I want to start off this article with a question for you all:
What does Louis Ck, Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein, and Bret Kavvanaugh all have in common?
Aside from being rich, straight, white, cis men…
CW for mention of sexual assault.
I want to start off this article with a question for you all:
What does Louis Ck, Kevin Spacey, Harvey Weinstein, and Bret Kavvanaugh all have in common?
Aside from being rich, straight, white, cis men…
CW for mention of sexual assault.
I want to start off this article with a tweet from someone I follow regarding gamers and their reaction about Obsidian’s new release, Outer Worlds.
And Casey pretty much nails it in that tweet, in that these gamers are looking for such a purity in their gaming that anything, ANYTHING, can be considered SJW.
It’s lead me to thinking about the past and other examples we’ve seen in our society with regards to a moral outcry and fear over the encroachment of elements seen as detrimental to our way of life. The most obvious examples are as Casey pointed out, the Christians that look for any sign they can interpret as teaching kids to embrace Satanism, but I’m also thinking of the great Red Scare of the 50s in America.
This was called McCarthyism and it lead to the creation of the House of Unamerican Activities Committee which would put people on trial to determine what their intentions truly were if any hint of communist-like activity was in their history.
What I find is the common link between the nigh-totalitarian response of the 1950s government against communism (which included a bill from Joe McCarthy that curbed civil liberties) and gamers who cry out against SJWs infesting their precious hobby is the fear over the loss of control.
And how that fear has manifested itself in hate groups forming and harassment campaigns waged against any and all targets they see as trying to take away their games.
It’s sad, in a way, to see because nothing will ever be good enough for such gamers ever again, outside of them personally seeing to the development of first person shooters, the only game that they appear to play. If there’s a hint of any woman with hair coloured in any other way that’s not natural to their body, any person with skin darker than a white person may achieve in the sun of summer, or the softest whisper of politics in the games’ story, they’ll scream and rage and boycott and harass those who do enjoy the games.
And it’s an attitude held by many such entitled fanboys (and some fangirls*) over a wide swath of fandoms, Look at the rage from Star Wars fanboys over the narrative being more focused on people of colour and a white woman, the creation of the Sad and Angry Puppies who tried to sabotage the Hugo Awards one year, and… well, at this point it’s only easy to google any news of them complaining, mashing their teeth, and believing any number of wild theories over Captain Marvel’s box office success.
My favourite from that last one, as it’s ludicrously absurd, is how Disney bought up ticket sales in order to boost sales figures, and it’s one that continues to find traction among the misogynistic/sexist hate mongers. After all, they’ve got to keep those patreon contributions coming!
Of course, I have concerns because to be a white woman, a person of colour, LGBTQ and in fandom is to be under attack for taking up space in a place that’s been deemed as belonging only to straight, white, cis dudes, and any news of any kind of diversity is almost always followed up by attacks. Remember the ‘fallout’ of Ghostbusters for daring to have a cast of all women?
On the other hand, it’s a sad, sad way to live, to constantly be fighting for and chasing a dream of a time of when there weren’t any politics in games. It’s as big a lie as the one any MAGA hat wearing bigot believes because, like the lie of there being a time that America was great, there being no politics in games is one that’s cemented in white entitlement.
Just because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not there. Or, to take a rallying cry from second wave feminism and the student protests of the 60s, the personal is political.
Politics, and I don’t just mean what party we vote for, informs our way of life, how we think and feel, and the content of the entertainment we enjoy. To suggest otherwise is to live within that insulating bubble of white male privilege, an echo chamber that gamers often accuse those who are critical of entertainment of living within.
And I’d rather not go through life with such paint encrusted glasses on.
*Honestly, just look at how enraged white fangirls become when a character who was white is cast with a black female actress and is in love with a white dude, or any relationship between a white man and black woman on screen. Black female fans of Nu Who, Nu Trek, the Flash, Sleepy Hollow have talked about the scorn they’ve faced and the hate and anger heaped upon the characters for DARING to be loved by a white man. That’s white entitlement as well.
Content Warning for mention of racism, rape, and misogyny.
Wow, what a week it’s been, huh?
For those not in the know, Blizzard Entertainment banned Hearthstone player Blitzchung and two casters over the phrase “Liberate Hong Kong.”
