3. The power results in a shift in mentality where violators of the rules come to accept the rules that are being enforced by those with power (in part due to #2).
Originally this article was supposed to be about how the power of men in the gaming community is panoptic.? However, throughout my thought processes and the research that I have done (yes there is research, even if it isn?t heavily featured in the articles themselves) I have come to realize that this is more about the internet as a whole and less about the gaming community itself.? I have made reference to this a few times, but I want to recognize that this is a problem which is pervasive on the internet as a whole, not just within the gaming community.? There will officially be six parts (originally I had decided on five where I would combine the last point and my conclusion into the final part of this article).? The conclusion is now going to be separate from the last point in which I plan to detail out how exactly this applies to the internet overall, if it hasn?t become clear already.
For today I?m going to describe how the power of men in the gaming sphere puts women in a role where they come to accept the rules as they are enforced, tacitly or actively, as a direct result of trolling and other forms of ?internet justice?.? First I will talk about how acceptance of the rules works within the frame of online gaming culture ? and the internet in general.? Then I will move on to how punishment for violation of the rules (as outlined in previous posts) works to reinforce the standard and move people towards the mentality of the standard.? Finally I will talk about how the standard is reinforced through the silencing of women in the online community.
As stated before, the acceptance of the rules being enforced online does not have to be an active acceptance of the rules.? We see this extremely often in American politics ? the libertarian who pays taxes, the Republican or Democratic Mayor who enforces the law he doesn?t support, the cop who issues a citation that he doesn?t agree with.? There is constant cognitive dissonance around many issues, where one accepts an idea but doesn?t agree with it.? We live with cognitive dissonance throughout our entire lives, where the things we believe contradict the laws and rules that govern our lives, but we abide by them anyway because of the punishments that are associated with them.
People in general can speak out, try to change the world and try to change policy, but in the end we all live by the rules which are set before us because of the fear of punishment that is associated with them.? Women on the internet can hold very strong beliefs that there is something wrong with the portrayal of women in video games, movies, and the media in general and can voice their opinion out loud.? This challenges the status quo and attempts to make changes to policy by showing the active dislike or even hatred of what the standard currently produces.? But in doing so there are repercussions to such outcries ? often in a fashion which demeans and debases them.? One of the most recent in public memory, not just the online community?s memory, is when Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke, a grad student arguing that women should have access to birth control, a slut and a prostitute.? His argument? ?She wants to be paid to have sex. She?s having so much sex she can?t afford the contraception.? (quoted from Gawker)
These attacks can lead to silencing, and the internet is rampant with them.? When attacks are successful people?s actions can shift because they want to abide by the rules merely out of fear of punishment or because they have come to truly believe the standard that has been set before them.
Violation of the standard, in order for it to result in the acceptance (tacit or active), must result from the punishment for violating the standard.? The punishment must be severe enough that the thought of violation, even if the person who is in violation does not think of it as violation, conjures an idea of the punishment for said violation.
This essentially boils down to a conditioned response.? When people think of the actions they want to take; creating media, commenting on media, or gaming online; there is a direct association created between the action and the punishment for the violation of the standard.? Humans can be conditioned ? we know this from such terrible ?treatments? like shock therapy where the person associates actions with the shock and no longer takes said action because it has become associated with the pain of the shock.
Social conditioning happens often.? I have been subject to it because of the things that I am interested in and the intellectual way in which I attempt to carry myself (as unsuccessful as I probably am in attempting to carry myself in such a way).
My previous roommate and I would hang out quite often ? going to bars and the occasional dance club ? and I became socially conditioned by him because of his comments which invalidated the person which I attempted to be.? I make nerdy jokes, geeky comments, and the occasional history joke.? Every time I made a joke which he didn?t understand or which was ?too nerdy? around his group of friends he would either mock me or put me down because I wasn?t being ?fun?.? My definition of fun was completely different than his, quite obviously (scrabble drinking game anyone?).? It got to the point where I no longer made such jokes and would sit around saying nothing because I associated my comments with the negative repercussion of being mocked and put down.? Hanging out with him became a struggle where I attempted to fill my need for social interaction (as most of my good friends were in other cities or states) but simultaneously couldn?t actively participate because of the repercussions of actively participating.? I don?t believe he intended for this to be the result, but it happened.? (He eventually admitted that part of it was due to the fact that he was somewhat jealous of the things I said and that they would go over his head ? although I?m still not sure if that was him being honest or merely attempting to make me feel better when I was in a difficult time in my life).
Trolling fulfills this role, although it is not the only way in which the standard can be maintained online.? When someone creates media, comments on media, or games online they can become subject to ?trolling? and can begin to associate these actions with the act of ?trolling?.? The backlash is that when women create, comment, or play online there is a distinctive chance that they will become the subject of such punishment for violation of the standard.? Out of this gaming online is no longer merely playing games online, but an act which openly avails them to attacks from men who think that women shouldn?t be online.? When they take these actions they are inseparable from the attacks that they have experienced previously.? If it becomes too much (the constant kitchen jokes, the threats of rape, the attacks on their gender as though their gender defines who they are as a person) it can result in the same ending as shock therapy.? They no longer want to do said things because the act of actively participating in the community is inseparable from the punishment.
Hopefully it has become clear what happens when actions are taken by women in attempt to circumvent the abuse that is experienced online.? Silencing reinforces the standard becomes women no longer have an active voice in the community.? Changing handles/usernames so as to actively hide the gender of the player again removes the voice that women have in the community ? very similar to becoming silenced.? But the question that remains ? how does this translate to acceptance?
As mentioned above, we live in a world where cognitive dissonance surrounds us.? Where we hold one ideal, but because the world is one way we live the way the rules tell us we should live.? Women need not actively believe that the standard is how things should be but because of the social conditioning and the abuse being too heavy they abide by the rules out of fear of punishment.
Silence is a tacit acceptance of the way the gaming community has become organized.? Silence does nothing to challenge the status quo and allows the standard to continue to be observed because women have no voice in the community (although I believe this is slowly changing).? The bigger problem that exists is when mentalities shift to that which many hold about American politics. ??I don?t like the way it is, but there is nothing I can do about it.? This is the way it is and that?s that.? The mentality where people view themselves as powerless to change things.? It?s a tacit acceptance of the environment which surrounds the gaming community and the standard that is falsely touted by men who hold misogynistic views.
It should be noted that this acceptance is not through the fault of those who become silent or those change their username/handle.? The abuse that takes place online through trolling is exactly that ? abuse.? Abuse is something which no person should have to endure, but it is there and it will always be there unless there is a group large enough to challenge it.? Trolling intentionally targets the emotions of people and intentionally moves people to feel debased and worthless.? Kitchen jokes, rape jokes, gangbang jokes, and even just questions of ?want to see my c*ck? can tear a woman down to her most basic biological functions so that she is no longer a person with character, but merely a biological being.? This sort of abuse is meant to be harmful, and it is not for me to say that they are weak in their submission to such things.? They are not weak.? Trolling in such a way strips away the contents of a person?s character, and when that happens it?s not easy to continue to do what you do.
Your Resident (Not Really) Anthropologist
felicia day nfl 2012 draft miami dolphins buffalo bills minnesota vikings st louis rams baltimore ravens
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.