I'm not gonna write anything long here because, boy, I am not keen to wade into this discussion fully the night before I have a 5am start.
But the heavily optimistic side of me (the dominant one) is pretty willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt here and consider his rather heartfelt and lengthy post to be as sincere as he can get here. I think that's pretty damn sincere- the guy doesn't seem, to me, to be the type to mince words when he's being serious. That's obviously got him into trouble before, but it's also a trait that can add some weight to what he says at times like this I suppose.
I guess if I felt more pessimistic I might view this as damage control (and I am not saying you have to be being pessimistic to do so, just personally), but I just really want to hope and think that it isn't. I honestly think that if it were merely damage control, and he at heart doesn't actually care all the much, then it'd backfire tremendously if he continues to mess up with what he does. That doesn't strike me as particularly smart wise damage control at all.
If he's going to get some sort of therapy, and perhaps if PA was to get serious about their PR control and distancing themselves further from Child's Play, then I think this could go all kinds of good places.
I think I'm right, but I'm pretty sure a good portion of that is just plain old hope. I guess all we can do is wait and see.
I don't expect people to be perfect, but I do think people should try their best to learn from their mistakes - this seems like Mike is finally doing that. My problem for years has been that he's apologized for each individual offense, while not stopping to reflect on the underlying reasons why he keeps needing to apologize for shit. Self-examination can be difficult and painful, but it's necessary, and I'm glad he's finally looking to fix the real problems, instead of just patching the incidents that result.
I think that I am a little hesitant with him in general because in the past it's not only been "sorry I said this thing" it's frequently been "sorry you chose to be offended" or that letter where he outed someone as trans
Sophie Prell (at the time, now Sam) was publicly out as trans and gave permission to post the exchange they had.
That whole deal is whatever but he did not "out" anyone.
I don't expect people to be perfect, but I do think people should try their best to learn from their mistakes - this seems like Mike is finally doing that. My problem for years has been that he's apologized for each individual offense, while not stopping to reflect on the underlying reasons why he keeps needing to apologize for shit. Self-examination can be difficult and painful, but it's necessary, and I'm glad he's finally looking to fix the real problems, instead of just patching the incidents that result.
I think that I am a little hesitant with him in general because in the past it's not only been "sorry I said this thing" it's frequently been "sorry you chose to be offended" or that letter where he outed someone as trans and basically used them as a "my trans friend thinks I'm ok" prop to his argument... bleh. But this is an interesting thing because I think it is a hard task to look yourself in the mirror and acknowledge, for real and for serious, that you're the asshole here and that you've been justifying your shitty behaviour in any way possible. It's a hard first step but I think it's frequently a necessary first step to moving on and learning how to be a decent person. I am hopeful, for once, that moving forward there will be a lot more evidence of stop - think - acknowledge I don't know everything versus the defensive response of 'you're just a bunch of jerks who want a reason to be mad'
This is just a side note, but I seem to recall him asking permission from that person before putting the emails online that outed them as trans. Am I just misremembering or is it a different occurrence entirely?
EDIT: Langly beat me to it!
Anzekay on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
I was the victim of bullies as a child and I did turn into a kind of bully myself for a time because of that so I can definitely understand where Mike is coming from. When I realized what I was doing I stopped that behavior and started trying to make up for it by being much nicer and more accepting. It's led to a happier life for me.
The problem I have with cutting Mike some slack is that I was 17 or 18 when I figured out I was hurting others and acting like a cock, not a 36-year-old man with a wife and child and a charity and a gaming convention and millions of readers. Acting like a hurt little kid is not acceptable at this point!
My main criticism of him over these past few years wasn't that he was a monster or a bigot so much as that he really needed to grow the fuck up. I'm glad he seems to be much more self-aware now. I hope we see some positive development rather than him just keeping quiet and staying out of the spotlight.
I'm not saying you are wrong.
But look at him 15 years ago.
By his own admission he was working a dead end job, not really growing up.
Then he hit it big with a bunch of people he didn't see, and became "head" of a company that did what he told. It's a hard environment to grow up in, because as far as you are aware, you are (and he is) successful.
I understand where Gabe is coming from, and to an extent that's why I've never seen him as some trans-hating cartoon villain that some here have painted him as. That he just wrote a very self-aware article about his shortcomings in this regard is impressive - I always thought he was just some thick inarticulate guy who had no sense of self-awareness whatsoever. Coming to terms with who you are is a very painful process for all of us, because we all have dark corners. Most assholes and shitheads never figure out that they are assholes and shitheads. So be glad that at least a famous one mused upon it out loud.
I grew up moving around a lot as a child and young adult (all the way up to now, even!)
I'm not particularly weird looking (apart from not being white) so I found friends wherever I went but I always regarded people I met as temporary at best. It's really easy to become solipsistic and callous when you have to learn new names once every few years, and sometimes even more frequently than that.
