feminism

Woman gamer harassed

I have been a gamer since 1980 when I purchased my first Atari console unit. I played Space Invaders, Pong, Circus and many other games for hours.

After purchasing my first PC in 1984, I played DOS games which consisted of text only or the simplest of games with limited graphics.

I purchased other console units for my oldest son over the years and always played games on those consoles (Sony Dreamcast, Nintendo, Sega Genesis, etc.).

My next PC had Windows OS which opened up the world of Myst to me and my kids. I bought educational games for the kids and played my own games while my kids sat beside me and helped me solve puzzles from the notes I took.

A decade or so later, I was introduced to the world of MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games). I joined the online gaming world and began to meet other online players. Some of them were women, but the majority were men.

In this world, there are men who play female characters and GIRLs: girl in real life.

I have made some real-life friends through online gaming, both male and female.

Within the online gaming environment you find all types of male players: protective types, kind types, gentlemanly types, socially-awkward types, controlling types, cliqueish types, macho types, quiet types, outspoken types, highly-competitive types, profane types and finally the really ugly types which portray a variety of bad male stereotypes: immature, unrestrained, abusive and sexually predatory (these behaviors are not exhibited exclusively by men, though).

In one game that I played for years, a new guild member started sending me private messages which started with this question: “Do you swallow?”

This was in response to the name of one of my characters which was inspired by a butterfly. What I thought was lovely and amazing, a male player twisted and perverted.

I reported him to our guild leaders and he was booted from the group.

This guy had started playing the game after a stint on Second Life, which is not a game at all, but actually an online community with an X-rated section for adults. I guess he thought all online games were populated by the same types of people. He was mistaken.

On other occasions, I have had character names twisted and perverted by male players in public chat (you can tell the guys who watch a lot of porn). I always reported any player who was obviously sexually harassing me. Many ended up banned from the game, not just because of my reports but because these people generally bring down the gaming environment to a low, base level which game developers do not want (especially subscription-based games where female players are valued).

Most recently, I started playing Blizzard’s first-person shooter game Overwatch. This team-based game is crazy fun, with a choice of 22 characters for each short match against other players.

There is attack and defend, capture and escort. After playing a set of matches with a 6-member team, you might find yourself playing the next set of matches with players from the other team. It is always a good idea to be a good sport after a match, a concept that seems to elude many players.

When I created my gamertag for Overwatch, I used a variation of my very female name. It was obvious that I was a female player.

Obnoxious male players have attempted to motivate our team with statements such as: “everyone get your dicks out.”

When I informed him that I didn’t have such equipment, he was not very nice.

Over the next few weeks, I found myself the subject of negative talk if I participated in voice chat and attempted to provide any leadership or guidance to my team. This negative talk was not just from male players, but younger female players as well. I was often teaming up with one of my sons who witnessed the behavior. It was an interesting dynamic.

If a guy offered the team leadership, he was usually rewarded with cooperation and thanks. If a female player attempted to provide leadership, she was often treated badly during and after the match.

When I reported to my other son that a male player had called me a “f***in bitch” after I called him out on his abusive chat, my son was upset but not surprised. As a male player, he was used to seeing and hearing such language. He had not, however, dealt with it directed toward his mother (you know, the argument that sexual harassment and/or assault isn’t a big deal until it could be your daughter, sister, mother, etc.).

I used this experience to try to educate my sons on what women must deal with in a man’s world, as gaming has been primarily male dominated for years. That is changing quickly. More and more women are populating the online gaming world.

I made a decision after yet another male player heaped abuse on me  to change my gamertag to something masculine.

For the last three weeks I have not had a single negative comment aimed at me. Not one.

Male gamers will argue that women who complain about the gaming world are just whining or being snowflakes or SJWs (social justice warriors).

The New York Times article SWSX Addresses Online Harassment of Women in Gaming is a disturbing read which I recommend to everyone.

There are YouTubers who regularly make fun of women who are trying to change the online, console, and PC gaming world so that such games do not perpetuate harmful attitudes, behaviors and stereotypes.

