I've never been to PAX, have little interest in comics, and had never heard this story before.
But if this is any way an accurate telling, then this whole thing is completely obscene. Rape jokes? Mocking people who object? Merchandising rape jokes? What the hell is wrong with these people?
It is disquieting -- to the say the least -- how often rampant sexism shows up in the geek community. But this is so beyond the pale. Krahulik might be entitled to his rights as an artist, but no amount of pleading against censorship can ameliorate the fact that he has no ethical sense whatsoever.
Is there any appropriate response to this other than unqualified outrage?
I've never read Penny Arcade or been to PAX either, but reading this story, it seems to me as if a bunch of outraged people want the benefit from attending this guy's conference, but also want him to stop making art that doesn't agree exactly with their sensibilities.
To me, this seems like unnecessary policing of the worst sort. Yes, his art seems to be in poor taste and he sounds like an asshole -- please stop attending his convention and urge other people to do so.
I don't see any direct link between this and "rampant sexism in the geek community", unless I guess you expand 'geek' to include 'anyone who has ever drawn a comic'. It is a case of a particular artist drawing something that some people think is horrible, but dunno if it calls for "unqualified outrage".
I was referring to the parent comment demanding "unqualified outrage", and relating this to "sexism in the geek community", which I felt was a little excessive considering it was one asshole artist who had drawn some offensive comic strips consisting exclusively of male characters.
So, what you really mean is, people should not attend PAX if they have a problem with PAX, and they should urge people not to attend PAX if they feel the need, but they should make sure that their urging conforms to a set of standards you have about what is and isn't a valid argument.
> but they should make sure that their urging conforms to a set of standards you have
Not at all. I'm not saying they should do anything. I'm merely commenting that expecting an artist to stop drawing something you don't like because you go to his convention to sell something is a little ridiculous. But hey, if that's your thing, feel free to erupt in unqualified outrage :)
The geek connection is explained in the article. Penny Arcade is massively popular within the gaming community (because it's a comic strip about computer gamers), and the decisions to showcase your indie game (or not) at one of their conferences has a direct impact on sales.
I've never read Penny Arcade
Informing yourself before jumping to conclusions is more effective than arguing from ignorance. As with your question rape threats, you could perfectly easily use resources like Google and Wikipedia to get a handle on the issue.
FYI, the parent commenter had never read Penny Arcade either, hence we were interacting from a position of presumably equal information regarding it.
> Penny Arcade is massively popular within the gaming community (because it's a comic strip about computer gamers), and the decisions to showcase your indie game (or not) at one of their conferences has a direct impact on sales.
Exactly. What his critics are essentially saying is, "We want him to stop making certain kinds of comic strips, but we also want to use his platform to sell our games." For an artist, that is ridiculous.
No they're not. The article is titled 'why I'm never going back to PAX'; the author's position is that she's given up on it. She quotes and links to two other developers who already don't go or won't go there again for the same reason, and quotes a 4th person who says that not going is difficult because since PAX is the biggest end-user game conference, staying away impacts sales. Generalizing from that observation as you did is inaccurate and misleading.
Just because the other person is also uninformed on the subject doesn't mean you should skip reading the source article.
I find it sort of amusing people pick and choose the social standing of gaming depending on circumstance. Some days "gaming is mainstream now! This isn't the 80s anymore people, everyone games!", while other days there is "gaming culture" which is distinctly "geek".
I suppose the truth is probably somewhere in the middle (somewhere pretty damn close to "geek" I think). I just find the juxtaposition amusing.
Most humor is in "poor-taste" to someone. IMO, when certain topics are taboo that just a bigger indicator of a cultural problem: "move along, nothing to see here".
As an honest question, how do you feel about murder? How many people have been murdered? Know someone who has been murdered? Love someone who has been murdered?
Is murder off-limits? It's arguably more heinous than rape, and yet -- video game culture specifically and, more generally, all media culture seems to glorify it and often use it for humorous purposes. Dexter. Scarface. Pulp Fiction -- when they shot that kid in the face it was treated like a joke. And I see this stuff all over t-shirts. All over the TV. Internet. Music. Games. Etc. As a culture, we love entertainment involving murder.
Why do we have this reaction against rape jokes in particular? Is it because of the sexism angle?
Maybe I'm just a white American male and, therefore, don't have sensitivities towards certain things like sexism and racism. But that attitude feels awfully dismissive.
Because murder is equal opportunity and is generally seen as abhorrent cross-culturally, while rape is skewed towards specific marginalized people and is generally seen as not a problem.
