Wanda Wumon. ‘Male Privilege’ prevents her rising further than lab tech.
Disclaimer: For comment, I shall be handing over to our Intersectional Feminism Correspondent, Wanda Wumon. Her opinions are entirely her own and do not reflect those of the owner of this blog.
Science: How The Patriarchy Oppresses Women’s Free Expression in the Workplace
For decades, women wanting a career in the patriarchal ‘hard’ (I don’t need to discuss the self-evident misogyny of the word—an obvious label designed to intimidate women) sciences of engineering, physics, and chemistry were expected to study for years alongside men in academic environments that subjected them daily to the torture of stare-rape and the sexualising objectification of the male gaze from privileged cis-white male-baby-nerds. Worse, we were expected to accept, with good grace, regular intimidation: being space-raped by domineering men confident of their entitlement to invade a woman’s 1/2 mile Safe Radius to propose such lewd acts as ‘checking something in your notes’ or ‘partnering up for the group assessment’. Their real meaning was always so, so transparent: systematic weaponisation of academic study in order to suppress the natural creativity and freedom of the female spirit. Continue reading
Sounds like a dumb title, doesn’t it? But after the launch of a recent Gamergate associated tag, #GamerGateNeutral, and watching how many reacted to it, it seems an explanation of some basic principles is needed.
(NOTE: whether the GGN tag is truly representative of neutrality in its broadest sense is up for debate. Being a neutral, and therefore having enough of a brain to form my own opinions, I would argue it is not, but that isn’t the subject of this post.)
The term ‘neutral’ was coined after the descriptors of ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ gamergate came to be used as shorthand for those who focus on fighting for ethics in games journalism and those who consider that ‘gamergate’ is a cover for those wishing to engage in harassment and abuse of women in the games industry. For those who feel they cannot subscribe to, or stand with, either position, the term neutral has been adopted by some, myself included. Continue reading
NOTE: Harassment and ethics are issues that are important to many, but NOT the focus this post. Agendas and concerns elsewhere, please.
This is about looking at allowing gamers of ALL sorts enjoyment of an inclusive hobby. Gaming is easily big enough for everyone. My suggestions for moving forward are:
1) When considering gaming and the community of gamers, drop the history. Leave it behind. Stop investigating. Stop shaming.
2) Social Justice types: stop trying to ban games.
3) Gamers: stop seeing the development of games that prioritise story and character interaction as threatening. Let those that enjoy ‘gentler’ or casual games do so without attacking them.
4) Devs: be aware the market contains a huge diversity of consumers. Follow your artistic vision for the game you wish to make, targeted at the audience you think will most enjoy it. Do not cave in to pressure to change your game by anyone who is not in the target demographic.
5) Devs, Gamers & Social Justice Types: stop attacking & trying to dismantle each other’s identities and sub-communities. Create safe and unsafe gaming spaces, and trash talk, or not, in an a place where it’s accepted.
6) Gamers & Social Justice Types: don’t be an idiot and make a nuisance of yourself in someone else’s space. Stick with your own and enjoy yourselves there.
What did I miss? Any suggestions/critique/agreement in the comments below. And we’re trying to look forward here. Can we think past the current gamergate ‘scandal’ no matter our affiliation?