Here’s the video in question if you wish to watch it:
To be honest, after much of what I’ve been reading about Activision-Blizzard, from the devil horn headed CEO Bobby Kotick to the company earlier this year laying off nearly a thousand people in order to prop up the profit of shareholders, Blizzard banning a game player for making a political statement is of no surprise to me. After all, Activision-Blizzard has shown its number one priority is the money it makes.
However, what truly concerns me was this phrase I saw in the ruling of the Hearthstone Grandmaster, which you can read on Blizzard’s own website:
2019 HEARTHSTONE® GRANDMASTERS OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES v1.4 p.12, Section 6.1 (o)
Engaging in any act that, in Blizzard’s sole discretion, brings you into public disrepute, offends a portion or group of the public, or otherwise damages Blizzard image will result in removal from Grandmasters and reduction of the player’s prize total to $0 USD, in addition to other remedies which may be provided for under the Handbook and Blizzard’s Website Terms.
‘Or otherwise damages Blizzard’s image’ is such a vaguely worded phrase because of how easily it can be used to view anything negative about Blizzard as damaging. In this case, as Activision-Blizzard has 5% of its shareholders owned by a Chinese company called Tencent (who has a lot of fingers in a lot of pies from what I’ve heard), Blitzchung’s comments were easily seen as damaging to Blizzard’s image. After all, you don’t want to anger your investors who are bringing you in a lot of money via streaming overseas.
Now, Activision-Blizzard will want you to believe it’s ruling had nothing to do with China or Tencent’s investment in them, but don’t kid yourself. It was, and is, even if Activision-Blizzard has refunded Blitzchung’s prize money and reduced the ban on both him and the casters. More and more, entertainment companies are seeing China for the money making machine that it is, and they desperately want a slice of that pie.
And if human rights happen to be trampled and are being trampled by the Chinese Government? Well, you can just sweep all that aside. Bobby Kotick needs a new yacht, and you don’t want to be selfish and deny a man whose net worth is a measely 7 billion dollars, do you?
Now, on a live stream of a game, they’ve banned someone for saying a political statement that could damage their image, I have to ask who else could they ban, block, or come down hard on. Say, you’re just a regular streamer on Twitch playing WoW classic and you note about some of the improvements on the game followed by criticism. Is that considered damaging the image of Activision-Blizzard? Would Activision-Blizzard send out a cease and desist to the streamer, maybe get in touch with Twitch and ask them to do something about it? Because the only other thing companies fear aside from losing money is litigation… which would also cost them money.
And yes, I know this decision was made within the context of a competition, but that phrase scares me, and it should scare you too. If some other competitor is wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt or showcasing the Pride flag somewhere in their room, would those political statements also be seen as damaging Activision-Blizzard’s image? What reassurances do we have from a company that values profit over human rights that they won’t ban other players for any kind of political statement, overt or otherwise implied?
And what of the precedent set now? Blitzchung and the two stream casters may have had their bans shortened, but they’re still bans. Will other companies follow in this stead? What if Fortnite’s company, Epic Games (who Tencent also has an investment of 40% of the shares) doesn’t like what someone says during one of their tournaments, will they also be banned? Or if someone gives thanks to the queer community for the help they received, or the black community… lord knows how over-reactive gamers can be another any kind of social justice, up to and including harassing developers and writers.
AreaNet, best known for Guild Wars 2, fired writer Jessica Price on account of some comments she made about the bigotry, sexism, and misogyny of gamers, something that is very real. AreaNet showed itself to be more in line with keeping the loyalty of some truly revolting people in a fandom that’s given rise to one of the most sadly influential hate groups/harassment movements online: Gamergate.
And she had done that on her own private Twitter, not in the midst of any stream in a competition.
All in all, game companies have shown time and time again their main concern is money, from breaking people down via the crunch period to instigating horribly addictive gambling practices that they’ve tried to pass off as ‘surprise mechanics’. That one would ban someone because of a political statement about very real government crackdowns is just not that much of a stretch.
Before I finish though, I want to add in one more thing, which is that currently, #BoycottBlizzard has become quite the trending hashtag on Twitter, and to those who want to boycott them, all the more power to you. While I have uninstalled Battlenet from my PC and all of the games from Blizzard I’ve bought, I realized I still had an account and wanted to delete it.
There was just one… small… snag…
I am in no way giving Activision-Blizzard a copy of my government ID, ANY of them. Not my Driver’s License and certainly not my Passport. While they say that all personal data would be deleted, I find it mighty suspect that they want a copy of my government ID, especially after this public debacle* they’ve been rightfully raked over the coals for. Companies are always releasing statements about how the personal data they’ve collected is leaked, and I can’t help but wonder if Activision-Blizzard would accidentally ‘leak’ your government ID to, say… the Chinese Government.
