It’s everyone’s most favoritest example of rank hypocrisy on the net nowadays: a group of GamerGate sympathists lie about their organizations motives to get floor space at the Calgary Expo, hide the fact that they belong to an organization that sells T-shirts with rape jokes and that they’re affiliated with one of the scummiest MRA websites on the web, immediately start selling paraphenalia related to a hashtag that many gamers, especially women, feel is threatening or offensive due largely to the hashtag’s origins in harassing female professionals to the point of national notoriety, and then start going to panels on Feminism in order to grab the mic time in order to talk about how they feel feminism is a sham. Just as a note – if you do one of these things, maybe you’re fine. Two, you’re on thin ice. All five, and you’re way beyond the hat trick of being misogynistic jerks. People who run conventions have shit to do, and they don’t have time to worry if whether or not MAYBE you’re going to cross the line. Good for the Calgary Expo for trying to keep that shit clean.
You can read the widely cited account on the Mary Sue, but for my druthers the best writeup is the frequently excellent Amanda Marcotte.
Here’s a question: If geeks and nerds are fantastic as they are and should be allowed to carry on, why would you deliberately lie about who you are in an effort to disrupt a convention? Disrupting the convention and trying to ruin it for the participants shows that they do not believe that geeks and nerds are fine and should be left alone. On the contrary, they are clearly offended that geeks are having geeky discussions about feminism and representation in comics and other nerdy endeavors, and they want to shut that discussion down. Harassing people, by definition, is not leaving them alone.
Silly Amanda. It’s the OLD geeks and nerds – you know the ones who are mad at Mortal Kombat for getting female body types to be down to the point where they’d at least be reasonable for playboy models. All those new ones – you know the ones who have lady parts, would like slightly fewer half-baked rape references – these are the ones who aren’t TRUE geeks and nerds, those are a problem. Clearly, despite the fact that comic book stores are still dominated by male heroes and male-leaning entertainment by about a 9 to 1 ratio, attempts to have a panel that talks about correcting this MUST BE STOPPED.
If you want to commemorate this historic moment in the march towards the rights of reactionary internet goons to harass the fuck out of women online so severely they flee geekdom, YOU TOO can purchase a t-shirt and express your pride! And if you believe in these standards, I hope you wear it, as it makes it much easier to figure out who to avoid at cons.
But of course, the real thing that amuses is that, according to the Mary Sue article, the Honey Badgers fully expected to get kicked out. They got kicked out Then started merchandising that shit ASAP. This is, for those not paying attention, exactly the sort of ‘professional victimhood’ that they like to claim feminists they disagree with, such as Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian, are up to.
As for the GooberGrape masses who have reached Lot’s Wife levels of saltiness about the topic in the last week, feel free to start up your own convention, because clearly GDC and CalgaryExpo will not be the first who will ask you to at the very least keep your very crappy attitudes towards other con goers to yourself. Feel free to include blackjack and hookers. Because you’ll need some sort of entertainment, as most game companies and press will choose to maintain a wide berth. Hey, that might be why your previous attempts to create your own outlets didn’t pan out.
That isn’t the type of behavior one would expect from an entity touting to be for equality under an #ExpoEquality campaign.
Yeah, it sure is a mystery. Look, there’s no shortage of jerks and assholes with unconventional politics – on ALL sides of the spectrum – at a major con. And let’s face it, no comic con is going to be a beacon of feminism – hell, the artist signing areas of these things typically is one massive cheesecake factory for eager nerds wanting half-naked harley quinns to plaster on the wall (man, do con-goers love harley quinn). To get kicked out, you have to be percieved to be a major risk of disruption. People who raise red flags are going to be on a short leash.
And if you proudly fly the GG banner, that’s a big ass red flag.
Uh-huh. This reads like the High School football team’s water boy trying to explain why his awesome friends were totally justified in stuffing that creepy nerd in a locker. I mean, coming from the guy who has to cross the line into libel before he’ll even CONSIDER re-evaluating his words, it’s hard to trust that you’re being objective. In fact, the only metric you can use to predict where he’ll stand on an issue is what stances are held by his friends. That’s not being an advocate for justice, social or otherwise.
You’re nothing more than a bully, Damion.
Oh, posh. Anyone who is taking the side of gamergate and calling someone else bullies is certainly guilty of the hypocritical projection that defines the whole fucking cause. For all their bluster, Gators are ridiculously thin-skinned when people do little things like point out things like ‘truth’ and ‘logic’.
