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.
No comments:
Post a Comment