Ever since the Seattle Weekly decided to go “ethical” in its back pages advertising (perhaps prodded to do so by new publishership), it has dwindled into a more and more inconsequential collection of a half-dozen or so broadsheets to remain “free” of cost (half its “content” is an advertiser mailer bundle). In order to be “relevant,” it occasionally apes its competitor, The Stanger, which apparently has no moral or ethical “principles” to uphold. These days I only pick up the Weekly (or the Stranger, for that matter) if I need something dry to stand on.
However, once in a while there is cover story that is at once “intriguing,” yet also reminds you why the Weekly has no principles itself. The most recent cover story, written by somebody I’ll just call “She-Geek,” pronounces In a world of gender-exclusive e-sports, sexist cosplay shaming, and #Gamergate, how can a nerdy mom protect her son from becoming a misogynistic a-hole? Now, I’m already turned off by the self-conceit of that three name thing, and predictably the text that follows is just one long, tiresome WHINE. To me, spending five minutes in the same room with such a person amounts to domestic violence.
She-Geek is allegedly married; I frankly have no clue what that guy’s mentality can possibly be if not supremely confident in his own skin—or a masochistic self-flagellant. I once read a book written by actress, feminist and infomercial maven Marlo Thomas’ ex-butler. Besides being constantly demanding and rude behind the “That Girl” persona, in the book she is referred to as a “female chauvinist” who had nothing good to say about men. Her husband, television talk show host Phil Donahue, was your typical ass-man forever kowtowing to her gender-obsessed volatility.
If She-Geek’s obsession with self, her victim myths and gender fixation is what “feminism” is about, then she shouldn’t be all that “surprised” that her shtick is tiresome to most people, even other women. Why would a male “gamer” want to play with such a person? Go form your own gender-obsessed league and whine with them. She-Geek whines and moans about some supposed “sexism” in the gaming community, which is nothing more than males playing those mindless games of violence with other males with whom they share the same testosterone trip. She-Geek quotes some “report” by Electronic Arts claims that females make-up half the gaming community, except that she neglects to mention that the “games”—or if they “play” at all—is subject to interpretation and taste. Card games, after all, are most just the “luck” of the draw.
She-Geek’s feminist gender obsession is clear in almost every sentence in her tedious tome. “Funnily enough” she says, “I was convinced I was having a girl, and was mentally preparing to raise the most kick-ass, geeky girl imaginable. Her room would be vintage sci-fi, fixed with all the geeky baby gear I could get my hands on. I would empower her to stand up for her rights and fight the impending battles that come with being a woman.” She admits, somewhat cagily, that maybe her little girl might not have wanted to be a “geek”—may some “liberal arts” type who wants to be a “star” in something less demanding. “Unfortunately,” she apparently has a hate male baby in her belly, and he doesn’t any help whatever; most males in this gender-obsessed society know better.
After reading that garbage, I said to myself “Talk to me when 60 percent of the white women in this country don’t vote Republican before you talk about how “tough” it is being a white woman. Or for that matter, not having one-quarter of the unemployment rate of black males. Or not having by far the lowest crime victim rate by demographic (in sharp contrast to what is shown on television crime shows or the news media), or how Title IX is now being abused to set in stone de facto affirmative action for white women in higher education admission.
Of course, She-Geek could have also mentioned the fact that no one is stopping females from entering STEM fields; if they wanted to, they could start their own “geek” and “gamer” sisterhood. Then we would see if she has a “point”—or just a hypocrite. She goes on to quote some professor who claims that men who play “war” games and shoot-em-ups are just acting out against the alleged abuse they suffered as children , and are likely to act out their “angst” against women as well. Male gamers have a “victim mentality,” she says. This is your typical self-serving, Janus-faced explanation for feminist illogic which must find a means to justify itself. Isn’t it amazing how the negative characteristics feminists accuse males of goes double for themselves?
So “In a world of gender-exclusive e-sports, sexist cosplay shaming, and #Gamergate, how can a nerdy mom protect her son from becoming a misogynistic a-hole?” Easy: Don’t be a self-obsessed, hypocritical, misandrist a-hole. And another thing: The women who seem to do the most complaining seem to be the egostistical “superstars-in-their-own-mind” types. It’s “funny,” but unless they were Samoan, I’ve never seen a woman actually do something call “manual labor,” whether it was in the Army or a warehouse environment. Whenever there was heavy-lifting to be done, they were nowhere to be found—or just watching, thankful that there is this “expectation” that they are not expected to do such work. Is to point this out “misogynistic”—or just the plain, cold, hard facts?
Terra Clarke Olsen talks about “sexism” as if it is an infectious disease. She doesn’t “know” men as well as she thinks. The real “disease” is her assumptions about the world her son will encounter, with people like her telling him what he can and cannot do to genuflect to female victim myths—myths perpetuated by women like herself who are just as guilty of their own “sexism.” All we need to do is examine such terms as “brotherhood” and “sisterhood”; the former is used in a universal context, while the latter has a built-in context of discrimination, intolerance and bigotry.