What do you think of this threat?

[JaneSmith]

This was sent to Utah State because Anita Sarkeesian was going to speak about anti-woman tropes in video games. The university and local police were unable to prevent concealed firearms at the event due to Utah's open carry laws. Ms Sarkeesian was forced to cancel her speaking event because of the lack of security in the face of such a terrible threat.

Do you think the response would have been different if a sportsperson, religious leader, or politician had been speaking?

 

[Lady_Disdain]

I want to know what is being done to identify and arrest the person who made this threat.

 

[ericad]

I HATE that she had to cave in the face of this threat. But calling his bluff might have resulted in violence, so I agree with her decision - her safety, and that of other women on campus, is the most important thing. That being said, I fail to understand WHY the campus couldn't ensure her safety. If President Obama was speaking at the university, surely they would have found a away to ban weapons despite the state's open carry laws. It seems to me that the school and local law enforcement didn't try very hard to protect the speaker and ensure the safety of the women of the university, and if I were a female student at this school I would be HOPPING MAD about it. I think they (and I'm making an assumption here that the heads of the university are primarily men, but I could be wrong) simply didn't deem this speaker as important enough to make the effort.

I've said it before and I'm gonna say it again - I'm SICK AND TIRED of hearing the talking heads of (conservative) media outlets whining about wars on Christianity, and wars on Christmas, and wars on everything else the conservatives hold dear, but no one (including liberal media) is talking about the quiet WAR ON WOMEN happening under our very noses.

I'm all kinds of angry today.

 

[Circe]

I genuinely have no idea how hindered authorities are in open carry states. Where are the lines drawn - can people carry them into protests, courthouses, political rallies, other potentially volatile environments?

I used to be pro-gun, before the Sandy Hook shooting: now I'm in favor of much tighter restrictions, because there are just too damn many tragedies. In these circumstances, I think the logic is supposed to be that the crowd of openly carrying citizens will be able to take the threat-making lunatic down ... but the thing is, incidents like the Giffords shooting and the Aurora shooting have demonstrated that's not the case.

But to address the title question ... I think the threat is a great gauge for the #Gamergate mindset and the toxic attitude Sarkeesian has been decrying. This isn't about dudes really loving their video games. This is about dudes really hating women.

 

[Circe]

I HATE that she had to cave in the face of this threat. But calling his bluff might have resulted in violence, so I agree with her decision - her safety, and that of other women on campus, is the most important thing. That being said, I fail to understand WHY the campus couldn't ensure her safety. If President Obama was speaking at the university, surely they would have found a away to ban weapons despite the state's open carry laws. It seems to me that the school and local law enforcement didn't try very hard to protect the speaker and ensure the safety of the women of the university, and if I were a female student at this school I would be HOPPING MAD about it. I think they (and I'm making an assumption here that the heads of the university are primarily men, but I could be wrong) simply didn't deem this speaker as important enough to make the effort.

I've said it before and I'm gonna say it again - I'm SICK AND TIRED of hearing the talking heads of (conservative) media outlets whining about wars on Christianity, and wars on Christmas, and wars on everything else the conservatives hold dear, but no one (including liberal media) is talking about the quiet WAR ON WOMEN happening under our very noses.

I'm all kinds of angry today.

Word.

 

[AGBF]

I have no idea what a trope in a video game is, but this message made Anita Sarkeesian known to me! Like Lady Disdain, I am now interested in the case and hope that you will post updates on it. My other observation is that it is quite well written. That makes me wonder if it was actually composed by a college student or merely posted by one. If it was actually composed by a student, he should be fairly easy to find (provided that he was telling the truth and is, indeed, a student at that school). There cannot be that many literate college students in school nowadays.

Deb/AGBF

 

[Circe]

I have no idea what a trope in a video game is, but this message made Anita Sarkeesian known to me! Like Lady Disdain, I am now interested in the case and hope that you will post updates on it. My other observation is that it is quite well written. That makes me wonder if it was actually composed by a college student or merely posted by one. If it was actually composed by a student, he should be fairly easy to find (provided that he was telling the truth and is, indeed, a student at that school). There cannot be that many literate college students in school nowadays.

Deb/AGBF

You make a sad point. Something about it does read awfully low-level bureaucrat, doesn't it.