1 in 6 women are sexually assaulted. 1 in 33 men are sexually assaulted. Rapes in prison are skyrocketing vs. any other form of violent crime in this country, men or women.
Check out "corrective rape" for an example of how rape is different than murder and, perhaps, is way worse.
Well, murder isn't generally perpetrated by one distinct group of people against another distinct group of people, so in that sense it's a universal problem. I don't think you're insensitive particularly, but surely you can imagine that jokes about rape come across significantly differently to men and women.
"Well, murder isn't generally perpetrated by one distinct group of people against another distinct group of people, so in that sense it's a universal problem."
Really?
I mean, it's certainly a much larger issue amongst certain socio-economic and ethnic groups in the United States, at least. The Trayvon Martin murder, for example, was very much about race and culture -- about the perception that murdering someone with a certain skin color is kind of okay because those people are inherently threatening.
And there are events like the Holocaust which absolutely were perpetrated by one group against another. (And that "Hitler's bunker"/Downfall video meme, which jokes about the ultimate perpetrator of that horror, went through a period of being beloved on the internet.)
And wasn't the original comic about a man getting raped?
Yes really. You are right about the controversy surrounding Trayvon Martin murder being very much a matter of race and culture. But that's one murder among many. You can find individual murders or groups of murders (eg the holocaust) or patterns of murder very easily. But murder in general is not so specific.
And for the nth time, it isn't really about the original comic.
Wait, wait... how did you get sexism out of this particular issue?
I'm not saying the dude isn't sexist or an asshole, but all of the characters in the offending strip were male, there's not specific reprisal against one particular gender of critics, etc.
So there's lots of assholery going around, but how did you get /sexism/?
There is specific reprisal against one particular gender of critics. Outspoken women who critiqued the comic and PA's response were sent rape and death threats.
To what degree exactly were they 'threats'? I have been hearing this phrase 'X received death and rape threats' a lot recently, but I have almost never heard of these being reported to the police, or arrests being made because of them (which you'd expect to be the case).
For example, randomcommenter123 saying something asinine like "you deserve to be trampled by a rampaging rhinoceros" does not constitute a death threat. On the other hand, someone who knows your address, or personal details about you is clearly dangerous and should be reported to law enforcement immediately. I would like the see the actual text of some of these threats before we assign them any actual importance.
Yeah, if you really wanted to know what rape threats read like, you could just Google it. Here's less than 5 mins of Googling for the term "rape threats":
Some examples (warning, some may find this content disturbing, turn back now):
"This is just the beginning. Over the next couple of weeks I receive a steady stream of violent abuse, including rape and death threats. At its peak I am getting about one threat a minute, with men discussing how they will rape me together, which parts of my body will be penetrated and exactly how they are going to kill me. They are still coming in now – the latest: a death-through gang-rape threat where I’m told to “KISS YOUR PUSSY GOODBYE AS WE BREAK IT IRREPARABLY”."[1]
"She wrote on her blog: "I just got one of those Twitter threats... 'Your house will be blown up at 10.47 tonight....'"[2]
"You better watch your back....Im gonna rape your ass at 8pm and put the video all over the internet," read one."[3]
"A BOMB HAS BEEN PLACED OUTSIDE YOUR HOME. IT WILL GO OFF AT EXACTLY 10:47PM ON A TIMER AND TRIGGER DESTROY EVERYTHING"[4]
"i will rape you tomorrow at 9pm .... shall we meet near your house??????< @MPSWForest and again….."[5]
Also, they are being reported to the police, the question of why no arrests have been made because of them should rightfully be directed at law enforcement:
"Professor Beard had tried to submit an abuse report to Twitter on her mobile phone but found the form refused to submit. She reported the incident to police, explaining to a follower: "Abuse is one thing (that's name and shame stuff), death threats are criminal and for the boys (& girls) in blue."[2]
Though it does appear sometimes they do get arrested[6].
Seriously man, if you were actually curious about how bad these threats are, this is trivially easy to discover. This is the internet. And this isn't limited to well-known authors or political figures too. Everytime something sufficiently controversial comes out of the mouth of a woman the violence and rape threats roll in, as if on cue.
But men don't exist in a culture that tells them to fear being raped, or that their physical appearance is what matters most about them, or that they should be demure and not like sex.
In no way was I saying "men didn't receive threats". But don't act like threats of rape to men and women are received the same way. They're not.
No, you're right. It's easy for me to say "A troll writes the same horrible nonsense to everyone", and I had forgotten about the impact upon the receiver of the message.
The hostility towards victims of rape didn't stem from the comic, it came from the response to the response to the comic.
