealthy city. My childhood was not any less comfortable than that of anyone in Europe or America. I am immensely privileged and I recognise that. I never had the luxury, however, of thinking that that was the case for everybody.
You do have that luxury. You have chosen not to be blind. For that I thank you and think of you as an ally. But please don’t claim that it isn’t a privilege.
Thanks for weighing in on this EJ, but allow me to offer this in exchange:
I’ve lived without electricity. I’ve lived without running water, and I’ve lived without a lot of things that are considered “birthrights” here in the US. I’ve never lived out of this country, and I know what it’s like to have to live without these things. Hell, I’ve gone hungry plenty of times in my childhood.
Yes, these only occurred for a short period of time, but even here in the US we get this kind of thing. I’ve never considered this a “birthright” because I’ve seen the bills for them. We pay for water, we pay for electricity, and we pay for food. You don’t pay, it gets shut off, or you don’t get it.
My life is easier with these things, of course, and yeah, many people consider them necessities, but there’s plenty of people who live without them even here in the US.
These are also problems we face in the so-called “first world” too.
Here’s a link on “first world problems” that might help clear up my issues with it.
Thanks for the rebuttal, Paradoxy.
I’m sorry to hear that you grew up without being able to assume electricity and water. That sucks and I’m not going to pretend that my own upbringing wasn’t vastly more comfortable than that.
I’m glad that when your family did have money, there was water and electricity in their town available for them to buy. This is what I mean by first world privilege: there’s a large-scale social infrastructure in place which simply does not exist in many other parts of the world. Pipes and pylons run to your town and there are paved roads running to it. There are districts of Johannesburg – never mind out in the rural provinces or in countries poorer than South Africa – where these are things that might not exist. If you live in a rural village or an informal settlement, you may not have a water or electricity bill available to pay.
With all the compassion in the world: I feel that you are falling into the trap of saying that because you experienced a lack of economic privilege, that it is not possible for you to have had other forms of privilege.
(Also, thank you for that link. I agree entirely with what Teju Coal wrote there. I have issues with feministbatwoman’s analysis of it; but in the interests of not derailing, I won’t derail into that.)
Perhaps the term “developed nation privilege” might be better than “first world privilege”? Or “infrastructure privilege”?
The dammed annoying thing is that the report is awful, as well as the Pokemon maddness it got hijacked by those opposed to sex workers rights, and includes stuff like sex workers being able to advertise online as “violence against women and girls”. So now we have a UN report that disagrees with UN women, WHO and Amnesty about how to protect vulnerable ppl who sell sexual services. Good peice here on Motherboard about the whole missed opportunity.
You can like it or not, proponents of third-wave feminism are actively trying to limit free speech by classifying any dissenting opinion as “hate speech” and any group of people that disagree with them a “hate group”.
Christina H. Sommers is scheduled to speak next month in LA. People on campus are trying to block her speaking, because the YAF is considered a “hate group” by the southern poverty law center. She has the temerity to have been considered a feminist and to disagree with these current ladies.
We do live in the United States of America, which is founded on the concept of the Freedom of Speech. You would be hard pressed to find a Founding Father that did not speak at length on the subject.
The point is that it does not matter who is right. All people have a right to speak. It is not by mistake that Orwell gets brought up rather often. We are in the land of the thought police.
In case you are wondering why people that identify most with the gamergate side of things are so passionate in their responses, it is because gamergate at its heart was the story of a woman who made a mistake using her influence to try to paint an entire group of men as hateful, dangerous misogynists; all in order to escape blame for her actions. This sentiment was echoed quickly, loudly and in an organized fashion as a nationwide slander of gaming men.
Men, many of whom had been introverted and uncomfortable approaching anyone, let alone women were now being called evil, sexist man-hating pigs. When someone starts calling you out for something that goes so far beyond what is in the core of you, you have to react passionately.
Injustice will not stand.
The reason these ladies want to censor opposition is simply put, they are wrong. They did not count on other reasonable women pointing out the obvious. Our society is one that to the large degree benefits women at almost every turn. These ladies aren’t for equality. They aren’t educated by scholarly works. They are simply women that wish to paint their own insecurities on the backs of men.