Indi game developers Brianna Wu and Zoe Quinn, and Anita Sarkeesian, social justice warrior who owns the Feminist Frequency blog and YouTube channel, are the favorite subjects of deniers of misogynistic and anti-femiinist themes in games. These women have received death threats and continued online harassment through Twitter and other forums.

Gamergate is the subject of many naysaying male gamer YouTubers such as Investigamer who mispronounces impartiality over and over (I know, I’m nitpicking) after gaming journalism was accused/exposed as being corrupt.

I understand that male players are just not going to see and understand what women endure in male-dominated environments because they are not on the receiving end of such behavior. I understand this. However, men need to learn to listen to female voices instead of denigrating or atttempting to silence them.

Polarizing men against women in the gaming world is not going to accomplish anything. Men and women must care about ending online harassment especially in the gaming world.

I know what I have experienced. I know that the harassment stopped when I quit using voice chat and changed my gamertag to one that is obviously masculine.

If women must disguise themselves as male players in order to avoid harassment, there is something wrong with the online gaming world.

If a female player challenges a male player because he is being a dick, her voice should be respected. If a gamer chooses to be a dick, he should expect to be called out for such behavior.

It is one thing to be upset during a game and expressing said frustration, it is another to attack a female player with the aim of humiliating and ultimately silencing her.

I have an announcement: men don’t rule the world anymore. You have to share the world with women, and this includes the military, politics, business, education, and, yes, gaming.

 

 

 

Women silencing women

Mbathroom_grafitiany women rage against the silencing behavior of men.

A huge battle is going on in the House of Representatives, who want to de-fund Planned Parenthood. That is silencing behavior at its worst.

I have written about how abusers silence their victims, stealing a woman’s power from her little by little until she has virtually none left.

But how many of us, women who believe women should be able to use their voices freely, silence other women?

Is some feminine speech okay and other feminine speech not okay?

What about women who use profanity or talk about sexuality? Is that type of speech okay? What about women who use speech that may be considered vulgar? How about women who use religious or spiritual speech?

Who decides whose speech should be spoken and heard? Religious leaders, sacred texts, family members, the majority of the people in society, our government, civil rights activists, atheists, feminists, and any other –ists you can think of?

Now we are touching upon morality and the myth of the virtuous woman (thanks Dr. Eva Jones for making mythology relevant to real life).

I was using the restroom in my local grocery store chain a few weeks ago and saw some writing on the wall.

At first I just saw the words, “You’re a lady so act like one. Thank you.”

To be honest, those words offended ME.

What defines what a lady is? Are all adult women supposed to be ladies? Why does anyone need to act like anything that they aren’t?

“…refined, polite woman” is the definition of lady one online dictionary provides.

Are tomboys immoral? Should women all wear dresses and speak in soft, lowered voices?

But then I saw that a lot of the words on that wall had been scratched out. I was subconsciously aware that the larger, symbolically louder, words had been in response to some kind of bathroom graffiti. I didn’t really consider the significance of that response until today.

A woman used that stall in that restroom, saw words written by another woman, and decided that they were not appropriate. She scribbled over them, making them unreadable.

One woman silenced another woman.

The unreadable words had been judged unladylike, and therefore, they needed to be silenced.

This goes both ways folks. If someone scribbles “Jesus loves you!” on the bathroom wall and another woman, who is an atheist, scribbles over it to render it unreadable, the atheist is using silencing behavior.

Women with different value and belief systems, with entirely different world views, silence one another every day. Is it possible that this behavior might be what is hindering social evolution in this country?

I wrote a research paper for an English course over a year ago which addressed free speech on college campuses. Most of us who are old enough are aware of what happened on the UCLA – Berkeley campus back in the 60s. Liberal voices, many from outside the campus, were being used to try to effect change. The powers that be, conservative and defensive of the American Way of Life, decided that those voices needed to be silenced. The fallout from that period hindered open discussion about a lot of important issues for decades.

The creation of free speech zones, banning outside groups on the Berkeley campus, controlling what printed material was distributed on campus and more led to a stand-off and arrests. Years later we have access to classified information that revealed the presence of the FBI on campus due to concerns over communist influences.

