Tales from the Infrared: Origins!

T

Tales from the Infrared: Geek Culture from a Men’s Rights Perspective!

Wednesday 14th. 8 Central. 6 Pacific.

Show Link.

Show Notes.

After Show Shin Dig.

 

Alison Tieman
Follow me
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmailby feather

About the author

Alison Tieman

<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="2986 http://www.genderratic.com/?p=2331">13 comments</span>

  • Well I hope geek mens rights is better than the festering pile of crap that is geek feminism. Good luck.

  • I’m mad and a bit hurt.
    It’s the Halo 4 thing.
    Here’s the ironic thing: I don’t trash talk hardly ever and I’m an “occasional” online player at best. I’m mostly single player or single console multi player.

    But to pull this bullshit…this just solidifies females as a special, protected class (in a largely male space, natch!) reinforces horrid stereotypes, reduces the amount of free speech in a goddam GAME, makes it so male people will have less rights to defend themselves than female people, and takes away a source of (at least physically) harmless steam-blowing for some men.

    Now I have to wonder if I’m even going to buy the game. I know I won’t be playing it online. And I’ve been looking forward to Halo 4 for years.

  • Clarence,

    I have to agree.

    Online bullying is juvenile and offensive but the simple fact is that people often play online games as stress relief and throwing around filthy insults is part of that.

    I think what should happen, for those that strongly wish to avoid trash talking in video games, is for an optional no-naughty/nasty-words setting or filter to be avaliable so they can game in environments where trash-talking isn’t tolerated.

    I mean, sure, we can go on about how many gamers aren’t acting in a polite and civil way. I agree with that to an extent, but the thing is that being civil and monitoring one’s language is a chore (especially in an environment where people have hairtrigger responses to being offended). People play video games to relax and vent, and trying to police men’s expressions in video games just ends up taking away an opportunity for men to vent.

    And then the feminists act all confused when their opposition starts accusing them of promoting censorship.

    Cyberstalking and online bullying and harassment are problems, but simple block/ignore controls and optional “no naughty/nasty words” settings for games fixes things easily.

    But you know what I think? I don’t think that the goal is to help people avoid uncivil speech. That’s a rationalization. The REAL goal is to police a predominantly-male space’s speech and expression.

    Why?

    I’ve said it before, but “political correctness” is based on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis – the proposition that language controls thought. As such, spaces in which men are allowed to say nasty things about women are spaces which, according to this hypothesis, creates misogyny (note the order of causality… bad speech causes bad ideas, NOT the other way around).

    Thus, according to this logic, if you want to stop misogyny, stop hate speech against women. If you want to stop rape, tell people to stop making rape jokes.

    This is why many feminists are analyzing and attacking “geek culture” and framing it as a Rapetopia… they literally believe that geek culture, as a “boys club,” provides a breeding ground for rape culture/misogyny, and thus feminists must police it.

    Bullying is terrible, but their interest isn’t in limiting the damage caused by bullies. Their interest is in policing how men speak so as to change (how they believe) men think. It is an attempt at thought reform, albiet one doomed to fail because the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been disproven.

  • Cyberstalking and online bullying and harassment are problems, but simple block/ignore controls and optional “no naughty/nasty words” settings for games fixes things easily.

    I might actually be willing to play games on-line if there were a “no jerks” option in the matching system, and a “flag as a jerk” option for the other players. (Probably requiring multiple hits.) Maybe, better yet, a “Rate how much you enjoyed playing with this person” dial, and an amazon-style “people who liked playing with X also liked playing with Y,” feature.

    t is an attempt at thought reform, albiet one doomed to fail because the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been disproven.

    Sapir-Whorf has been disproven? Can you point me to more information about this?

  • I don’t know, YetAnotherCommenter, “Blue Pill” language does seem to have an effect on molding thought. Though I guess the real effect is achieved through the restriction of information. If the mind’s only input is lies, thought can absolutely be controlled. Limiting speech because it “harms” people’s feelings or influences them in the “wrong” way is just another lie.