I know that a lot of people think I'm capable of being really mean and shitty towards random people. It doesn't help that I've been told from birth that dumb people exist to be servants and that I shouldn't marry a poor or fat person and so on. My parents are pretty stubbornly conservative. Then I went to a high school where money/intelligence/lastname were everything, and then I went to undergrad and grad schools that emphasized the same.
Thinking about it after reading Gabe's post, I realized a lot of who I present to the public comes from that. But a part of it also comes from the deep pain of losing people who you care about, over and over and over. I alluded to it in the relationship thread but I'm so fucking scared of opening up to someone who probably won't be in my life in X months that I don't allow myself anything more than a perfunctory relationship.
I've tried very hard over the past few years to change all of that, to become a better person and be more open and not automatically dismiss people and so on. It is very difficult (some would say impossible to do completely), extricating yourself from psychological conditioning that has been ingrained into how you perceive things on a first-order level.
The default route is just to shut yourself off completely and see other people as annoying and interchangeable set pieces, objects that impact you in no other way except to cause pain. It's easy to belittle them and laugh at the cast of characters life has thrown at you for a year or so. It's even easier to stay that route, like someone earlier in the thread said, if someone or some people manage to bond with you over the shared pain and ignominy of being uncool.
Again, the fact that the tone was very earnest and self-aware makes it seem like a legitimate attempt to change. Who knows? Plenty of people are still assholes even after they realize it. But Gabe seems like the kind of guy who will really try to rise above who he once was.
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
The whole "reason not excuse" mentality can also lead down a very treacherous road, as well.
We constantly rationalise and reason with ourselves and our decisions and words and actions every day. It's a valid way of thinking but only for a certain amount of time. My mum and dad say some fucking terribly bigoted shit sometimes and I get why, I know the reasons behind it, and they never use those reasons as an excuse but that's not necessarily better than if they just didn't say that kind of shit in the first place, or if they learnt their lesson the first or second time they were called out on it.
I mentioned before how I was disappointed yet glad about this, it's because I'm disappointed that a website I used to enjoy and primarily one of its co-founders has become linked with a toxic attitude that has been perpetuated in an industry whose community I am a part of,I don't revel and celebrate that a place like PA makes a mistake, big or small, it fucking really sucks. However I'm glad because I think every company as public and with as much attention and clout as PA should be under such scrutiny, that we can't just keep accepting everything they say at face value or else nothing will ever fucking change. It just blows that it's taken this long and after several mishandled, to say the very least, situations to get to this point.
Well, perhaps others think a bit differently here, but I'd say I consider a reason to be a factual cause for something- entirely neutral- whereas an excuse is where a reason becomes something you use to try and get people to let you off the hook for what you have done/who you are.
Reasons are fine, and identifying them is an important part of self-change. Learning to stop turning reasons into excuses can be the hard part.
Anzekay on
+1
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
edited January 2014
A reason outlines how you came to be where you are.
An excuse is why you are still there.
I acknowledge that that's a bit reductive, but deliberately so.
Bullies are hiding their own insecurity, and pointing it out to them in the midst of their bullying will either make them back down or become enraged. So when I was bullied (frequently) I typically smiled and said something nice about them. It didn't always work and I got my fair share of beatings. Hell, my own damn father was a bully who would constantly look for a reason to smack me around.
The end result of this is that I, as an adult male in my 30s, still have to deal with all the pent-up rage, social anxiety and sadness that I still, even after years of therapy, allow to build inside myself.
Point being, a coping mechanism is a coping mechanism. It's not a smart bomb that targets each individual bullying incident, it's something a person uses so that they can get through every day without thinking about hurting themselves or others. My coping mechanism might not be as outwardly controversial as Mike's but I can assure you it is just as destructive to carry into your adult years. Once a person has adopted their method of coping, it is extremely difficult to stop using it, even after the bullying stops.
Meeting new people makes my heart beat faster. In fact, as I type this, just the thought of having to go meet somebody new produced this effect. I know this is silly; I have no illusion that my reaction to this thought is normal or healthy, and I know that the likelihood of being bullied at my age is not something that I should allow to impact my decision-making. But it's a primal thing in my core.
I think I got off pretty light in terms of my upbringing. Nobody died or killed themselves (though there were attempts). I don't have to see my father anymore. I consider myself self-aware enough to have looked at the bullies (my father included) and decide that that's not the person I want to be. And it isn't. I'm messed up in a totally different way than they were.
Bullying isn't an excuse here; Mike is saying he wants to change this thing about him and he even says he is bringing trouble on himself now. I challenge you to find somebody who was bullied that doesn't have crippling issues that they need to overcome. Mike's issues are harmful to others directly, but I would give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he has just as much control over that as I have over how anxious I get in unfamiliar social situations. Which is to say, very little. And the guy says he's working on it. I believe him.