Fast forward to the 90s and inversely, traditional (often conservative) speech was limited by way of speech codes (the SCOTUS found these unconstitutional). Liberal influences wanted to change conservative ideologies and prohibit speech that could be harmful to women, minorities, and gays.

The problem with this approach is that by silencing people, unwanted attitudes are reinforced, not changed. They just go underground and form even stronger, sometimes more fanatical subgroups. As the persecuted ones, they are ready to do battle for what they believe is true and good.

The end does not justify the means. In the case of silencing others, the means can backfire horribly.

What is the answer? I have a potential solution.

Someone scribbles something about an explicit sex act on the bathroom wall. The next person who enters the stall doesn’t like the content of the message (sarcasm mode coming: her delicate sensibilities are offended); instead of erasing or scribbling out the offensive speech, she writes something encouraging, beautiful, something that represents her point of view in a respectful manner. Why not?

If one woman’s speech is morally superior to another woman’s speech, this should be obvious to anyone who sees them side by side, right?

[I know that writing on a bathroom wall is actually vandalism. This is a hypothetical situation, and is being used as an example of women respecting the voices of other women. I am not encouraging people to write on bathroom walls.]

Many who are conflicted about the feminist cause are conflicted because of seemingly militant, aggressive women who silence the voices of men (and other women who are not as militant or aggressive).

I know what you’re thinking: Have you ever tried to convince a man that he was wrong about something?

It is often like hitting your head against a brick wall to try to get through to a man who has it all figured out: authoritative, conservative, deeply entrenched men who believe they were given the keys to the kingdom because of their maleness. Yes, I have dealt with this, a lot!

How many men will turn around and ask the same question? (Lots of male heads nodding assent to this one. Women can be stubborn and intractable, too.)

Again, what is the answer?

Free speech, without the silencing behavior.

When there is no silencing behavior, power is not shifted from one group to another. Each person and group retains their own power. I love this!!!

Bad [good] feminist

Roxane Gay has a powerful message about the many faces of feminism. It is not just about feminism, but the female voice. Listen closely starting around 9:30 of her talk about what happened to her voice and what she did about it.

We are all bad feminists if we think there is an ideal to which we must aspire. I am a human who wants equal access, equal opportunity and equal rights. Whatever that looks like, that’s what I want.

Using my voice is very important to achieving equality. It is vital. I will use my voice.

Thank you, Roxane Gay.

Women against feminism supported by a LOT of men

This National Review Online article supports the Women Against Feminism movement. The article is interesting, and does provide insight into what motivates the women behind this movement, but the comments are especially telling. Article comments are where you see what people really think about an issue. I love reading comments. Below are some screenshots of comments. Although not required to do so, I have blurred out the usernames of the commenters. I especially appreciate the individuals who took the time to provide definitions and clarification on what feminism means to them.

screenshot waf1

screenshot waf2

screenshot waf3

Feminism under fire

BBC.com is one of the online news sources in my news circuit. I saw a story this morning about women against feminism. Huh? I tried to keep an open mind as I clicked play to watch the video part of the story.

There were women stating that we didn’t need feminism any more, that it is toxic, that women don’t need to hate men to pursue their ambitions.

Okay, I kind of understand where they are coming from. There are some radical feminists that seem to get press every time something controversial that affects women’s health, equal pay, and so on pops up in the news.

Are they really radical, or are they the women who continue to recognize that even today there is still not gender equality?

Well, is there? I don’t think so.

If we had gender equality, there would be family-friendly policies in place for moms and dads who work outside the home, rooms for nursing moms who need to pump while at work, flexible work hours and built-in family leave for fathers.

If we had gender equality, women wouldn’t make less than men for the same job. Sorry, but this is documented. Pay equality is an issue. Deniers can say it isn’t so, but facts and figures support the claim.

Has anyone even considered what women give up to stay home with their children? No social security earnings, no retirement protection, little legal protection should the earning husband abandon her. It is like the dark ages legally and financially for women.

The only way for women to be protected is IF they work outside the home and have their own separate income, kept apart from their husbands.

