Friday, April 8, 2016

Vox buys the bait, as usual

Well, it's been a little over a week since the Emily Garland post went up (Latining), and now has taken their usual "listen and believe" route. Of course, the Winnipeg Free Press, and the Minitoba Human Rights Commission did as well, so they can claim precedent from more legitimized sources.

I'd like to thank for doing some of the legwork for me, emailing Garland and linkeing to the WFP, as now I can do more than just see an asinine tumblr blog without doing work: I can now look at both a hit piece and a real article. This might get messy, as it also leads to the Canadian "justice" system, a system that disenfranchised George Alan Eliot for three years, and he likely has no recourse for false arrest and loss of livelihood and reputation.

I'm going to start with Ms. Garland's "historic case". The Manitoba Human Rights Commission is not a proper court. Trials are ruled on by 10 people, appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council for terms of three years. In the case, Mr. Tackaberry stated that Garland was a  compulsive liar, and later told the WFP that the HRC's process was a kangaroo court. Looking at the decision, it appears to at least be run in similar fashion to a criminal court, but if the defendant's acts were such, I find myself incredulous that it did not result in imprisonment. This is telling in that they are making citizens fearful of speaking "the wrong way", reducing public freedom. By the way, the Code of Human Rights in Canada does not allow for free speech. Stereotypes are forbidden.

While at the University of Manitoba, Ms. Garland claims to have received several death threats, both via email and slipped under the door of her office as a grader. The police allegedly refused to even fill out paperwork, a clear sign of lack of evidence. Why the WFP didn't investigate further, well that might require journalism, rather than collecting a couple of statements.

Garland told that she was frozen out of one game store, and harassed out of another. By harassed, I assume the gamers there felt unwelcoming to her. Nobody has to be your friend, Ms. Garland, and you ruined one gamer's life already. Why would anyone want to play with you?

You're upset that there's more male figures in a WAR GAME? I just checked an article based on 2012 DOD numbers, and the US military is only 16% female. So, why not get those numbers more in line with reality? Oh, you're complaining with 50/50 representation, because you think female models are oversexualized? I personally don't like the aesthetic of Malifaux these days, as I don't care for some of the anime stylizing. But no, you went after their portrayal of females specifically, not the overall art direction of the game.

As to her complaints about harassment, they had no place on the company's website unless the company was running the event. Send a letter to the store, and a copy of the letter to the police, and you're on the right track.  Given the level of nagging and conflating, I can understand why Wyrd stopped talking to her. If you stop outraging every day, you might actually get what you want. did contact Wyrd, which has issued it's own statement regarding community and harassment. Their spokesperson also stated they investigate all claims and that no employee has engaged in harassment. Another Wyrd official stated that after a year, they had yet to be presented any evidence or been approached by authorities. Again, a lack of criminal complaints reduces creditability.

Here's a great line from's article:

This sounds like a case of "same shit, different geek community." Are things actually changing?

Of course, they aren't realizing that we might say that about games journalism.  If they spent some time among gamers, at a convention, it might be realized that we don't really care about race or gender that much, we want a good game.  I don't want sex in my games, I want conflict. Us supposed orthodox gamers don't dislike someone for being a minority; we dislike slander and stupidity. We largely don't want to care about the "Social Justice" issues(not to be confused with charity to the poor and helping with employment), we want to play our games.

Ms. Garland, while you might be proud of creating another front for SJW's, you fail to realize you're just going to make another GamerGate group. We have alternative creation platforms already in place if companies fold to your demands, game design is a sub hobby for many of us, and you WILL lose, as our side gains exposure to the world at large.

When you play Social Justice, the world loses.

No comments:

Post a Comment