A lot has been said already about the importance of reflection in regards to how Mike sees himself and the things he says and does, so I'm not goign to get onto that point except to agree with the general consensus that the longer Mike spends looking in the mirror the less this stuff is likely to happen in the future, and that's probably a good thing
I think the most important aspect of the piece, for me, is the underlying thread of how he sees himself as being separate from the things that he's helped to create. He can't be fully apart from the comics, the comics are an ongoing dialogue that he and Jerry have with their readers, but Child's Play?
The thing that upsets me most about these episodes, the ones where Mike says things no one should say and Jerry remains silent, isn't so much the reality of what's said or the echo chamber that pops up in support of Mike and how he do; it's that it reflects poorly on the things he's had a hand in for years. When Gabe says something that hurts the trans community or is insensitive to victims of rape or any other thing it's possible he might say, it's not the thing itself that really hurts (and I try to be empathetic enough that such things enrage me anyway) or the support network that chimes in to echo the hurtful thing he's said. People are gonna be as they gonna be, and echo chambers are going to exist no matter what.
But then I think, "You are one of only two or three people on the planet who can take away from Child's Play. When you say something terrible you are one voice in thousands, adding to a cacophony that already exists - but you are potentially hurting thousands of people by associating others with these horrible ideas"
It's like
I know it's dumb to care more about one thing over another in something like this, and I don't want to imply that I care more about a single videogame-oriented charity than I care about trans people, or women, or anyone else Mike has hurt in the past through his words, because that's not true
But he has responsibilities that are so much bigger than himself and his own opinions, and he can take so much joy out of so many people's lives just by being thoughtless and mean, and he doesn't just hurt the people that his words cut into. I wonder if that played some part in this, the realization that the things he said could take money away from sick kids, or make it so that gamers of all stripes feel less safe and confident at PAX
I guess I don't want Mike to just stop saying terrible things. I want him to actively work to be better, or be a positive influence in whatever way he can. Maybe the comic isn't the proper medium for that. Maybe they can come up with ways to make it work, though. Maybe this is the point in Mike and Jerry's career where they see the body of work they've made, and what they've done with it so far, and think about what they want to do with it in the future, and what kind of footprint they want to leave behind, and say "We could be doing more"
My default assumption is that it is sincere, and I will assume that until it's proven otherwise
Because even if he is insincere, then so long as he changes his behavior and doesn't hurt anyone and makes things better for the people around him, then the result is the same
Meaningful or damage control, whatever it is, it just needs to stick
0
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
I hadn't really thought of treating bullying like a coping mechanism before, but it's a fair point. I'm more likely to think of something like self-harm that way - as a risky coping mechanism that is hard to stop because, well, it works, even if it's just for a little while. For me bullying almost always seemed a wholly separate thing, because it seemed to happen even when the person is at baseline or, put another way, calm and not in distress.
And, well, rather than SELF-harm, it is effectively OTHERS-harm. :P
But in another way maybe someone does not need to be in distress to bully someone. What a bully gets from bullying is probably as diverse a pool of benefits as it is with self-harm - it could be a place to put your ongoing, shitty emotions, or it's a way to release emotional tension, or it's a way to get your mind off your problems, or it's a way to make you feel better by making something else seem smaller or worse than yourself. And after years of practice it becomes second nature, your default option, to the extent that it is the norm.
Thanks for putting it that way, as I hadn't thought about it quite that way before. I would also add that even when someone self-harms, even when you know that it is something you are doing that is helpful to you in the moment, plenty of people are also aware it is something dangerous, harmful, and likely to lead to escalation and bigger problems. Some people want to stop, others don't, but ultimately there is that acknowledgement of the risks involved. And I suppose it's almost easier to examine that because it is private and personal, while bullying is not.
I did not mean to digress into self-harm, but what you were saying about bullying is very close to what I talk to my clients about regarding self-harm and it definitely resonated with me that way. An intriguing take I hadn't considered, and very much some welcome learning. Fistbump.
My default assumption is that it is sincere, and I will assume that until it's proven otherwise
Because even if he is insincere, then so long as he changes his behavior and doesn't hurt anyone and makes things better for the people around him, then the result is the same
Meaningful or damage control, whatever it is, it just needs to stick
I am inclined to agree with you. It almost doesn't matter what is going on inside his brainhole; what matters more are the resulting actions/changes and their impact.
Actually, many times it's sort of an indirect way of getting personal validation from peers that's missing elsewhere in life. A father tells his kid he's worthless (sometimes with physical violence in the mix) and the kid learns that saying hurtful things to and even harming people lower on the social totem pole will gain them respect and make them feel like at least they aren't that kid.
If a bully does his thing when there's other people around, you can almost bet the farm on this being the case. It's certainly an outlet as well, but asserting social status through dominance is a real ugly thing.