 

[VRBeauty]

I genuinely have no idea how hindered authorities are in open carry states. Where are the lines drawn - can people carry them into protests, courthouses, political rallies, other potentially volatile environments?

Or into a Mormon/LDS convention? I mean, this is Utah we're talking about. If someone made a similar threat about a speaker at an LDS rally, would the police still decide that their hands were tied?

I'm curious to see how the Utah media reacts to this. Will their op-eds support free speech or nut cases being allowed to use their "second amendment rights" to suppress it?

 

[packrat]

Why are men so afraid of women? (some men, I should say)

 

[OreoRosies86]

I would be very surprised if that digusting letter were actually written by a student.

 

[MollyMalone]

According to local news media reports from, e.g., the Salt Lake Tribune, the university had planned to increase the number of security personnel present, use bomb-sniffing dogs, and ban all backpacks from the auditorium where Ms. Sarkeesian was scheduled to speak. But they declined to undertake the kind of screening of attendees for firearms (pat-downs, metal detectors) she asked for.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58521856-78/sarkeesian-video-usu-feminist.html.csp

That kind of guns-targeted screening would run afoul of the state statute which generally prohibits Utah public schools and the state's institutions of higher learning from enact[ing], establish[ing], or enforc[ing] any ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy pertaining to firearms that in any way inhibits or restricts the possession or use of firearms on either public or private property.
http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE53/htm/53_05a010200.htm

Don't know of any reason to doubt reports that the local authorities and the FBI's cyber-terrorism task force are working to identify the person responsible for that e-mail (and like Elliot86, I doubt he's a Utah State student)

 

[ame]

I HATE that she had to cave in the face of this threat. But calling his bluff might have resulted in violence, so I agree with her decision - her safety, and that of other women on campus, is the most important thing. That being said, I fail to understand WHY the campus couldn't ensure her safety. If President Obama was speaking at the university, surely they would have found a away to ban weapons despite the state's open carry laws. It seems to me that the school and local law enforcement didn't try very hard to protect the speaker and ensure the safety of the women of the university, and if I were a female student at this school I would be HOPPING MAD about it. I think they (and I'm making an assumption here that the heads of the university are primarily men, but I could be wrong) simply didn't deem this speaker as important enough to make the effort.

I've said it before and I'm gonna say it again - I'm SICK AND TIRED of hearing the talking heads of (conservative) media outlets whining about wars on Christianity, and wars on Christmas, and wars on everything else the conservatives hold dear, but no one (including liberal media) is talking about the quiet WAR ON WOMEN happening under our very noses.

I'm all kinds of angry today.

 

[AGBF]

I have no idea what a trope in a video game is, but this message made Anita Sarkeesian known to me! Like Lady Disdain, I am now interested in the case and hope that you will post updates on it. My other observation is that it is quite well written. That makes me wonder if it was actually composed by a college student or merely posted by one. If it was actually composed by a student, he should be fairly easy to find (provided that he was telling the truth and is, indeed, a student at that school). There cannot be that many literate college students in school nowadays.

You make a sad point. Something about it does read awfully low-level bureaucrat, doesn't it.

But then again, you don't think an upstanding, real man ready to take a stand against Ms.(or is it Dr.?) Sarkeesian and risk his life in a gunfight would lie about his status, do you?

Deb

 

[AGBF]

I did not see this article until after this thread was well underway. It has a lot more information on the entire phenomenon of women and video games and a lot of history on Ms. Sarkeesian and the hatred towards her, too.

Article from "The New York Times"...http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/technology/gamergate-women-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%221%22%3A%22RI%3A6%22}&_r=0

 

[Matata]

I don't think the threat was serious. I think the intent was to stop the presentation and the person succeeded. Used to words to effectively stop free speech. Just a hunch, but I think if the writer were as disgusted and victimized by feminism as s/he states, s/he would have acted violently regardless of this particular event.

 

[momhappy]

I genuinely have no idea how hindered authorities are in open carry states. Where are the lines drawn - can people carry them into protests, courthouses, political rallies, other potentially volatile environments?

I used to be pro-gun, before the Sandy Hook shooting: now I'm in favor of much tighter restrictions, because there are just too damn many tragedies. In these circumstances, I think the logic is supposed to be that the crowd of openly carrying citizens will be able to take the threat-making lunatic down ... but the thing is, incidents like the Giffords shooting and the Aurora shooting have demonstrated that's not the case.

