Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - RSS Headlines   RSS Headlines   Twitter   Twitter

Op Ed

Polygon - No skin thick enough- The daily harassment of women in the game industry.
The problem with sharing these stories in broad terms is that people think men and women receive the same harassment online. They do not. Iím not writing this piece to evoke your sympathy. Iím writing to share with you what prominent, successful women in the industry experience, in their own words.

Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Game Names Are Almost Universally Terrible.
Seriously itís not that hard why are you all so bad at this aauuugh.

View

60. Re: Op Ed Jul 23, 2014, 21:41 Eirikrautha
 
Several responses, in no particular order:

  • The headline of this article is misleading, at least in the fact that the issue is not women in the "game industry." It is women in the "public eye." Having read the article, I didn't see any complaints about harassment occurring in their workplace from their employers or coworkers. The examples were almost exclusively the responses of fans, online gamers, and other anonymous douche-nozzles. I would be shocked if the number of vile and inappropriate fan communications with someone like Jennifer Lawrence or Selena Gomez doesn't absolutely dwarf any of the sick stuff sent to these women. Which says to me that the problem is not one centered around "games." It is a problem of how people communicate with each other when (a)there is a high level of anonymity or (b)little threat of direct consequences. The same loser who is posting "show us your bewbs!" in an online chat room would likely not even have the courage to speak to one of these women that way face-to-face, especially in front of her boyfriend/brother, etc. This issue might have a different solution than one totally spawned in the "games industry," which is why I think this categorization is not helpful.


  • There is a cognitive disconnect between the various claims of injury and capability, and this is not limited to women's issues. In fact, just about any group that dons the "victim" label runs afoul of this disconnect, whether it is a particular sexual or racial minority or even white Christians claiming to be discriminated against. Almost all "victim" groups assert that they are being discriminated against based on an incorrect assumption of inferior capabilities, while at the same time claiming that they are so fragile that even micro-aggresive transgressions are too much for them to bear. Which is it? In this case, I just have a hard time reconciling an article with a half-dozen trigger-warnings in front of it with the idea that women are just like anyone else in the workforce. Either women are so sensitive to these issues that they can be incapacitated by them, or they aren't? It seems like most "victim" groups don't want to be treated differently... unless it benefits them.


  • Almost all of these discussions of equality (whether racial, gender, et al.) ignores the fact that none ALL [edit- ooops, typing too fast] of the progress that has already been made has come primarily from the actions of the majority. Blacks in the US didn't gain equality because they outnumbered whites and forced people to treat them equally. They didn't have the numbers or the power. They gained equality because they successfully demonstrated the moral superiority of their positions. They proved to the majority that the majority was morally wrong. And then the majority changed themselves. Even if every single black American had violently rebelled, they could not have forced the Civil Rights movement on an unwilling majority. They, instead, forced the majority to face the disconnect between what the majority preached (equality) and what they practiced (bigotry). Unfortunately, where the civil rights movement has been less successful is where it has given up the moral high-ground (reverse-discrimination, quota-based hiring and university admissions, etc.). Women face the same problem. Equality is a moral high-ground for them. It is nearly unarguable... at least until they stray from convincing to lashing out. There is a fine line between identifying obvious transgressions and generalizing them so that your allies get swept up with your enemies. I don't think many women would have a problem with getting men to condemn their stalkers, their abusers, and their harassers. When they start generalizing, accusing all men of being victimizers, the moral high-ground becomes very shaky. This article borders on that...


  • This comment was edited on Jul 23, 2014, 21:52.
     
    Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
     
        Date Subject Author
      1. Jul 23, 09:18 No subject Mashiki Amiketo
      2. Jul 23, 09:40  Re: Op Ed MoreLuckThanSkill
      5. Jul 23, 10:20   Re: Op Ed UHD
      9. Jul 23, 11:04  Re: Op Ed Julio
      34. Jul 23, 15:15   Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
      3. Jul 23, 09:43 Re: Op Ed Verno
      4. Jul 23, 10:14  Re: Op Ed HoSpanky
      6. Jul 23, 10:33   Re: Op Ed Verno
      7. Jul 23, 10:50    Re: Op Ed UHD
      10. Jul 23, 11:10     Re: Op Ed Verno
      11. Jul 23, 11:36      Re: Op Ed Jerykk
      12. Jul 23, 11:51       Re: Op Ed ASeven
      13. Jul 23, 12:18      Re: Op Ed UHD
      14. Jul 23, 12:55       Re: Op Ed Verno
      18. Jul 23, 14:08        Re: Op Ed UHD
      24. Jul 23, 14:52         Re: Op Ed Verno
      32. Jul 23, 15:10          Re: Op Ed UHD
      47. Jul 23, 18:05           Re: Op Ed Verno
      16. Jul 23, 13:36   Re: Op Ed Minuit
      8. Jul 23, 11:00  Re: Op Ed Prez
      15. Jul 23, 12:59 Re: Op Ed Ozmodan
      17. Jul 23, 13:41  Re: Op Ed Drazula
      19. Jul 23, 14:10 Re: Op Ed Wraith
      20. Jul 23, 14:13  Re: Op Ed Beamer
      21. Jul 23, 14:14 Re: Op Ed TheEmissary
      29. Jul 23, 14:56  Re: Op Ed SlimRam
      30. Jul 23, 15:00   Re: Op Ed Draugr
      65. Jul 23, 22:00   Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      22. Jul 23, 14:45 Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      25. Jul 23, 14:52  Re: Op Ed TheEmissary
      27. Jul 23, 14:54   Re: Op Ed Beamer
      28. Jul 23, 14:56    Re: Op Ed Beamer
      39. Jul 23, 16:04   Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      43. Jul 23, 17:07   Re: Op Ed yuastnav
      53. Jul 23, 19:04    Re: Op Ed Bodolza
      54. Jul 23, 19:48     Re: Op Ed NKD
      26. Jul 23, 14:53  Re: Op Ed Beamer
      31. Jul 23, 15:02  Re: Op Ed Bodolza
      33. Jul 23, 15:14   Re: Op Ed PHJF
      36. Jul 23, 15:37    Re: Op Ed SlimRam
      35. Jul 23, 15:15   Re: Op Ed Draugr
      37. Jul 23, 15:37    Re: Op Ed Agent.X7
      38. Jul 23, 15:44     Re: Op Ed NewMaxx
      48. Jul 23, 18:10     Re: Op Ed NKD
      64. Jul 23, 21:54      Re: Op Ed Agent.X7
      51. Jul 23, 18:39    Re: Op Ed Redmask
      55. Jul 23, 20:01     Re: Op Ed Draugr
      56. Jul 23, 20:52      Re: Op Ed Redmask
      59. Jul 23, 21:37       Re: Op Ed Draugr
      61. Jul 23, 21:45        Re: Op Ed Redmask
      57. Jul 23, 21:02      Re: Op Ed Slashman
      40. Jul 23, 16:14   Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      41. Jul 23, 16:27    Re: Op Ed Bodolza
      42. Jul 23, 16:34     Re: Op Ed Beamer
      44. Jul 23, 17:12      No subject Mashiki Amiketo
      45. Jul 23, 17:18       Re: Op Ed Beamer
      49. Jul 23, 18:24        No subject Mashiki Amiketo
      50. Jul 23, 18:28         Re: Op Ed NKD
      23. Jul 23, 14:48 Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      46. Jul 23, 17:24 Re: Op Ed harlock
      52. Jul 23, 18:43 Re: Op Ed panbient
      58. Jul 23, 21:16  Re: Op Ed Burrito of Peace
      62. Jul 23, 21:46   Re: Op Ed Eirikrautha
    >> 60. Jul 23, 21:41 Re: Op Ed Eirikrautha
      63. Jul 23, 21:49 Re: Op Ed Redmask
      66. Jul 23, 22:08  Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      67. Jul 23, 22:34   Re: Op Ed Redmask
      68. Jul 23, 23:43    Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      69. Jul 23, 23:52 Re: Op Ed Cutter
      70. Jul 24, 00:04  Re: Op Ed descender
      71. Jul 24, 00:55   Re: Op Ed NKD
      72. Jul 24, 02:15 Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      73. Jul 24, 03:52  Re: Op Ed NKD
      75. Jul 24, 06:42  Re: Op Ed Julio
      79. Jul 24, 08:17  Re: Op Ed Burrito of Peace
      74. Jul 24, 05:30 Re: Op Ed jdreyer
      76. Jul 24, 06:53  Re: Op Ed NKD
      81. Jul 24, 09:26   Re: Op Ed Parallax Abstraction
      83. Jul 24, 12:15    Re: Op Ed Verno
      84. Jul 24, 17:38    Re: Op Ed NKD
      85. Jul 24, 19:43     Re: Op Ed Mad Max RW
      86. Jul 24, 20:04      Re: Op Ed Beamer
      87. Jul 24, 20:13      Re: Op Ed Mad Max RW
      88. Jul 24, 23:03       Re: Op Ed Sepharo
      89. Jul 25, 08:45       Re: Op Ed yuastnav
      90. Jul 25, 09:41        Re: Op Ed Mad Max RW
      91. Jul 25, 10:19         Re: Op Ed Beamer
      92. Jul 25, 11:19         Re: Op Ed yuastnav
      93. Jul 25, 11:37         Re: Op Ed descender
      94. Jul 25, 11:57         Re: Op Ed Verno
      95. Jul 25, 12:18          Re: Op Ed Mad Max RW
      97. Jul 25, 12:28           Re: Op Ed Beamer
      101. Jul 25, 23:36            Re: Op Ed Quboid
      102. Jul 26, 02:27             Re: Op Ed Beamer
      107. Jul 27, 01:21     Re: Op Ed Redmask
      108. Jul 27, 11:46      Re: Op Ed Quboid
      109. Jul 27, 12:29      Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      110. Jul 27, 15:43       Re: Op Ed Redmask
      111. Jul 27, 18:44        Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      112. Jul 27, 19:16         Re: Op Ed Redmask
      113. Jul 27, 22:16          Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      114. Jul 27, 22:29           Re: Op Ed Redmask
      115. Jul 28, 13:10            Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      116. Jul 28, 15:04             Re: Op Ed Redmask
      77. Jul 24, 07:15  Re: Op Ed Redmask
      78. Jul 24, 07:38   Re: Op Ed yuastnav
      80. Jul 24, 08:55    Re: Op Ed Verno
      82. Jul 24, 12:01   Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      96. Jul 25, 12:24 Re: Op Ed Verno
      98. Jul 25, 12:38  Re: Op Ed Mad Max RW
      99. Jul 25, 15:30   Re: Op Ed Draugr
      100. Jul 25, 18:33    Re: Op Ed Stormsinger
      103. Jul 26, 17:58 Re: Op Ed yuastnav
      104. Jul 26, 21:39  Re: Op Ed Prez
      105. Jul 26, 21:50  Re: Op Ed Quboid
      106. Jul 26, 23:52  Re: Op Ed Verno
      117. Jul 28, 15:27 Re: Op Ed Verno