1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted.

That is some serious hatred there. Yes, rape is a hate crime against women.

How many of these anti-feminists spend time scouring news sites, reading comments to articles? I read comments by men who still think women should be silent, pregnant, and in the kitchen and certainly not bothering their pretty little selves about the big, bad world. Granted, the generation of men who spout this crap will eventually die out, but what about the men that they raised?

Feminism is not a movement or a set of behavioral guidelines. Feminism means equality for women, plain and simple. So anti-feminism means . . . what? They are against equality? Really?

Merriam-Webster defines feminism as 1. “the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities;” and 2. “organized activity in support of women’s rights and interests.”

Because I am fairly intelligent, I surmise that these anti-feminists are objecting to the second definition of the word. They take issue with the organized feminist movement that lobbies and actively fights for a political and social agenda that benefits women. I don’t agree with every tenet of the organized movement myself, but I certainly do not oppose it, either.

And the idea that demanding equal rights means that men lose rights is ludicrous. It does mean that they must adjust their workplace behavior to include women. This means that good ‘ole boy club atmosphere must be relegated to the men-only clubs. It doesn’t belong in any workplace.

I learned the hard way that any woman that surrenders her financial independence to stay home and raise children, care for the home, and support her husband’s career is taking a risk. This is a sad truth in our modern, enlightened society.

Are most feminists man-haters? I think not. Opposing entrenched ideas that stand in the way of an egalitarian society does not equal hate. It means they oppose unfair ideologies and practices that continue to keep women from having equal access and opportunity to pursue their dreams.

Choices: Self-Determination for Women

For a woman, self-determination is a subconscious desire. When men identify, acknowledge and validate this primal need, everyone is happier. Wise men acknowledge this basic need and work it into their relationships with women. Not controllers. Controllers end up driving away the women in their lives, or killing them, sometimes emotionally and sometimes physically. When one person needs to exert control over the life of another, the end result will be either subjection or rejection.
chainlinks-white
Subjecting another to one’s will might seem desirous if one feels he or she is correctly oriented and the object of subjection is incorrectly oriented. What right does any person have to determine another person’s life? More importantly, how does a man earn the superior position of “head” or relational boss over a woman? Because the Bible says it’s so? I reject that position. It doesn’t fit my right to equality and my desire for freedom from oppression. That doctrine does not fit my belief that I have a right to self-determination.

Rejection is my final choice. If I refuse a life of subjection to the will of a man, then I must reject his doctrine. I have stated previously that a controller cannot function within a relationship in which he does not have control. He flounders, struggles, becomes completely depressed and eventually lost. Without external control over others, he cannot find any kind of internal control over himself. In my case, I must reject the man. He cannot love; he can only control. I do not need to be controlled; I need to be loved. With no understanding of this basic concept, there is no viable relationship. So I must choose.

Choices . . . I have made many of my life choices based on ideological concepts. Although living this way often causes hardship for me and my children, I cannot live any other way. I chose to keep my first pregnancy (against the sage advice of some resulting in judgment and rejection of me), lived as a single mom for nine years before remarrying, and then chose someone that I felt would share my life goals. I look back, as only those who have reached my age can, and see many mistakes I have made. I do not, however, regret any of my choices. I am who I am today because of every one of those choices.
dothisMy choices have, however, unwittingly caused my family emotional difficulty. My family cannot understand why I choose as I do because I am not in possession of their experiences and their values, ones that are more calculated to the results than the perceived right and wrong of the situation. Again, I tend to be an idealist. It is hard being an idealist. Oh, that is an entirely different post, one which I must explore separately. I have made many choices based on wrongly idealistic concepts. But they were mine. I believed thus and acted on that belief. I own those choices.

I celebrate that I can make tough decisions separate from the expressed desires of my extended family. On the other hand, I mourn that I haven’t received more respect and support from my family–do I have a right to expect this when I reject their advice? We all do this to some degree, I think. Some more boldly than others. I am lucky that I don’t care what people think as much as some. Not caring gives me a certain amount of freedom. Deep down inside, though, is that little girl still waiting for someone to notice her, delight in her, and celebrate her as their precious little girl. I never felt this and mourn this lack. This (lacking approval) has been a motivator for many of my choices. It has given me much freedom to make choices apart from a desire for approval and acceptance while deep down yearning for approval and acceptance. Oh, the conflict.