For my own views I think Mike is on the right track. He's acknowledged his flaws sure, but more importantly than that he's set out to change. The change is the important part. The doing of something different is what will make you a (hopefully better) person. In the end it doesn't matter why you are the way you are, or what you want to be, only that you do it.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
For my own views I think Mike is on the right track. He's acknowledged his flaws sure, but more importantly than that he's set out to change. The change is the important part. The doing of something different is what will make you a (hopefully better) person. In the end it doesn't matter why you are the way you are, or what you want to be, only that you do it.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
I feel like this might be an oversimplification
Separating someone from their work or an organization they're involved in is often a very, very personal matter, and it's going to be different for everyone. Jelly Belly as a company ain't anti-gay, but lots of gay rights activists won't buy from them because the company head is anti-gay rights. For some people, they can separate him from the company, or they don't care, or they reason that they can more than offset the cost of jelly beans in the fight for gay rights, or all kinds of things. For some people, fuck that guy and fuck his stupid god damn jelly beans.
The same thing is going to be true of Mike. Some people see him as being a negative force in the long fight for certain forms of social equality, and if PAX puts any money in his pocket at all then fuck it, they're done with it.
I can't blame them for that position
It's one of the things that makes me unsure whether or not I want to go to PAX
Related to that Wyborn, @HyperBallad and I were weighing the option of selling our PAXAus tickets this year, we ended up not doing so because while I'm more hesitant than her of the event itself these days she bought them as a present for us and I didn't want to throw it back in her face.
What happens this year with PA will be the deciding factor of whether or not I want to continue going to future PAXes, and unfortunately gabe is a very large part of that.
@SilverWind and I have talked about going for years, either to East or Prime, but in the past year or two I've gotten less enthusiastic about the idea and no small part of that is down to certain elements of the community being stoked by Mike
I guess I want to see how the expo shapes up in the next year or two before we make the plunge - it seems to be in a state of flux right now
Honestly the biggest deciding factor, for PAXAus at least, is that it's the one time I'm most likely to see the wonderful friends I've made here in one spot.
Unless I go to Perth and see, like, 90% of them
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
I would be into meeting peeps too, but I don't really know you guys that well - you guys as a community, not you guys in this conversation specifically, though that's true too
So for right now it's more like "Do I want to basically fulfill the 10-year-old Wyborn's desire to go to E3 and see some other really rad things, all while accompanied by a beautiful woman"
And the answer to that being anything less than a screamed "yes" is odd
0
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
For my own views I think Mike is on the right track. He's acknowledged his flaws sure, but more importantly than that he's set out to change. The change is the important part. The doing of something different is what will make you a (hopefully better) person. In the end it doesn't matter why you are the way you are, or what you want to be, only that you do it.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
I feel like this might be an oversimplification
Separating someone from their work or an organization they're involved in is often a very, very personal matter, and it's going to be different for everyone. Jelly Belly as a company ain't anti-gay, but lots of gay rights activists won't buy from them because the company head is anti-gay rights. For some people, they can separate him from the company, or they don't care, or they reason that they can more than offset the cost of jelly beans in the fight for gay rights, or all kinds of things. For some people, fuck that guy and fuck his stupid god damn jelly beans.
The same thing is going to be true of Mike. Some people see him as being a negative force in the long fight for certain forms of social equality, and if PAX puts any money in his pocket at all then fuck it, they're done with it.
I can't blame them for that position
It's one of the things that makes me unsure whether or not I want to go to PAX
I can certainly see where that position comes from, but I find it to be very close minded and reactionary. While Jelly Beans is a small choice, you're still basing your choices off your opposition to one person. I find it a bad habit to get into, and see no reason why people I disagree with should in any way dictate my use or enjoyment of anything.
In the PAX case, people are letting their dislike of one person (who they've likely never met) dictate their level of enjoyment for a whole series of events. And, if you decide you no longer want to attend PAX because of Mike, will you also leave the PA forums and comic? They are equally (if not more so) touched by him.
For my own views I think Mike is on the right track. He's acknowledged his flaws sure, but more importantly than that he's set out to change. The change is the important part. The doing of something different is what will make you a (hopefully better) person. In the end it doesn't matter why you are the way you are, or what you want to be, only that you do it.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
I feel like this might be an oversimplification
Separating someone from their work or an organization they're involved in is often a very, very personal matter, and it's going to be different for everyone. Jelly Belly as a company ain't anti-gay, but lots of gay rights activists won't buy from them because the company head is anti-gay rights. For some people, they can separate him from the company, or they don't care, or they reason that they can more than offset the cost of jelly beans in the fight for gay rights, or all kinds of things. For some people, fuck that guy and fuck his stupid god damn jelly beans.
The same thing is going to be true of Mike. Some people see him as being a negative force in the long fight for certain forms of social equality, and if PAX puts any money in his pocket at all then fuck it, they're done with it.
I can't blame them for that position
It's one of the things that makes me unsure whether or not I want to go to PAX
I can certainly see where that position comes from, but I find it to be very close minded and reactionary. While Jelly Beans is a small choice, you're still basing your choices off your opposition to one person. I find it a bad habit to get into, and see no reason why people I disagree with should in any way dictate my use or enjoyment of anything.
