Feminism

[Dualhammers]

The Idle Thumbs community is already like this, for the most part. It's one of the reasons I like it so much.

 

It is also the reason why I like it so much, but I am not sure if the ethics of this community could survive a scaling up to the size of something like PAX.

[sclpls]

That's not what he said.

 

 

I know it's not what he said, but I also don't think whatever good aspects exist of PAX really needs defending. No one is criticizing those elements.

[SecretAsianMan]

I know it's not what he said, but I also don't think whatever good aspects exist of PAX really needs defending. No one is criticizing those elements.

 

That's fair.  What I was really trying to get at is the idea that by liking and attending PAX, I'm also endorsing PA and the things that made people upset with Mike, which is not the case.  In my mind, PA and PAX are two separate things that share some common elements.  I'm not saying that PAX should be immune to criticism (nothing should be), but that some of the criticism is being leveled at PAX isn't justified because it's really about something else.

[syntheticgerbil]

The thing i worry about now is that the conversation seems to be shifting strongly towards the idea of boycotting PAX.  Now i could be quite wrong about this, but i feel that no amount of boycotts or harshly worded articles criticising them is going to change PA's founders behavior.

 

And that's the end game here isn't it? Change? (and as they say change has to come from within)

 

What would (I feel) make them think twice and maybe genuinely self examine, is  hearing (face to face) from someone who's been affected by the issues, or if next time they make that sort of comment, they get booed.

 

As long as they think the response they are getting to their comments is a attack from outside they wont change. The more people who are boycotting PAX the less likely that they will get called on their BS or meet someone who will change their perspective.

 

Idk perhaps i'm being naive, but i don't want to think of them as irredeemable.

I don't like this argument at all. Why even bother waiting for them to change? I would rather people just boycott and move on to getting different conventions together. Who needs to support a corporation founded on the ego of a few guys and their dumb comic? I mean I know who does, everyone who loves video games and comics it would seem, but if anything maybe this will help these people with blind fan faith start to understand why making an "industry standard" conventionsbased on a cult of personality is the wrong way of doing things.

 

The sooner the gaming community stops worshiping Penny Arcade and ignores it altogether, the better everyone will be for it. I've never understood the appeal of the comic in the first place, always seemed to promote the usual gaming bro culture with dick jokes and constant sarcasm but with just a tad bit of intellectual analysis thrown in... sometimes. I don't know why anyone expects the creators to be some kind of bastion of good judgment.

 

Also I read this Leigh Alexander article on it last night: http://leighalexander.net/still-never-going-to-pax/

 

Off topic, After realizing she had a website I went through a few more of her articles. Her name seems to keep popping up and I had read some of her pieces before on Gamasutra and Kotaku and havdalways loved them. I think she is becoming my favorite game journalist now that I put all the pieces together. Also I see her favorite game is MGS3. Yes!

[jeremywc]

That's fair.  What I was really trying to get at is the idea that by liking and attending PAX, I'm also endorsing PA and the things that made people upset with Mike, which is not the case.  In my mind, PA and PAX are two separate things that share some common elements.  I'm not saying that PAX should be immune to criticism (nothing should be), but that some of the criticism is being leveled at PAX isn't justified because it's really about something else.

 

As long as Mike continues to use PAX as a vehicle to say boneheaded shit, people are going to hold PAX accountable for it. I don't think that's unfair. 

[SecretAsianMan]

As long as Mike continues to use PAX as a vehicle to say boneheaded shit, people are going to hold PAX accountable for it. I don't think that's unfair. 

 

But he wasn't using PAX as the vehicle, he was using himself and Penny Arcade, which like I said I think of as a separate thing from PAX itself.  A lot of the people attending PAX don't give a shit about PA itself, me included.  I read the comic and occasionally find it amusing, but I that doesn't mean I'm a PA fanboy who will instantly take their side.  I understand that I'm probably in the minority when I say that I don't associate the two things with each other.  I just think that PAX has grown so much beyond PA.

[Patrick R]

That's fair.  What I was really trying to get at is the idea that by liking and attending PAX, I'm also endorsing PA and the things that made people upset with Mike, which is not the case.  In my mind, PA and PAX are two separate things that share some common elements.  I'm not saying that PAX should be immune to criticism (nothing should be), but that some of the criticism is being leveled at PAX isn't justified because it's really about something else.

 

Whether or not they're separate in your mind, they aren't separate in reality. Financial support is just about the only support a company cares about. Someone (I can't recall if it was in this thread or in an essay I read) brought up how quickly PA rescinded a comic when threatened with legal action by that greeting card company. Money talks. I don't see anything wrong with Chic-Fil-A's sandwiches but that doesn't mean I'm ever gonna spend a dime there. 