Choices . . . I will continue to make them based on my value system even as that system shifts. I do try very hard to understand the motivations and values of others in dealing with them. I cannot allow myself to be subjected to the values and beliefs of others, though. I am struggling with the age-old need for self-determination. I have given up a lot to gain this right. A lot. When I am 85 years old, I wonder if I will think it was worth it all. For now, it is what I must do. I can live no other way.

Self-Determination

According to Self-Determination Theory, the following is believed to be true:

“Within SDT, the nutriments for healthy development and functioning are specified using the concept of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. To the extent that the needs are ongoingly satisfied people will develop and function effectively and experience wellness, but to the extent that they are thwarted, people more likely evidence ill-being and non-optimal functioning. The darker sides of human behavior and experience, such as certain types of psychopathology, prejudice, and aggression are understood in terms of reactions to basic needs having been thwarted, either developmentally or proximally.”
control
In a system where self-determination is disallowed, I believe moral and behavioral standards are threatened and personalities become twisted to some degree. We all acknowledge that overly controlling parents often raise a rebellious child. A man who attempts to control his wife often ends up with a wife who runs away or sneaks around. If the controllers had been less controlling, would the children and wife have developed differently, been able to be true to a moral standard of obedience for the children and faithfulness in the wife? Can we blame the wrong behavior of one person on the oppressive behavior of another? In some cases I believe we can.

What happens when a people are faced with a dictatorial ruler? A black market emerges. A resistance is formed. Lawbreakers are created either way. When prohibition was in effect in the United States, we all agree that it was a factor in the development of organized crime. Many believe the same situation has emerged because of the war on drugs. And now we have hundreds of thousands of new felons in Connecticut because of their refusal to register their legally-purchased and possessed long guns and high-capacity magazines. We can see what Stalin did in Russia when he declared the private ownership of land void and that the product of personal effort belonged to the state. Riots, rebellion and millions of deaths as Stalin endeavored to eliminate any threats to his plan for collectivism and Communism.

On a personal level, when one person oppresses or controls another, the results are often perceived immorality. For myself, I had to reject my church, my husband, and my extended family to some degree in my quest to be free from an emotionally-abusive marriage. I had to do what is considered taboo in America. Women just don’t leave their faithful husbands here. He didn’t deserve that. I have been told over and over again that he loves me and wants me back. Control is not love.

selfdetermination
And yet, in my quest for self-determination, freedom from oppression and rejection of subjection, I am true to myself. I suffer a lot for this choice as any woman does who fights to escape an abusive marriage. I risk financial devastation, potential loss of my children, and even death for standing up to a controlling, abusive husband. A woman is most at risk when she is fleeing an abusive husband. I know women who had to leave their children behind with an abusive husband to preserve their own lives. What horrible choices abused women face.

The good news is that here in America, a woman is free to seek escape from an abusive marriage. The courts support her right to be free from emotional and physical abuse. The police will enforce orders of protection, and when necessary, a woman can protect herself legally by owning a gun. I don’t care what you believe about gun control, a woman does not stand a chance physically against a man in hand-to-hand battle; a gun equalizes her chances of survival in many cases. I chose not to purchase a gun for protection when I was fearful but appreciate that I had the choice.

Self-determination is a basic human right, one that has been denied to women for thousands of years; it is a right that continues to be threatened by religious doctrines and controlling men even today. I celebrate my right to make choices for my life. I celebrate that I am free to make good and bad choices, and acknowledge that I will live with the consequences. Someday, maybe, women will feel even more empowered to reject male domination in our culture (entertainment, advertising, consumerism, career choices, politics, education). Controlling men are weak men (another blog post). Women who shake off control are strong women who pay a high price for their freedom and for their right to self-determination.

May we all be free to make choices about our own lives!