It would make visiting the Great Wall a tad difficult.
At the least, I was able to delete all of my payment methods and some personal information, so they can’t charge me for anything, but in the meantime, I’m stuck with an account I no longer want.
*Although I’m unsure how long this policy has been in place, if it’s something more recent or been there all along.
When I first saw the after-credit scene of Iron Man way back in 2008, where Samuel L Jackson talks to Robert Downey Jr about ‘the Avengers initiative’, my eyes widened. After all, Marvel Studios was a new face on the scene, not yet owned and supported by Disney, and going up against what seemed like the unstoppable Juggernaut that was DC Comics and Warner Bros, having just finished the Nolan- directed Batman trilogy to high acclaim.
“This is a huge gamble,” I thought, because Marvel Studios did not have, and wouldn’t have for many years, the rights to their more successful characters of Spider-Man and the X-Men from the comics. And arguably, it hasn’t been Captain America, Thor and Iron Man that were Marvel Comics’ flagship, but Spider-Man and X-Men.
11 years and many, MANY films later, the MCU is a thing that now exists, a huge, financially successful franchise with its penultimate film, Endgame, having knocked James Cameron’s Avatar from its place of largest blockbuster ever. Needless to say, the genre of superhero films is very much no longer a niche thing anymore, but a viable, powerfully successful film genre in and of itself.
But that’s not to stop certain detractors from rearing their heads, turning up their noses, and sniffing as though they smelled something bad their dog did.
I know I raised an eyebrow when I saw a clip of Comedian Marc Maron saying that superhero movies were for grown men who live in their mother’s basements. Now, to be honest, as someone who’d been bullied and picked on for liking superhero comics in the 90s, I felt a bit defensive over this. And to this day, I still feel a bit defensive, because some of that stuff from high school sure as hell sticks with you for years.
However, I found Marc Maron’s comments dismissive because it ignores the scores of people from across the gender spectrum that enjoy superhero movies and contribute to the fandom in terms of cosplay, fanart, fanfiction, creating panels at conventions, and even being critical of the media. After all, as Feminist Frequency puts it, we should be critical of the media we enjoy.
What I didn’t know, and only found out prior to writing this article when I went looking for the clip in question, was that Marc Maron continued to open his mouth, aim his foot carefully, and then wedge it firmly between his teeth. Much of his commentary about how the Joker is a REAL film minus all the capes and tights runs parallel to what Joker director Todd Phillips and, more recently, Martin Scorcese have said, denigrating the genre as something not to be taken seriously, or at least as seriously as other ‘real’ cinema.
Of course, Todd Phillip’s comments on the matter (as per my last article), as well as his personal opinion on how SJWs are ruining comedy these days, are well known at this point, but it’s been Academy Award Winner Martin Scorsese’s added commentary about how they’re also not real cinema that’s pushed this sentiment from just a couple grumpy old dudes into gatekeeping, in my opinion.
Why? Well, it comes from the very fact that they are straight, white old men who have enjoyed success over the years and are now poo-pooing over something relatively new that’s become incredibly successful. It’s also amazingly dismissive of the acting and hard work that’s gone into the films, starting with an actor who had all but ruined his career due to a terrible bout of addiction to drugs and alcohol, who then went on to push for his fellow Avenger actors in receiving higher pay.
It’s also a telling sign of gatekeeping when a member of the old order starts to wag his finger and dictate what is and is not a ‘real’ part of whatever entertainment industry they’re a part of. Martin Scorsese saying that superhero films are more theme parks than cinema carries with it an edge of discrimination when one considers the successes of Black Panther and Captain Marvel, as well as being wholly ignorant of the themes that they explore.
Black Panther? Colonialism.
Captain Marvel? Sexism.
Captain America – Winter Soldier? Security vs freedom in an ever increasing police state.
Avengers Endgame? How people cope and deal with loss (even if it fudged up pretty bad in its treatment of Thor).
I also couldn’t help but agree whole-heartedly with this thread on Twitter:
And it’s not like something that women love has been dismissed as not being real before. If women enjoy it, and enjoy it a lot, then it’s ripe for dismissal by men. Example? The romance genre of fiction, or even young adult novels for that matter.