But to address the title question ... I think the threat is a great gauge for the #Gamergate mindset and the toxic attitude Sarkeesian has been decrying. This isn't about dudes really loving their video games. This is about dudes really hating women.

Concealed Carry laws vary by state (in terms of where/when folks can carry). Unless an event (like a political rally, protest, etc.) was being held at a location that did not allow for concealed carry (like a college campus for example), then a person is free to carry.

 

[VRBeauty]

Molly Malone - thanks for the research.

 

[kenny]

Why are men so afraid of women? (some men, I should say)

I think it's about power.
People in groups that have long enjoyed power over others (women, blacks, gays etc.) don't like the idea of equality.
Equality means they don't get to see themselves as superior any more.

I hope they catch this guy, shove his AK47 up his ass and unload a 30-round magazine, I mean ... prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[AGBF]

The article in "The New York Times" has 186 comments on-line now, all that I read intelligent and bouncing off each other to make a really interesting conversation. The argument has been made that the First Amendment is not doing very well in Utah. Someone suggested that Ms. Sarkeesian could have spoken from another room and been broadcast to her listeners. Someone pointed out that Utah's open carry law allows school teachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom and said that it is just like an old western with the school marm toting a gun. Another poster (female) who loves the geography of Utah said it can forget her ski dollars this season. And many, many posters expressed skepticism about the inability of a government that spies on every aspect of people's lives as ours does with the NSA (not to mention Google) being unable to figure out who is behind this threat if they want to. Some posters believe the gaming industry should throw in several billion of their dollars to assist in the effort.

Obviously I find the comments a fun read.

Deb

 

[Circe]

The article in "The New York Times" has 186 comments on-line now, all that I read intelligent and bouncing off each other to make a really interesting conversation. The argument has been made that the First Amendment is not doing very well in Utah. Someone suggested that Ms. Sarkeesian could have spoken from another room and been broadcast to her listeners. Someone pointed out that Utah's open carry law allows school teachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom and said that it is just like an old western with the school marm toting a gun. Another poster (female) who loves the geography of Utah said it can forget her ski dollars this season. And many, many posters expressed skepticism about the inability of a government that spies on every aspect of people's lives as ours does with the NSA (not to mention Google) being unable to figure out who is behind this threat if they want to. Some posters believe the gaming industry should throw in several billion of their dollars to assist in the effort.

Obviously I find the comments a fun read.

Deb

I suspect that the issue was less a concern for her own personal safety, and more a fear of his targeting the audience: Sarkeesian's spoken after death threats in the past, but this idiot made a broader statement of intent than his predecessors.

I would love - LOVE - to see nonsense like this prosecuted as the domestic terrorism it is. It's not just Sarkeesian. There have been three separate incidents in this last month when women in the gaming industry have been targeted and threatened specifically enough that they've had to leave their homes. And it's not like it's limited to the gaming industry: I know or know *of* women in just about every field who've gotten rape & death threats for being vocal on the internet. The anonymity of the internet (and possibly the commonality of these threats generally not being taken seriously by law enforcement) makes these cowards feel like they can progress with impunity.

Compare that to, say, the discrepancy in application of Stand Your Ground laws (see this article, for example: http://www.salon.com/2014/10/15/sta...ophole_gives_domestic_abusers_all_the_rights/). The default expectation appears to be that men's abstract rights - like freedom of speech, like a man's home being his castle - are prioritized over women's concrete right to protection under the law, or even self-protection. It's repulsive.

 

[MollyMalone]

Well, just because someone posts a comment on the NY Times web site doesn't mean they know what they are talking about or that their comment is an inherently meaningful one. E.g.,
* someone suggested that Ms. Sarkeesian could have spoken from another room and been broadcast to her listeners - sure, but there's no evidence that Ms. Sarkeesian was interested in that set-up & Utah State refused to consider the arrangement.

* Utah's open carry law allows school teachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom and said that it is just like an old western with the school marm toting a gun - what bearing does that have on Ms. Sarkeesian's decision to cancel her speaking engagement? If she herself wished to openly tote onto the Utah State campus a handgun that's either unloaded or 2 mechanical actions short of firing, she could have done so. That requires no permit in Utah altho' a permit is required for concealed carry.