In the PAX case, people are letting their dislike of one person (who they've likely never met) dictate their level of enjoyment for a whole series of events. And, if you decide you no longer want to attend PAX because of Mike, will you also level the PA forums and comic? They are equally (if not more so) touched by him.
Yes
+1
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
HunterChemist with a heart of AuRegistered Userregular
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
For my own views I think Mike is on the right track. He's acknowledged his flaws sure, but more importantly than that he's set out to change. The change is the important part. The doing of something different is what will make you a (hopefully better) person. In the end it doesn't matter why you are the way you are, or what you want to be, only that you do it.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
I feel like this might be an oversimplification
Separating someone from their work or an organization they're involved in is often a very, very personal matter, and it's going to be different for everyone. Jelly Belly as a company ain't anti-gay, but lots of gay rights activists won't buy from them because the company head is anti-gay rights. For some people, they can separate him from the company, or they don't care, or they reason that they can more than offset the cost of jelly beans in the fight for gay rights, or all kinds of things. For some people, fuck that guy and fuck his stupid god damn jelly beans.
The same thing is going to be true of Mike. Some people see him as being a negative force in the long fight for certain forms of social equality, and if PAX puts any money in his pocket at all then fuck it, they're done with it.
I can't blame them for that position
It's one of the things that makes me unsure whether or not I want to go to PAX
I can certainly see where that position comes from, but I find it to be very close minded and reactionary. While Jelly Beans is a small choice, you're still basing your choices off your opposition to one person. I find it a bad habit to get into, and see no reason why people I disagree with should in any way dictate my use or enjoyment of anything.
In the PAX case, people are letting their dislike of one person (who they've likely never met) dictate their level of enjoyment for a whole series of events. And, if you decide you no longer want to attend PAX because of Mike, will you also level the PA forums and comic? They are equally (if not more so) touched by him.
Yes
That's unfortunate, understandable, but unfortunate.
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
I'm going to draw a line here
Things that people should not say
__________
Things people should not be allowed to say
I'm all for freedom of speech, it's one of the absolute rights I believe in, but people sitll shouldn't be hurtful or marginalizing to other people, as a rule. Even if you have the right to do so!
I was bullied into oblivion in school, and as a result I have permanent low self-esteem and that's about it. I did spend a long time defining myself by my enemies, but I didn't do much to actually fight the enemies I perceived. Playing games & learning programming/animation gave me battles I could actually win, so that's what I focused on. The end result is that I have confidence in the technical areas I've studied and zero confidence in anything else.
I don't like social conflict of any kind, so I don't get involved, no matter how I feel about a topic. The side effect of that is near-total social isolation, both online and off, because nearly any interaction has a potential for conflict, and any time I see that possibility I just delete what I'm typing and close the browser tab.
We'll get back there someday.
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Mike and Jerry don't, but other members of the organization do - not the least of which is Tube, who is a paid employee and actively works to foster an environment that actually fits pretty well with the ideal Mike is heading for.
Also, @gatsby, this forum would be a much worse-off place with you taking your voice from it. I understand the reasons, and I really understand the desire to disengage from those that cause hurt and pain, but I feel disengaging is a lot of why our society is where it is these days.
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
I'm going to draw a line here
Things that people should not say
__________
Things people should not be allowed to say
I'm all for freedom of speech, it's one of the absolute rights I believe in, but people sitll shouldn't be hurtful or marginalizing to other people, as a rule. Even if you have the right to do so!
the cure for bad speech is more speech
they say something wrong, you explain why they are wrong. sometimes peoples say things that are wrong and don't know they are doing it! the only way for them to learn is to be told they are, and if they refuse to accept it at least the attempt was made and maybe somebody else who was listening learned something from it.
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless.
Non sequitir. There are many things that are legal to say but should not be said.
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
I'm going to draw a line here
Things that people should not say
__________
Things people should not be allowed to say
I'm all for freedom of speech, it's one of the absolute rights I believe in, but people sitll shouldn't be hurtful or marginalizing to other people, as a rule. Even if you have the right to do so!
the cure for bad speech is more speech
they say something wrong, you explain why they are wrong. sometimes peoples say things that are wrong and don't know they are doing it! the only way for them to learn is to be told the are, and if they refuse to accept it at least the attempt was made, and maybe somebody else who was listening learned something from it.
I agree
That doesn't take away from the idea that people shouldn't say things to hrut others, though, and that kickstarting a particular vein of empathy is still owing to the idea that you shouldn't say dismissive things about victims of rape or mean things about trans people, or what have you
Mike and Jerry don't, but other members of the organization do - not the least of which is Tube, who is a paid employee and actively works to foster an environment that actually fits pretty well with the ideal Mike is heading for.