That is to say rape victims said some not nice things about the comic and so they made a tee shirt about it, and started carrying on. Kind of a Streisand effect.
You'd be surprised actually. When studying the incidence of sexual violence in the last 12 months, the CDC's 2010 "National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey" study found that 5.3% of men and 6.5% of women were victims.
The CDC did a pretty terrible job of organizing and labeling their data, and the male numbers are skewed downwards because they don't have reliable statistics for the last 12 months for rape in which male victims were penetrated. It's true that the lifetime incidence of sexual violence is significantly higher for women, but talking about the average person today, rape is basically an equal-opportunity tragedy. Even leaving aside the problems with the study that bias male data downwards, making the claim that a type of crime is gendered should require a far greater disparity in the incidence per gender.
If I had two white characters in a comic strip, with one being a stereotypical "loser" being arrested by the police (let's say in a comical manner, over a single joint) and the other one joking about it, is it racist because the issue of the war on drugs primarily affects minorities?
Good question! I think that's getting into blurry lines territory.
Rape victims often suffer for a long period of time from the experience; people busted for a joint usually get over it more quickly. A reader of the comic is more likely to be suffering PTSD from rape than from getting busted.
Societal attitudes toward rape materially impact the likelihood of the occurrence of rape by creating a culture of safety or of danger; attitudes about drugs generally don't affect whether an officer will make an arrest (until laws get changed). Media shapes societal attitudes; therefore media creators have an obligation to be socially responsible.
Although rape doesn't only affect women, I estimate that it does affect them more disproportionately than the war on drugs disproportionately affect minorities. Men going about their day-to-day business aren't concerned with the threat of rape or related issues; white pot smokers going about their day-to-day pot smoking should be concerned with encountering the police (depending on local law).
> attitudes about drugs generally don't affect whether an officer will make an arrest (until laws get changed).
This is untrue: officers operating under the same set of laws within my state have disparate policies regarding arrest (and from the DAs, prosecution) based on the local social leanings.
> I estimate that it does affect them more disproportionately than the war on drugs disproportionately affect minorities.
According to the CDC study cited in another reply, you'd be wrong.
> Men going about their day-to-day business aren't concerned with the threat of rape or related issues;
This seems like it's cultural and about social attitudes, rather than about any actual danger level. (Based on the same CDC report.)
I'm not sure that I buy the argument that because one group of people is afraid of something that impacts a wider group of people, no one can make jokes about it.
Here's a few questions: would your opinion of whether the rape joke was "sexist" depend on if the male author had been the victim of rape and was making jokes about it as a therapeutic device (noting that all the rape jokes in the strip are about "dicks" and male slaves)? how is the joke existing different in this context? should he stop if people are still uncomfortable about it? why is this (not) okay if the author hasn't been raped, but has some sort of anxiety about it? where exactly does it become "sexist" again?
> I estimate that it does affect them more disproportionately than the war on drugs disproportionately affect [sic] minorities.
I appreciate that you're willing to be so open-minded about this stuff (in contrast to a lot of the conversation around both these topics), but the numbers that you're guessing and basing your assumptions on are just wildly off the mark. Black Americans are estimated to make up 13% to 20% of drug offenders in the US, but 35% percent of drug arrests are of black offenders. At the peak of the disparity (early 90s), black drug offenders were being arrested at FIVE times the rate of white drug offenders. The current disparity is between 3.5 and 4 times as much. Note that this is talking specifically about elevated arrest rates of drug _offenders_, so the fact that the amount of drug usage between the two groups may differ is not relevant. By the way, the disparity only increases as you look at indictment and incarceration rates vs percentage of population or percentage of offenders.
> Is there any appropriate response to this other than unqualified outrage?
Oh gee, I dunno, maybe trying to think critically about the issue and taking a measured look at what actually went down instead of believing that some people are really the villains that an inflammatory clickbait article makes them out to be?
If I could upvote this 100x I would. I know that stories like these should be covered because of it's importance, but the websites/news channels that publish or cover this story reap the rewards (just as much as Penny Arcade).
It's just perpetuating exploitation over and over again, and damn does that piss me off.
But if this is any way an accurate telling, then this whole thing is completely obscene. Rape jokes? Mocking people who object? Merchandising rape jokes? What the hell is wrong with these people?
It is disquieting -- to the say the least -- how often rampant sexism shows up in the geek community. But this is so beyond the pale. Krahulik might be entitled to his rights as an artist, but no amount of pleading against censorship can ameliorate the fact that he has no ethical sense whatsoever.
Is there any appropriate response to this other than unqualified outrage?