Informational aside: despite the conflation by Ms. Sarkeesian and others, "open carry" is not synonymous with "concealed carry" -- and what is lawful, open carry & concealed carry in 1 state is not necessarily the same in every other state that where some sort of open carry is lawful. E.g., you may lawfully be able to openly carry a rifle in a jurisdiction, but not a handgun; in a few states, you may openly carry a loaded, ready-to-fire handgun(not true of Utah); the definition of "open" and "carry" is not uniform - "carry" may mean on the person, but not while in a motor vehicle, "open" may mean it's OK if it's visible in a holster or, depending on the jurisdiction, that may not be the definition of "open".

* many, many posters expressed skepticism about the inability of a government that spies on every aspect of people's lives as ours does with the NSA (not to mention Google) being unable to figure out who is behind this threat if they want to. The e-mail was received less than 48 hours ago. I highly doubt that it was sent via an e-mail account accurately linked to a readily identifiable person who did not use a Internet proxy. Also, the process of eliminating innocent people & developing probable cause for arrest is more tedious, time-consuming in these kinds of scenarios than most realize.

 

[Karl_K]

I did not see this article until after this thread was well underway. It has a lot more information on the entire phenomenon of women and video games and a lot of history on Ms. Sarkeesian and the hatred towards her, too.

Article from "The New York Times"...http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/technology/gamergate-women-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%221%22%3A%22RI%3A6%22}&_r=0

That is a very one sided story.
There is a lot of history to it.
I am hesitant to get into it because a lot of it I don't agree with and some I do and it would upset some people here.
Gamers have been under attack for years, from first ladies to presidents to senators to celebrities.
They get blamed for mass shootings and many attempt to marginalize them.
Many view it as the last place on earth where men can be men and boys be boys without the nanny state and do-gooder PC types breathing down their necks.
There are a few Women and girls who hang with the boys and they are honored.
Those that come in and demand that everyone change because they want it their way get a very negative reaction.

That statistic on woman gamers are way off they are not playing the same games.
They are counting games like words with friends and facebook games which are 99% Women in the same category as more hardcore games that are played by 99.9999% men.

There is much more to it than that but like I said I am not going to get into it.

The threatening letter was uncalled for and whoever sent it should be prosecuted.

 

[AGBF]

Karl-

I started out by saying I didn't even know what a trope was. I am not holding myself up as an expert on gaming. I know nothing about gaming and do not have a position on it or how women are treated in it. My only issue is with death threats made to a speaker and a community. I take those very seriously.

The issue upon which some other posters touched (whether people who commented on "The New York Times" website had all their facts straight or not) is interesting to read. As interesting to read as the comments themselves. But just as all those comments left on "The New York Times" website contradict each other, the fact that the opinions of Pricescopers contradict some opinions of "The New York Times" posters is just more interesting reading for me. It doesn't really matter much to my "stand" on the issue. They are just opinions and insights and thoughts, the stuff from which I will draw my own conclusions one day once I have sorted them all out.

The only issue for me here is the death threats. I want them investigated vigorously. No one in the United States should be threatened with death with impunity. No groups should be.

Deb/AGBF

 

[Karl_K]

Karl-

The only issue for me here is the death threats. I want them investigated vigorously. No one in the United States should be threatened with death with impunity. No groups should be.

Deb/AGBF

That we agree 100% on.

 

[AGBF]

Well, just because someone posts a comment on the NY Times web site doesn't mean they know what they are talking about or that their comment is an inherently meaningful one.

Maybe so, but they often have interesting opinions (in my opinion, of course). And interesting opinions are worth their weight in gold to me.

Deb

 

[Circe]

I did not see this article until after this thread was well underway. It has a lot more information on the entire phenomenon of women and video games and a lot of history on Ms. Sarkeesian and the hatred towards her, too.

Article from "The New York Times"...http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/technology/gamergate-women-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%221%22%3A%22RI%3A6%22}&_r=0

That is a very one sided story.
There is a lot of history to it.
I am hesitant to get into it because a lot of it I don't agree with and some I do and it would upset some people here.
Gamers have been under attack for years, from first ladies to presidents to senators to celebrities.
They get blamed for mass shootings and many attempt to marginalize them.
Many view it as the last place on earth where men can be men and boys be boys without the nanny state and do-gooder PC types breathing down their necks.
There are a few Women and girls who hang with the boys and they are honored.
Those that come in and demand that everyone change because they want it their way get a very negative reaction.