What Marc Maron, Martin Scorsese, and Todd Phillips all share in their digs against superhero movies is a hatred, or at least a dislike, against something they see as frivolous and shallow. Now, that’s their opinion and they’re more than welcome to it, but dictating what is and isn’t a real film?
You can bet they’re going to be called out on it, and rightly so.
I’m 41 years old, and been online for just over half that time, so I’ve come to see and recognize what gatekeeping is, both in and outside various fandoms. So it comes across as telling that these three have said, so far as I can see, nothing about superhero movies in all the time that they’ve starred and been directed by white dudes, but suddenly have something to say once the people making and starring in them have started to diversify, if only a little.
Trust me, guys, you’re not looking the best right now.
So, about that Joker movie, eh?
Oh, I should say, about the director of the Joker movie, Todd Phillips who has recently been expressing distress, even anger, and not a little bit of snobbishness, that people would dare, DARE criticize his movie.
There was also this blatant misdirection Todd attempted, most likely while his publicist screamed at him from afar to just shut the hell up.
Just a reminder to Mr Phillips, Keanu Reeves isn’t white, he’s biracial, his first name means Ocean Breeze Over A Mountain, so please stop erasing his Asian heritage, as he was born in Lebanon.
That being said, I find the actions of this director vehemently opposing any idea that his film could be held up as the endorsement of white male violence upon the world as astoundingly childish and also a sign of white privilege in and of itself. Movies, aside from being a medium of entertainment, are an art form, much like books, video games, and graphic novels.
And as a form of art, there can be more than just the creator’s intended message that people can take away from it. The history of cinema has shown this time and time again.
For example, Alien is not just a scary, claustrophobic movie about a dangerous creature hunting a bunch of truckers in space, it’s also a commentary on capitalism that seeks to gain profit even at the danger of destroying humanity. Aliens continues along this thread but was also seen as a metaphor for the Vietnam war, where a technologically superior invading force is wiped out by the native life there.
The original Blob movie? A metaphor for the encroaching communist spread across the world during the McCarthy Era as well as a movie about a faceless ooze that devours people.
And those are just but a few examples, and different takes can be taken from art according to one’s own life experiences.
Take me, for example: I’m a cis, white, abled bodied male, so the views and critiques I could take away from a movie would be vastly different than someone who is black, trans, and female.
This is why there’s been discussions of cop shows as copoganda, from CSI and Law & Order to Brooklyn-99. I’ve read critques from a feminist POV about the lack of leading women with their own movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and ones that question that further, looking at the diversity of women and the lack of women of colour in the MCU on a whole.
(And before anyone comes in and says it, no, Gamora and Nebula do not count. Green and Blue people aren’t real, even if one of them is played by Zoe Soldana.)
And of course, there’s discussion of the diversity of people behind the scenes, such as was April Reign’s coining of the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite when looking at the line up of winners at the Academy Awards back in 2015.
I say all of this to add further context to the importance that we critique the media we watch, especially in this darkest timeline in which we live where there’s a domestic terrorist attack in the US just about every other week. The premise of the Joker movie, about a nice guy who has a bad day and simply snaps, is disturbing to say the least, because of the real world parallels we see weekly, if not daily, in the news.
Parallels such as the self-proclaimed Incel who drove his van into a crowd in Toronto, killing 10 people, who was in turn inspired by another ‘Nice Guy’ who had a bad day, Elliot Rodgers. Incel culture in and of itself reeks of white male privilege and the rage over being unable to lay claim to women and the coveted prize of sex. If you’ve the stomach for it, I’d recommend the website We Hunted The Mammoth and click through the Incel tag for more on the disturbing behaviour of these men.
Those of us who are critical of the message of the Joker movie, which points very strongly to the Nice Guy Who Has A Bad Day take, worry about how many men will take heart to this, and then enact on it.
As the US Military did recently with this warning to their troops who might be seeing the movie.
And if you don’t think people don’t act on racist, sexist, messages in our media, look no further than the screening of “Birth of the Nation”, a movie made BY the KKK to inspire more recruitment into the KKK, at the White House itself. The KKK received a boom in size after that, which continued on until another piece of media, the Superman Radio Drama, tore apart its veil of secrecy and metaphorically pantsed the organization.
And these are just the examples I can think off the top of my head while casually writing this. Others have put significantly more time and effort into looking at the messages in our media and across more than just movies that enforce terrible racist stereotypes as well as outmoded and harmful standards of beauty.
Don’t even get me started on the genre of films I consider to be Transgender Pain Porn.