Also, @gatsby, this forum would be a much worse-off place with you taking your voice from it. I understand the reasons, and I really understand the desire to disengage from those that cause hurt and pain, but I feel disengaging is a lot of why our society is where it is these days.
Cheers, I'm humbled to hear that, but I also feel it is not on the onus of those who are a voice for some whether they mean to be or not, to constantly feel obligated to engage with an audience who they feel just doesn't listen any more.
I didn't want to have to do this, but I've read the posts and I would like to express my opinion about a certain topic.
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
I'm going to draw a line here
Things that people should not say
__________
Things people should not be allowed to say
I'm all for freedom of speech, it's one of the absolute rights I believe in, but people sitll shouldn't be hurtful or marginalizing to other people, as a rule. Even if you have the right to do so!
the cure for bad speech is more speech
they say something wrong, you explain why they are wrong. sometimes peoples say things that are wrong and don't know they are doing it! the only way for them to learn is to be told the are, and if they refuse to accept it at least the attempt was made, and maybe somebody else who was listening learned something from it.
I agree
That doesn't take away from the idea that people shouldn't say things to hrut others, though, and that kickstarting a particular vein of empathy is still owing to the idea that you shouldn't say dismissive things about victims of rape or mean things about trans people, or what have you
No it does not. Those are things that shouldn't be said for a variety of reasons, all of them good. But you can never make law or rule saying that nobody can say those things.
Posts
But the heavily optimistic side of me (the dominant one) is pretty willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt here and consider his rather heartfelt and lengthy post to be as sincere as he can get here. I think that's pretty damn sincere- the guy doesn't seem, to me, to be the type to mince words when he's being serious. That's obviously got him into trouble before, but it's also a trait that can add some weight to what he says at times like this I suppose.
I guess if I felt more pessimistic I might view this as damage control (and I am not saying you have to be being pessimistic to do so, just personally), but I just really want to hope and think that it isn't. I honestly think that if it were merely damage control, and he at heart doesn't actually care all the much, then it'd backfire tremendously if he continues to mess up with what he does. That doesn't strike me as particularly smart wise damage control at all.
If he's going to get some sort of therapy, and perhaps if PA was to get serious about their PR control and distancing themselves further from Child's Play, then I think this could go all kinds of good places.
I think I'm right, but I'm pretty sure a good portion of that is just plain old hope. I guess all we can do is wait and see.
Sophie Prell (at the time, now Sam) was publicly out as trans and gave permission to post the exchange they had.
That whole deal is whatever but he did not "out" anyone.
This is just a side note, but I seem to recall him asking permission from that person before putting the emails online that outed them as trans. Am I just misremembering or is it a different occurrence entirely?
EDIT: Langly beat me to it!
I'm not saying you are wrong.
But look at him 15 years ago.
By his own admission he was working a dead end job, not really growing up.
Then he hit it big with a bunch of people he didn't see, and became "head" of a company that did what he told. It's a hard environment to grow up in, because as far as you are aware, you are (and he is) successful.
Satans..... hints.....
I grew up moving around a lot as a child and young adult (all the way up to now, even!)
I'm not particularly weird looking (apart from not being white) so I found friends wherever I went but I always regarded people I met as temporary at best. It's really easy to become solipsistic and callous when you have to learn new names once every few years, and sometimes even more frequently than that.
I know that a lot of people think I'm capable of being really mean and shitty towards random people. It doesn't help that I've been told from birth that dumb people exist to be servants and that I shouldn't marry a poor or fat person and so on. My parents are pretty stubbornly conservative. Then I went to a high school where money/intelligence/lastname were everything, and then I went to undergrad and grad schools that emphasized the same.
Thinking about it after reading Gabe's post, I realized a lot of who I present to the public comes from that. But a part of it also comes from the deep pain of losing people who you care about, over and over and over. I alluded to it in the relationship thread but I'm so fucking scared of opening up to someone who probably won't be in my life in X months that I don't allow myself anything more than a perfunctory relationship.
I've tried very hard over the past few years to change all of that, to become a better person and be more open and not automatically dismiss people and so on. It is very difficult (some would say impossible to do completely), extricating yourself from psychological conditioning that has been ingrained into how you perceive things on a first-order level.
The default route is just to shut yourself off completely and see other people as annoying and interchangeable set pieces, objects that impact you in no other way except to cause pain. It's easy to belittle them and laugh at the cast of characters life has thrown at you for a year or so. It's even easier to stay that route, like someone earlier in the thread said, if someone or some people manage to bond with you over the shared pain and ignominy of being uncool.
Again, the fact that the tone was very earnest and self-aware makes it seem like a legitimate attempt to change. Who knows? Plenty of people are still assholes even after they realize it. But Gabe seems like the kind of guy who will really try to rise above who he once was.
