If you’ve been following the news, you’ve probably seen alarming stories about an army
of angry and vicious video gamers marching under a banner called GamerGate. According
to these reports, this mob will stop at nothing to defend its heteronormative privilege.
Well, is this an accurate picture of GamerGate? I’ll consider the evidence next on the Factual Feminist.
#Gamergate is a Twitter hashtag and it attracts
gamers from all over the world, males & females, liberals & conservatives, black & white, straight,
gay and trans. Some gamers identify with the hashtag because they believe there is
too much corruption in gaming. Others are weary of cultural critics who evaluate video
games through prism of gender politics. Now, I discovered GamerGate when I was working
on my recent video about sexism in games. In that video, I pointed out that the evidence
does not support the claim that video games cause violence or misogyny. I mean, gaming
has surged since the early 1990s, but youth crime has plummeted, and millennials who were
born and raised in video game nation, they are far less sexist, homophobic, bigoted than
older generations. Now, I deplore the fact that some feminist
critics and game developers have been threatened. In the earlier video, I pointed out that gamers
were being blamed for issuing death threats, even though no one knows who sent them. Well,
since that video, I have learned that several people inside GamerGate—including 2 women—have
received death threats too. Many in the media are treating Gamergate as a simple damsel
in distress story. Well damsels are in distress, but they are on both sides of the controversy.
Gamergaters were amazed and grateful for my defense of their hobby because for years they
have been disparaged as nerds, shut-ins and proto-school shooters. Now critics have added
misogynist and death threateners to the mix. Writers at popular game websites like Kotaku
and Polygon, they did a good job defending video games from the false charge that they foster
violence. But when gender activists came along accusing games of creating misogyny, these
journalists eagerly jumped on the bandwagon. And they were not happy with my video. Colin
Campbell, senior reporter at Polygon, for example, called me a “reactionary” and
suggested my indifference to sexism in videos was an “irresponsible abrogation of our shared
humanity.” I don’t doubt Mr. Campbell’s sincerity.
Many games do depict horrific violence and mistreatment of women. But remember there
is vastly more violence and mistreatment of men. Now, there are horrible scenes in video
games like Grand Theft Auto and these upset me. But I also cringe at the violence in television
shows like Breaking Bad and The Sopranos. I mean I’d rather play a games with themes
from Downtown Abbey or the Umbrellas of Cherbourg. But my g ame and film preferences cannot be
generalized and certainly can’t be a basis for condemning others. I mean, behavior should
be guided by Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative; that the rules of the imagination
are more permissive. Would-be game reformers need to connect the games they criticize to
negative world consequences. They need to show, not dogmatically assume, that video
games make people sexist. The burden of proof rests with them. And intuitions that a certain
game or book or film, comic book, song, that these are psychologically damaging and socially
corrosive. This is rarely borne out in reality. Now, critics might respond that we should
be unforgiving of sexist tropes even if we can’t prove that games cause misogyny. But
what counts as sexism is unsettled—even among feminists.
Consider the newly released video game Bayonetta 2. Bayonetta is a powerful, charismatic female
protagonist created by a Japanese female game developer. She is a wildly popular video heroine,
and some feminists have embraced her as an exemplar of Girl Power. But the feminist critic,
Anita Sarkeesian, disagrees. She has called the game “pernicious” and she faults its
“shameless sexism and use of the male gaze.” “Everything about Bayonetta’s design,”
says Sarkeesian, “is created specifically for the sexual pleasure of straight male gamers.”
Those were her words. Now, her critique relies on a 1975 feminist theory about the “male
gaze” and how it objectifies and demeans women. But 'Gaze Theory' has evolved since 1975.
It turns out that spectators might be able to gaze at a woman’s beauty and also identify
with her on a human level. Now, men are the main market for competitive
action games, and many men—not all them, but many—do like images of beautiful, sexy
women. Why shame them for this? Now, traditionally women, gays, trans people, they have been
policed and humiliated for their sexuality. That is wrong. Today, at least in certain
feminist circles, it’s open season on the sexual preferences of straight males. That’s
also wrong. Now, when GamerGaters protest the politicization
of gaming journalism, they are not fighting progress or thwarting feminism. Most of them
are probably supporters of mainstream equality feminism. They are pushing back on a hardline,
puritanical gender politics that for some reason many of their critics are imposing
on them. Well, take it from Based Mom: GamerGate, overall, is
a voice for moderation in today's fevered debates over sex and gender. And those gamers,
they’re not going away any time soon. I mean, once they enter a battle, they like
to win. And they know how to slay a dragon. What do you think about the GamerGate Debate?
Do you agree that the media has given a misleading account. Let me know in the comments section.
And if you appreciate this series please show your support by subscribing. And also, follow
me on Twitter. Thank you for watching the Factual Feminist.