  • Clarence:

    Microsoft back-pedaled pretty fast as to what they were actually willing to DO about anything that happens in Halo 4, which makes the earlier announcements seem more like wishful thinking than anything else. The only developer that’s ever actually solved the issue of the way people talk in online games is From, and they did it by deliberately making a game in which it is almost completely impossible to communicate with another human being (also Armored Core, which is… Armored Core). Either way, all the cool people just auto-mute everyone and go on Vent.

    Everyone else:
    I know linguistic-determinism is at the very least out of favor in academic circles, although people are still doing a lot of work with the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, focusing on the inter-relation of language, cognition and culture. That said, I’ve never heard it applied to something like this by anyone I would have considered credible. All the discussions I’ve heard have had more to do with things like the perceived differences between colors and its relation to the number of color-words in a language (although both studies I’ve read concluded that language didn’t have much to do with it). I’ve also heard of some work that’s been done relating to perceptions of relative position and of emotion.

  • I’m so sick of people taking zero responsibility for themselves. You’re offended by what people are saying online? There’s a mute button. There’s group/party features that allow you to form your own network of trusted people to game with. They already have solved this problem!

  • I don’t see any reason to bring the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis into it. If some people use homophobic and/or transphobic slurs, and if other people accept the use of homophobic and/or transphobic slurs, it teaches some lesbian, gay, and/or trans people to be ashamed of who we are. I know this from personal experience. I can’t point to any right now, but I think I remember that there are studies on these, and on racial/ethnic slurs, and on disability-related slurs, and so on.

    I can see three basic strategies for dealing with this. One is to approve all slurs and hope the most bizarre slurs make all the slurs seem equally bizarre/out of touch. I don’t see how to make this work. Another is to block all slurs. But if you get rid of racial/ethnic slurs, and accept disability-related slurs, it might make the latter seem more legitimate, and might give the latter more power. Another is to try to create positive space for various minorities. So you could find a space with other people with the same challenges or facing the same prejudices. So you might have some way for cancer survivors to game together, or the like.

  • “I know linguistic-determinism is at the very least out of favor in academic circles, although people are still doing a lot of work with the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, focusing on the inter-relation of language, cognition and culture.”

    YAC, Whorfianism is as laughable to linguists as creationism is to geneticists and paleontologists. It gets you laughed out of the room as fast as prescriptivist peevology i.e. whining because actaully observed Englsih langugae behavior doesn’t abide by the bogus invented rules one learned in 3rd grade.

    Nevertheless…

    “I don’t see any reason to bring the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis into it. If some people use homophobic and/or transphobic slurs, and if other people accept the use of homophobic and/or transphobic slurs, it teaches some lesbian, gay, and/or trans people to be ashamed of who we are. I know this from personal experience.”

    Marja is dead on the money here. You don’t have to break all Whorfian on this. We aren’t talking about how language shapes a person’s perception of reality, we are talking about how cultural values are passed through language, especially vocabulary. If for instance “German” becomes a synonym for Nazi or “Slave” becomes the standard ethnonym for African-Americans, this will have real-world effects on how those groups are viewed in society.

    And this is why these jeremiads about “bullying” in gaming and these blue-nosed attempts to invade, colonize and regualte a men’s sapce in gaming are so foul. They reinforce the notion that women are fragile creatures and that men have some kind of duty to walk on eggshells around them as if they can’t handle rough language, situations, anything, when these same men know very well that they are going to be expected to then immediately turn around and treat them as equals. It’s just bullshit.

  • @Gingko

    Can you imagine an NFL offensive lineman complaining when the D linebacker says out loud to him, “youre my bitch now”?

  • Titfortat said: “Can you imagine an NFL offensive lineman complaining when the D linebacker says out loud to him, “youre my bitch now”?”

    LOL! Ain’t it the truth. Masculine cultures such as the NFL are, or will be under attack soon I am sure. Viva Moral Agents! lol

By Alison Tieman

Events

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather

Support Hannah Wallen’s HBR Talk

Categories

Archives

Tags