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
We constantly rationalise and reason with ourselves and our decisions and words and actions every day. It's a valid way of thinking but only for a certain amount of time. My mum and dad say some fucking terribly bigoted shit sometimes and I get why, I know the reasons behind it, and they never use those reasons as an excuse but that's not necessarily better than if they just didn't say that kind of shit in the first place, or if they learnt their lesson the first or second time they were called out on it.
I mentioned before how I was disappointed yet glad about this, it's because I'm disappointed that a website I used to enjoy and primarily one of its co-founders has become linked with a toxic attitude that has been perpetuated in an industry whose community I am a part of,I don't revel and celebrate that a place like PA makes a mistake, big or small, it fucking really sucks. However I'm glad because I think every company as public and with as much attention and clout as PA should be under such scrutiny, that we can't just keep accepting everything they say at face value or else nothing will ever fucking change. It just blows that it's taken this long and after several mishandled, to say the very least, situations to get to this point.
Reasons are fine, and identifying them is an important part of self-change. Learning to stop turning reasons into excuses can be the hard part.
An excuse is why you are still there.
The end result of this is that I, as an adult male in my 30s, still have to deal with all the pent-up rage, social anxiety and sadness that I still, even after years of therapy, allow to build inside myself.
Point being, a coping mechanism is a coping mechanism. It's not a smart bomb that targets each individual bullying incident, it's something a person uses so that they can get through every day without thinking about hurting themselves or others. My coping mechanism might not be as outwardly controversial as Mike's but I can assure you it is just as destructive to carry into your adult years. Once a person has adopted their method of coping, it is extremely difficult to stop using it, even after the bullying stops.
Meeting new people makes my heart beat faster. In fact, as I type this, just the thought of having to go meet somebody new produced this effect. I know this is silly; I have no illusion that my reaction to this thought is normal or healthy, and I know that the likelihood of being bullied at my age is not something that I should allow to impact my decision-making. But it's a primal thing in my core.
I think I got off pretty light in terms of my upbringing. Nobody died or killed themselves (though there were attempts). I don't have to see my father anymore. I consider myself self-aware enough to have looked at the bullies (my father included) and decide that that's not the person I want to be. And it isn't. I'm messed up in a totally different way than they were.
Bullying isn't an excuse here; Mike is saying he wants to change this thing about him and he even says he is bringing trouble on himself now. I challenge you to find somebody who was bullied that doesn't have crippling issues that they need to overcome. Mike's issues are harmful to others directly, but I would give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he has just as much control over that as I have over how anxious I get in unfamiliar social situations. Which is to say, very little. And the guy says he's working on it. I believe him.
I think the most important aspect of the piece, for me, is the underlying thread of how he sees himself as being separate from the things that he's helped to create. He can't be fully apart from the comics, the comics are an ongoing dialogue that he and Jerry have with their readers, but Child's Play?
The thing that upsets me most about these episodes, the ones where Mike says things no one should say and Jerry remains silent, isn't so much the reality of what's said or the echo chamber that pops up in support of Mike and how he do; it's that it reflects poorly on the things he's had a hand in for years. When Gabe says something that hurts the trans community or is insensitive to victims of rape or any other thing it's possible he might say, it's not the thing itself that really hurts (and I try to be empathetic enough that such things enrage me anyway) or the support network that chimes in to echo the hurtful thing he's said. People are gonna be as they gonna be, and echo chambers are going to exist no matter what.
But then I think, "You are one of only two or three people on the planet who can take away from Child's Play. When you say something terrible you are one voice in thousands, adding to a cacophony that already exists - but you are potentially hurting thousands of people by associating others with these horrible ideas"
It's like
I know it's dumb to care more about one thing over another in something like this, and I don't want to imply that I care more about a single videogame-oriented charity than I care about trans people, or women, or anyone else Mike has hurt in the past through his words, because that's not true
But he has responsibilities that are so much bigger than himself and his own opinions, and he can take so much joy out of so many people's lives just by being thoughtless and mean, and he doesn't just hurt the people that his words cut into. I wonder if that played some part in this, the realization that the things he said could take money away from sick kids, or make it so that gamers of all stripes feel less safe and confident at PAX
I guess I don't want Mike to just stop saying terrible things. I want him to actively work to be better, or be a positive influence in whatever way he can. Maybe the comic isn't the proper medium for that. Maybe they can come up with ways to make it work, though. Maybe this is the point in Mike and Jerry's career where they see the body of work they've made, and what they've done with it so far, and think about what they want to do with it in the future, and what kind of footprint they want to leave behind, and say "We could be doing more"
I hope so
My default assumption is that it is sincere, and I will assume that until it's proven otherwise
Because even if he is insincere, then so long as he changes his behavior and doesn't hurt anyone and makes things better for the people around him, then the result is the same
Meaningful or damage control, whatever it is, it just needs to stick
I hadn't really thought of treating bullying like a coping mechanism before, but it's a fair point. I'm more likely to think of something like self-harm that way - as a risky coping mechanism that is hard to stop because, well, it works, even if it's just for a little while. For me bullying almost always seemed a wholly separate thing, because it seemed to happen even when the person is at baseline or, put another way, calm and not in distress.