 

Mike, Jerry, and Robert have influence. What they say matters, and has ramifications. Supporting them financially means securing their influence, means giving them a platform to continue this sort of thing. Specifically, a platform at PAX. 

 

Now I'm not really a convention goer. I'm not the kind of person who would have gone to either PAX. So I am speaking from a place of ignorance. So let me ask: What is so important that any convention (or conventions) that replace PAX be exactly that big? From what I've understood about the growth of other conventions, like Comic Con, the bigger it gets, the more corporate and less special it gets. It sounds like PAX has done a pretty good job not being co-opted by corporate interests (the gross nature of the actual company that runs it not withstanding) but I am curious as to what makes it's largeness something so desirable that replacing it doesn't seem like a good idea?

[Patrick R]

I should say, I'm not judging anyone morally by whether or not they attend PAX. Capitalism is kind of a gross system in general, and leads to situations where we financially support companies who do things you don't agree with. We're probably all talking to each other right now on computers that were built by exploited workers. Compromise happens. Especially for people in the industry.

[jeremywc]

But he wasn't using PAX as the vehicle, he was using himself and Penny Arcade, which like I said I think of as a separate thing from PAX itself.  A lot of the people attending PAX don't give a shit about PA itself, me included.  I read the comic and occasionally find it amusing, but I that doesn't mean I'm a PA fanboy who will instantly take their side.  I understand that I'm probably in the minority when I say that I don't associate the two things with each other.  I just think that PAX has grown so much beyond PA.

 

I understand where you're coming from, but your logic doesn't pass the mustard with me. I think if Mike decided to put his foot in his mouth at literally any other convention in the country, the chances of the convention management calling him on it would be higher. Although I'm too cynical to believe there would be any real lasting repercussions either way, you can't ignore the fact that he gets extra privilege at PAX he wouldn't necessarily get elsewhere. And you would have a hard time convincing me that HE doesn't know that.

[osmosisch]

It just sucks being told you're making a probably overall slightly harmful decision by going out and having a weekend of fun with thousands of people of whom the overwerming majority are decent folk, most likely. I can understand why that causes some cognitive dissonance that needs hashing out.

[SecretAsianMan]

Ugh, this is exactly what I was afraid of.  I didn't want to derail this thread.  Don't get me wrong, I like having this discussion but I regret it has to happen here.  I think I should have done what I usually do and kept my mouth shut (or my hands still).

 

I understand where you're coming from, but your logic doesn't pass the mustard with me. I think if Mike decided to put his foot in his mouth at literally any other convention in the country, the chances of the convention management calling him on it would be higher. Although I'm too cynical to believe there would be any real lasting repercussions either way, you can't ignore the fact that he gets extra privilege at PAX he wouldn't necessarily get elsewhere. And you would have a hard time convincing me that HE doesn't know that.

You're absolutely right in that if he made those statements at another convention he would catch a lot more shit and that he gets special treatment at PAX.  But again, he didn't say the things that made the Fullbright group withdraw from PAX at PAX, he said it on twitter and the PA site.  And if he said such things at PAX, you can bet a lot of people would certainly be upset even if it was "his show".  The idea that PAX is full of nothing but PA supporters and fans is a false one, so I wouldn't expect him to get off scot-free.

[Hermie]

Moral quandary: Should you, and will you, boycott Child's Play?

[Thrik]

This argument has gone long enough without a Hitler comparison.

Would you go to a gaming convention ran by Hitler, that is absolutely splendid apart from the fact that, you know... it's ran by Hitler?

In all seriousness, supporting shitty things because they do some good things is not something I can get behind. If PAX crumbles, another will rise. There are plenty of other gaming conventions and events where you can have a great time. Ones not ran by and home to some serious assholes.

[syntheticgerbil]

Only if I can get Hitler to sign my pass, allowing me to get through all of the road checkpoints, no questions asked.

[Twig]

Nice.

[Sententia]

That's absurd hermie, PA don't gain great benefit from Child's Play as far as I know.  I don't donate to it anyways as it's not the most effective organization to put my money in to increase world awesome, but in regard to this issue it would be silly to boycott it for that reason specifically.

[jeremywc]

The idea that PAX is full of nothing but PA supporters and fans is a false one, so I wouldn't expect him to get off scot-free.

 

I don't think anyone is making this argument. I'm certainly not. We're pointing out that there isn't an effective mechanism at PAX for applying pressure on Mike alone to take a more considerate tone. That leaves people with only a few options: apply pressure via boycott or continue to attend and feel complicit in what he's presenting. The only options are... morally messy. It wouldn't be that way if there wasn't a link between PA and PAX *as organizations*. It has nothing to do with the volunteers or attendees.