That statistic on woman gamers are way off they are not playing the same games.
They are counting games like words with friends and facebook games which are 99% Women in the same category as more hardcore games that are played by 99.9999% men.

There is much more to it than that but like I said I am not going to get into it.

The threatening letter was uncalled for and whoever sent it should be prosecuted.

The thing is, this isn't just a gamer issue: we see it come up in every single male-dominated field "infiltrated" by women. The closest parallel I can think of is the comics world, which I did/do participate in ... and there's the same uneasy push-pull between comics geeks feeling marginalized, oppressed, and stereotyped ... and then lashing out angrily whenever women start to get involved.

I think the difference in terms of media attention can be chalked up to the fact that gamers are likely to be more computer savvy ... and thus more likely to actually respond in a form that can be documented, and to reach out to directly harass their targets (your average fifty-mumble comics guy is not going to be able to find the home address of the new writer for "Catwoman" to send her hate mail, for example, and thank god for that). And I don't think it's limited to "geek" milieu either ... I think we see the same thing in every field, from sports to business on out.

I think we're in the middle of a cultural paradigm shift, basically, where we're redefining what it means for men to be men, boys to be boys, etc. Do those necessarily have to be defined in opposition to women? Are they based on being able to objectify or insult or exclude women? I certainly hope not.

 

[Karl_K]

I think we're in the middle of a cultural paradigm shift, basically, where we're redefining what it means for men to be men, boys to be boys, etc.

Is that really a good thing?
Why should all things change to suit what some women feel they should be?

 

[Karl_K]

. Do those necessarily have to be defined in opposition to women?

When someone wants a group to change just to suit them it is wrong.
There are hardcore female gamers who hang with the guys.
They are looked up to with awe in many cases.
It is the ones that come in screaming you cant do that because I don't like it that get a hard push back.
I am not saying some change isn't good and really could care less about games.

 

[Circe]

I think we're in the middle of a cultural paradigm shift, basically, where we're redefining what it means for men to be men, boys to be boys, etc.

Is that really a good thing?
Why should all things change to suit what some women feel they should be?

On an earnest note, applying to damn near everything: because Patriarchy Hurts All of Us (TM). Because women shouldn't have to deal with the "tits or get the **** out" mentality if they happen to like fantasy video games. Because men shouldn't be derided as "pussies" if they prefer the other kind of games, or, for that matter, knitting. Because the current system really sucks for half the population, and still sucks relatively badly for the other: former has to worry about discrimination in schools, harassment at work, domestic violence at home (as a pregnant lady, right now my biggest statistical risk for death would be ... not childbirth, and not even a typical risk like, say, a car accident, but the father of my child, because that's how most pregnant women kick it these days: at the hands of their partner). The latter? Doesn't have a party either, with the pressure to constantly live up to a rather limited ideal of stoic, violent, "provider" stereotypes.

On a practical note, applying specifically to gaming: because money. Because appealing to a broader demographic will help companies grow and improve their technology. Because gamers wouldn't be so marginalized/oppressed if they actually tried to include the rest of the population. And because ... drumroll, please ... nobody is making them change. Anite Sarkeesian isn't God. Zoe Quinn ain't POTUS. Their critiquing video games, or providing alternatives, isn't a threat. Gamers are freaking the hell out over the abstract possibility that their way isn't the One True Path. It's ... disproportionate, to say the least.

 

[Circe]

. Do those necessarily have to be defined in opposition to women?

When someone wants a group to change just to suit them it is wrong.
There are hardcore female gamers who hang with the guys.
They are looked up to with awe in many cases.
It is the ones that come in screaming you cant do that because I don't like it that get a hard push back.
I am not saying some change isn't good and really could care less about games.

Whoops, crossposted - gonna reply to this one separately.

I don't want to be the person who draws inappropriate parallels, so please see this as an illustration of general philosophy, and not as a minimization of the things I'm about to reference with a comparison to video games: the same thing could have been said about integration. Or gay marriage.

If a system is exclusionary, then, yeah, pretty much universally, I'm going to be on the side of the people who're on the outside looking in ... just because I can see a practical gain for the larger whole in that system, whereas I see absolutely no net positive in keeping the Nice Things for an exclusive minority.