All being said, for Todd Phillips to plug his fingers into his ears and yell “Lah lah lah, I can’t hear you, you’re all wrong!” speaks to his ability to accept any kind of criticism, which is as flimsy as wet tissue paper. It also says volumes about his lack of understanding of the messages art can have.
Quite frankly, I’ve never heard of the man up until now, and I honestly have no intentions of watching or supporting any of his work. If I wanted to watch a tone deaf, whiny, self-entitled dude who can’t stand that no one wants to appreciate his genius and understanding, I’d dive head first into the Rick and Morty fandom.
We all make mistakes.
It’s all part of growing up, living, learning, and just being a human being in general. We make mistakes, we learn from them, and sometimes we don’t make them again.
Which makes it all the more frustrating that Scarlet Johanson, in a recent interview with As If magazine, she made yet another mistake, in which she said that as an actor, she “should be allowed to play any person, or any tree, or any animal because that is my job and the requirements of my job.”
Considering her past mistakes, this line, and others in the interview, is really telling of her ignorance of her own privilege as a straight, white, cisgender woman.
One also can’t help but think about how that line in particular pretty much equates playing trees and animals to playing transgender people and people of other ethnicity. It’s very insulting, to say the least, especially with the demonization of transgender people that transphobes regularly engage in.
For a quick reminder, ScarJo took on the role, then backed out and apologized, of Dante Tex Gill, a transgender male mob boss in 1970s Chicago, as well as taking on the role of Motoko Kusanagi, a Japanese woman, in Ghost in the Shell.
She’s since apologized for what she said in the As If magazine, claiming they had been taken out of context.
Personally, I prefer this explanation for her apology from one of my favourite people on Twitter, Clarkisha Kent:
At this rate, I feel like the main question to be asked is when does she stop getting chances to screw up, because she’s been doing a darn good job of that, at least once a year for the past 3 years on some very important discussions of representation and diversity in our media. Yes, we’re allowed to make more than one mistake a year, and to expect perfection of people is downright impossible and inconsiderate.
However, we’re not asking for perfection, just some basic empathy and for ScarJo to stop making the same mistakes over and over. Whenever something like this comes out, it feels as though any forward momentum we’re making is slowed, even stalled, to explain, once again, why this is a bad thing.
At times like this, I’m reminiscent of when I first learned about her, in her role as Black Widow in Iron Man 2. By Avengers, I know a lot of MCU fans were eager for a Black Widow movie, something to break up the monotony of straight, white, male-centric movies that continues to be much of what Marvel Studios puts out. When Winter Soldier came out, we were certain that a Black Widow movie was coming out. Under the direction of the Russo Bros and that incredible script, we got a really nuanced, intriguing character in Black Widow.
Now though? She’s pretty much killed off any and all enthusiasm I’ve had for the Black Widow movie that is finally coming out, after Captain Marvel and the end of what’s been basically the Infinity Gauntlet Saga in Endgame.
(On a side note, part of the delay in seeing any kind of female-lead movie from Marvel Studios feels like they were waiting to see if DC’s Wonder Woman would sink or swim instead of simply having faith… but that’s a topic for another day.)
This is in total opposition to what Brie Larson has done in the PR work for Captain Marvel, where she actively worked to include more diverse voices in the discussion of the movie, as well as push for more diversity onscreen. This isn’t an attempt to pit one woman against another, but to highlight how one recognizes her power and privilege and use it to push for diversity, and the other remains ignorant.
And another thing that makes me frustrated?
As I and others have expressed our desire not to see the Black Widow movie, it means that if it under performs (and the goal posts for the success of any movie lead by anyone who’s not a straight, white male are easily moved by people who think only straight white dudes can sell a movie), then some people will take it as evidence that women can’t sell movies.
A lot of those people are still in charge in Hollywood, either as casting directors, heads of studios, etc, and will believe only that despite the success of movies like Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, the Resident Evil series, and others. It feels a bit like a Catch-22, where people continue to push a self-fulfilling prophecy in spite of reality, and then assume that is the reality. This has resulted in movies like Supergirl, Catwoman, and Elektra, to name a few.
They weren’t bad films because they starred women, they were bad films because they had bad writing and directing, and I sure as heck don’t recall them being advertised as much as their male superhero counterparts.
At the very least, ScarJo only appears to make this kind of mistake once a year, and as it’s happened in July, we won’t get any others for the rest of the year.
But I’m not gonna hold my breath or anything…