 

Moral quandary: Should you, and will you, boycott Child's Play?

 

I'll have to stew on it. My family has spent a lot of time in a Child's Play hospital (Texas Children's) and it's full of toys that do make a difference for kids that are stuck in there. You can still just donate toys or money directly (we've done this with duplicate Christmas or Birthday gifts). You can also support other, similar charities like Extra Life. Or even better, Children's Miracle Network, which actually helps families pay for children's medical bills (which is a huge problem if you have a child with a chronic illness, disorder, or disease).

[Gormongous]

 I don't think anyone is making this argument. I'm certainly not. We're pointing out that there isn't an effective mechanism at PAX for applying pressure on Mike alone to take a more considerate tone. That leaves people with only a few options: apply pressure via boycott or continue to attend and feel complicit in what he's presenting. The only options are... morally messy. It wouldn't be that way if there wasn't a link between PA and PAX *as organizations*. It has nothing to do with the volunteers or attendees.

 

I honestly wish Penny Arcade would do a better job of spinning off PAX as its own thing. That would solve a lot of problems here. I mean, it's already technically its own thing, right? But you still have Gabe and Tycho appearing as guests of honor to the audience's cheers, so it feels like a having-and-eating situation.

[SecretAsianMan]

 

I don't think anyone is making this argument. I'm certainly not. We're pointing out that there isn't an effective mechanism at PAX for applying pressure on Mike alone to take a more considerate tone. That leaves people with only a few options: apply pressure via boycott or continue to attend and feel complicit in what he's presenting. The only options are... morally messy. It wouldn't be that way if there wasn't a link between PA and PAX *as organizations*. It has nothing to do with the volunteers or attendees.

I'm not accusing anyone of necessarily making that assumption, but it seems like it's implied by a few of the things I've read (not just here).  I do understand why people want to boycott PAX and I respect their decision to do so.  I guess I just think that PAX is more good than bad and don't like the idea that people are going to look down on me for believing that.

 

I think I've said enough about this and suggest we get back to the actual topic.

[Dualhammers]

Would we as a group feel more comfortable with a convention run by anonymous organizers? I wonder if that is the only way to avoid this happening in the future. 

[jeremywc]

Would we as a group feel more comfortable with a convention run by anonymous organizers? I wonder if that is the only way to avoid this happening in the future. 

 

No, I don't think that would help. Anonymity negates accountability, which is what I think most people are looking for.

[thestalkinghead]

this is a bit like the debate about boycotting the russian winter olympics because they are anti-gay

[Dualhammers]

No, I don't think that would help. Anonymity negates accountability, which is what I think most people are looking for.

Perhaps, but I am under the impression most people don't actively go looking for the fault and flaws in people in order to force them to change. Only when problems were uncovered did people demand Mike to change. In my hypothetical the organizer wouldn't impart any cultural norms or personal views onto the event itself. It's probably a stupid idea but I wonder a lot about the strange ways of brains categorize good and bad groups.

[Ben X]

That's absurd hermie, PA don't gain great benefit from Child's Play as far as I know.  I don't donate to it anyways as it's not the most effective organization to put my money in to increase world awesome, but in regard to this issue it would be silly to boycott it for that reason specifically.

 

I assume you're saying it would be absurd to boycott Child's Play, not of Hermie to ask an open question?

 

I disagree that it's an absurd or silly idea, I think it's another valid way of protesting against the PA guys' actions that will illustrate that those actions are not only no longer acceptable but also actively harmful to large organisations or corporations associated with them. Sure it sucks that you're having to withhold money from a charity rather than a sponsor, but you can give that money to a different charity, and perhaps the PA guys would take a little more notice if there was a noticeable dent in the charity donations because the stuff they're doing and saying is so repulsive to a lot of charitable people.

[Problem Machine]

I'm coming into the thread late so maybe I'm missing some context, but is the belief that the only problem with PAX is its association with the gross things that PA says? Because I honestly think there are some more systemic problems as well... like some kind of, I dunno, blood alien monster thing.

 

http://loveconquersallgam.es/post/60281881446/an-open-letter-to-jerry-holkins#_=_

http://littlelull.tumblr.com/post/60240420647/i-cant-go-back-or-why-im-so-bent-out-of-shape-about

 

It's times like this I'm absurdly grateful that the IT community exists, that there's a place to talk about games that isn't infested with misogynerds. Sigh. Real depressed right now.