Here’s a hint: I hate gamergate because I SUPPORT developer freedom, free speech, an unencumbered press, expanding markets, new gameplay paradigms and the ability for people to work on the internet without harassment or fear. Members of gamergate have consistently opposed all of those things, and they deserve being exposed and ridiculed for as long as that’s the case.
Given the account on Jennifer’s blog post, do you support the removal of the HBB, not because of anything they actually did at the con, but because of their GamerGate affliations, period?
Calgary had a problem with them signing up under false pretenses. They told the con one thing about why they were there, and the Internet something else. That’s against con rules, so good on Calgary Expo for enforcing their own rules.
They “infiltrated” the expo in order to disrupt it?
Did you actually read any plans of theirs to do this? Did you get multiple accounts of what transpired? Are you as tone-deaf to sarcasm as The Mary Sue?
Yes, and yes.
Please elaborate on your point of view, because what you might be referring to as “sarcasm” might be considered otherwise.
The Mary Sue breathlessly reported this statement completely oblivious to the sarcasm:
“In April of this year, the Honey Badgers plan to put on a booth at the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo! We plan to infiltrate nerd culture cunningly disguised as their own. Each of us has been carefully crafting a persona of nerdiness through decades of dedication to comics, science fiction, fantasy, comedy games and other geekery, waiting for this moment, our moment to slip among the unaware. ”
They registered the artist who was selling her work rather than under their own name in order to avoid a preemptive campaign against their presence? So what?
A few of their members politely asked questions at a talk where they disagreed with the viewpoint of the presenters. Again, so what? The presenters could have redirected the conversation.
Kicking people out of conventions because The Mary Sue doesn’t like their political positions is pretty shitty. And every other reason is basically just pretextual or retroactive justification.
My questions for you:
Did Calgary Expo kick them out before The Mary Sue or any other website reported on it?
Did this group have permission from the artist of the webcomic they purported to promote, to represent the work?
If the latter is yes, please cite.
For the record, I do not consider the text you quoted as “sarcastic”. I would rather consider it “duplicitous,” “disruptive” and “under false pretense.” On its face, I can’t tell whether to take it seriously, but Calgary Fan Expo was within its right to compare it to the stated reason why they were at the con, and taking into account the alleged actions of members at the con, i.e., being disruptive at panels, that seems like enough reason to me to get the boot.
But if you still want to declare it sarcasm, I do not believe that sarcasm, parody or satire to be reasons to justify actions meant to be disruptive. Conventions have rules against disruption for the sake of their guests, vendors and attendees. I think they have a responsibility to uphold those rules for that reason.
Do you disagree?
The artist was the one running the booth.
I was wrong. Calgary Expo basically kicked them out for no reason, lied about what happened, then pointed to the complete misunderstanding of facetiousness at TMS to retroactively justify their actions. There was never a scheme to “infiltrate” the event. They just wanted to fucking participate in it.
So what about the report about the panel disruptions?
What about all the merch being sold at the booth that was photographed? Was that all in support of the webcomic? Doesn’t look like it’s all the same style, or even what the comic’s about.
They registered under website of the artist so that they wouldn’t be bullied into not attending. I’m not saying that the artist was the only one whose merchandise was being sold, but she was one of the people running the booth.
They weren’t disrupting panels. They asked some questions and made some not so great arguments at a panel. The panelists could have moved onto someone else at any time. They were participating, not disrupting. They never announced any intent to disrupt anything.
Uh-huh. That’s why you were trying to tell a bisexual woman that getting mean tweets was worse than getting shoved out of a moving car? (“Your experience pales in comparison to Anita’s” were your words, I believe. ) That’s why Brad Wardell had to literally shove court documents in your face before you stopped libeling him? That’s why mean tweets at your friends get diatribes while a bomb threat deemed credible by the FBI gets 2 sentences?
Yeah, you’re not a bully. You’ll pretend at camaraderie and friendship until it suits you to change your loyalties. That’s actually worse.
You’re a vile, heartless psychopath. If there’s any decency left in you, you’ll sequester yourself before you end up hurting anyone else.
who are you
Oh, brother. I have no idea who the hell got shoved out of a moving car, and I certainly don’t know of anyone who claims that they were pushed out of a moving car in relation to their actions related to GamerGate. However, in terms of getting abused and terrorized over the net in relation to the gamergate fiasco, to the point of having to change their lifestyles and involve law enforcement, probably the only person who can even come close to what Anita has gone through is Zoe. This is a contest neither of them particularly want to win.
