Threats.

I've been thinking about online threats, and their value. I think the two problems with this is-
1. There will always be a troll or jackass or, in extreme cases, false flags. No matter how squeaky clean a community is, it only takes a few moments for a troll to create a new user account, and go threaten somebody. Bonus points if they do the research and use a real phone number or address.
2. Accsuing someone of faking a threat opens the accuser up to refutation if they aren't dead goddamn certain of their facts.

Trolling for threats is easy enough as well. Feminists and social justice warriors have been attacking various groups for a long time. Eventually someone will lose their cool and post something embarrassing.

And I've been clued in to the phenomenon of search engine optimization revenue tactics.


I'm pretty sure this is what was behind the Emma Watson nude picture threats. Another source of real and false threats that cannot be prevented by self-policing.

But also the value in threats is that it plays on people's sympathy. The focus is shifted from the arguments to the threats. This is how Anita Sarkeesian operates, and in a lesser fashion, Zoe Quinn.

#gamergate is chasing it's own tail.

If you haven't been following #gamergate, well google it. There's far too much to go over.

But I saw a twitter log that confirms what I've been worrying about.

The participants of #gamergate are going after small potatoes, making up silly accusations against indie devs instead of chasing real corruption. I can only hypothesize that the accusations of "misogyny" worked, and they've gotten cold feet over challenging feminists and social justice warriors, which was where the corruption originally came from.

Ah well. Baby steps.

Somebody is going to do something stupid.

With all the hostility and confrontation and frustration... Someone is going to be goaded into stepping over the line. Danielle D'Etremont. Zoe Quinn. Anita Sarkeesian. Threat narratives get people scared, and scared people do things...




Well, maybe not as dramatically as V for Vendetta, but still.

Anita Sarkeesian, level 50 Troll.

Feminist Frequency's latest video. Be aware that clicking on the link gives them ad revenue.




Problems with the video abound, in her feminist interpretation of violence against women in video games. In almost all cases, the violence is portrayed as BAD, because it's an easy button to push in men's psyches. We have an innate desire to protect women, and when we see them harmed, it motivates us. It's a cheap and simple way to propel a protagonist into action.

But my main problem is with her conclusions. That this violence is "problematic" and indicative of "systemic misogyny"... blah, blah, blah. I'm reminded of the hysteria over video game violence in the 80's except now the hyseria gets a coat of lipstick.

I do think that media influences us. But I also think it's important for artists to be able to portray what they want, within legal guidelines, of course. (No kidde porn for art's sake, please)
Anita doesn't go for the legal route of controlling art, she uses the feminist tools of manipulation and guilt to portray ALL video games, and ALL video gamers as having the mentality of a 14 year old pervert who grows up to rape and abuse women. You don't hate women, do you? Then you better do what Auntie Anita tells you to.

And the cherry on the shit sundae is that after insulting gamers, and portraying them as monsters, they sling insults back at her. She gathers up these insults and parades them around as "evidence" of that misogyny. It's getting a bit old and predictable at this point. But GG Anita, you got more people to donate to you out of pity instead of having a compelling, logical, well thought out presentation. You cuntrag. (You can quote me on that.)

Zoe Quinn

Women against feminism.

Why the hell not? Eveyone else is talking about it. As I see it, there are 3 important categories of WAF. I'm sure there's some overlap, and a few that don't neatly fit into a category, but I'll deliniate them anyway.

 #1. Tradcon women who are fine with getting back to the kitchen, as long as there's a man to bust his ass to provide for her. These I dislike the most, because I'm sure there's lots of guys who will take them up on that offer without doing a cost/benefit analysis.

 #2. Me-too's. Women who see an opportunity to post a selfie and get some attention. Mostly harmless.

 #3. Honey Badgers. My favorite. Women who know terms like 'gynocentric', 'hypergamy', 'misandry' who have done their homework on feminism and have read stuff like The Myth of Male Power, and The Manipulated Man. I fear this category is not nearly large enough.

 Watch WAF with caution.

Building the future.

I hate having to preface a post with disclaimers like "This is my opinion", etc, so I'm going to do it this once, and hopefully I won't have to do it again.

Typhon Blue made a most excellent statement in one of the Honey Badger podcasts. drrandomercam then put it to video, and I'm going to link to that.


And I pretty much agree.  Women, in the vast majority, control the raising of children. That means legions of white knights in training, identifying with their single mothers, vulnerable to anti-male propoganda. Compared to that, the men's movement is a trickle.

So, that's what women can do. What can men do? We're mostly doing it. By creating an alternate space where people can speak without being censured by social forces. The creation of those spaces, and participation in them, is a place where a man can say "That cunt was one fucked up bitch!" and not immediatley be dismissed as a "misogynist", or speaking about the usual issues like genital mutilation or divorce courts and not have someone femsplain to us why women's issues are more important.

What's amusing is when one looks at how the progressive types turn on each other without an enemy present. I've seen it in the online communities that I have participated in. Often it turns into an outrage contest, and they turn on those who don't express the proper amount. Mundane Matt covered it pretty well.



Make those alternate spaces. Participate in them.The goal is not to infiltrate the mainstream, or to convert them, but to create an alternate space, and people will judge that alternative by their participation in it. And if the "misogyny" offends them, too fucking bad. They can always go to Jezebel or Good Men Project.