There have been GamerGaters who have been targeted for harassment, most likely by third party trolls. When I was writing about gamergate, I covered that angle of it, and am one of the few people who actually wrote about the phenomenon that clearly people (probably groups like the AyyTeam and GNAA) were fucking with the women of GamerGate simply to keep things riled up. Those in the know in GamerGate KNOW this, and yet still choose to try to blame people like me, Kotaku and others for this shit, as well as use it to continue to justify their own bad actions. This utter myopia is a huge part of the reason why nobody outside of KiA takes these complaints seriously. All harassment is wrong and should be condemned – and I do – but the harassment is still coming out of #gamergate – from twitter handles that are big and recognizable. This behavior doesn’t get a free pass because some other scumbag is punching back.
As for Wardell, I have made a point not to discuss that issue further, but I will say this: the difference between myself and those who frequent KiA and 8chan/gg is that I pointed out my error and owned up to it. Those rolling in the gamergate sludgebucket don’t do that – they inflict their damage, and then once it’s pointed out they’ve made an idiotic choice, they never apologize, they just move on to the next faux crisis they’ve managed to manufacture.
Being compared to a bully by someone belonging to a consumer group founded on bullying women and progressive journalists is rich in irony. Sorry, standing up for your beliefs doesn’t make you a bully. However, the actions of those extremists in Gamergate towards myself, Zoe, Anita, Ben, AbleGamers, Leigh, and many others – actions that include dogpiling, slander, doxing, and threats so strong that law enforcement has had to get involved – certianly does make them bullies. The actions of those in GamerGate that has attempted to harass unique voices and many of my female colleagues in the industry to the degree where they felt they had to silence themselves and/or consider quitting the industry to protect themselves and their families – those are bullies. I will stand up against them, unapologetically. I’m sorry that I’m not one to roll over and play nice when people threaten myself and my family.
Did Kate Cox ever own up to her sloppy reporting about Wardell? Did Jason Schreier ever own up to a sloppy write-up about the settlement? Did you ever own up to your sloppy criticism of Milo regarding his story about Wardell?
Why pretend that the third-party trolls are only targeting Gamergate? They’re at the same time doing things in the name of Gamergate.
What harassment is coming out of #gamergate from big and recognizable names? Or is this just you redefining words again? I mean, aren’t people who troll gamergate and then whine about getting trolled back a bunch of mewling babies? Doesn’t that apply to all of your friends who think they have to silence themselves or who want to quit the industry?
Yeah, you and your lady friends get threatened, and dammit its all Gamergate’s fault. Gamergaters get threatened, and it’s all third-party trolls. Arthur Chu unironically argued that “Of course it was no one who is genuinely against gamergate who called in the bomb threat, because the bomb threat only helps gamergate” as if this doesn’t apply to every threat attributed to gamergate.
Is this blog post factually wrong? Please show.
Damion:
Did you catch Totilo’s very lengthy remarks in the comments section of Kotaku’s coverage of the Calgary story? He pretty much addresses and dismantles every so-called “ethics” argument about his site. It was impressive stuff.
http://kotaku.com/yes-we-re-talking-about-the-same-kotaku-a-news-and-op-1698680433
Speaking as a student SPJ member, there is no fucking way anyone on the Internet who is not a professional journalist gives a damn what’s in their ethics document, and I seriously doubt the guy who referenced the link even read them.
Honestly, I don’t know why Totilo spent so much ink answering the guy. I love his answer, but why bother engaging with these fools to begin with?
Most non-journalists who reference the SPJ guide as a means of attack understand no part of it. That original commenter probably doesn’t even understand the meaning of the pronouns and conjunctions used in it.
To be fair, the guy just said, “perhaps you guys should read it.” Not implying strongly that he’s read it himself, especially since he doesn’t actually cite any part of it. As for Totilo, never underestimate a peeved editor on a roll.
I did read it. It’s a good read, and shows why I respect Kotaku a lot (though I rarely read them unless linked directly). What he failed to mention is that many of the best exposes of the games industry have actually come from them. Kotaku is somewhat of a muckraking site – they dig a little deep, but they do in fact hit paydirt sometimes.
Gosh. That’s quite the rundown.
Actually, I think internet harassment has gotten to the point where the harassers need their own convention. HaraCon 2016.
I’m already booked to moderate a panel on “Why The Real Victim Of Everything Is Me”.