And, well, rather than SELF-harm, it is effectively OTHERS-harm. :P
But in another way maybe someone does not need to be in distress to bully someone. What a bully gets from bullying is probably as diverse a pool of benefits as it is with self-harm - it could be a place to put your ongoing, shitty emotions, or it's a way to release emotional tension, or it's a way to get your mind off your problems, or it's a way to make you feel better by making something else seem smaller or worse than yourself. And after years of practice it becomes second nature, your default option, to the extent that it is the norm.
Thanks for putting it that way, as I hadn't thought about it quite that way before. I would also add that even when someone self-harms, even when you know that it is something you are doing that is helpful to you in the moment, plenty of people are also aware it is something dangerous, harmful, and likely to lead to escalation and bigger problems. Some people want to stop, others don't, but ultimately there is that acknowledgement of the risks involved. And I suppose it's almost easier to examine that because it is private and personal, while bullying is not.
I did not mean to digress into self-harm, but what you were saying about bullying is very close to what I talk to my clients about regarding self-harm and it definitely resonated with me that way. An intriguing take I hadn't considered, and very much some welcome learning. Fistbump.
I am inclined to agree with you. It almost doesn't matter what is going on inside his brainhole; what matters more are the resulting actions/changes and their impact.
If a bully does his thing when there's other people around, you can almost bet the farm on this being the case. It's certainly an outlet as well, but asserting social status through dominance is a real ugly thing.
Also yes fistbump.
As someone who's gone through some very painful changes lately, I would tell him that it's going to be difficult. Everything about you is going to fight the change. But stick with it, even if you doubt how it's working, continue to do different things and you will eventually be a different (hopefully better person).
Do I think this will change the mind of anyone who has decided they dislike him (and anything he's in any way involved with by association?) Not at all. Those people have made that hate part of their identity, and nothing he does will undo that. It's too important to those people to hate Mike, Penny Arcade, and anything else related to those for the "unforgivable" things they have done. As a wise man once said: Haters gonna hate.
I feel like this might be an oversimplification
Separating someone from their work or an organization they're involved in is often a very, very personal matter, and it's going to be different for everyone. Jelly Belly as a company ain't anti-gay, but lots of gay rights activists won't buy from them because the company head is anti-gay rights. For some people, they can separate him from the company, or they don't care, or they reason that they can more than offset the cost of jelly beans in the fight for gay rights, or all kinds of things. For some people, fuck that guy and fuck his stupid god damn jelly beans.
The same thing is going to be true of Mike. Some people see him as being a negative force in the long fight for certain forms of social equality, and if PAX puts any money in his pocket at all then fuck it, they're done with it.
I can't blame them for that position
It's one of the things that makes me unsure whether or not I want to go to PAX
What happens this year with PA will be the deciding factor of whether or not I want to continue going to future PAXes, and unfortunately gabe is a very large part of that.
I guess I want to see how the expo shapes up in the next year or two before we make the plunge - it seems to be in a state of flux right now
Unless I go to Perth and see, like, 90% of them
Satans..... hints.....
but PAX for me has always been way more about meeting up with people than anything to do with PA
even the expo hall itself is secondary to the peeps
This is what I was glad to see for the most part last year! I hope it continues to be the case especially with everything gabe has said
So for right now it's more like "Do I want to basically fulfill the 10-year-old Wyborn's desire to go to E3 and see some other really rad things, all while accompanied by a beautiful woman"
And the answer to that being anything less than a screamed "yes" is odd
I can certainly see where that position comes from, but I find it to be very close minded and reactionary. While Jelly Beans is a small choice, you're still basing your choices off your opposition to one person. I find it a bad habit to get into, and see no reason why people I disagree with should in any way dictate my use or enjoyment of anything.
In the PAX case, people are letting their dislike of one person (who they've likely never met) dictate their level of enjoyment for a whole series of events. And, if you decide you no longer want to attend PAX because of Mike, will you also leave the PA forums and comic? They are equally (if not more so) touched by him.
Yes
Due to the fact he does not attend them.
Satans..... hints.....
Saying Mike or anybody said things that shouldn't be said is bullshit. We live in a society that not only protects speech by rule of law, but has time and time again gone to the plate to defend this right to say whatever you want to say regardless. It has successfully survived some pretty brutal attacks too. Sometimes it's things I believe most of us can agree with, like the Civil Rights movement leading to a whole race getting basic rights in the US, end of Apartheid in South Africa and the eventual presidency of a great man once labeled a political terrorist in that country, and the modern changes for the better we are actively living through in terms of Gay Rights in our somewhat backwards first world country. These are positive steps towards something that is going in the right direction for society. Sometimes though, it's a bitter pill like having Neo-Nazis hold a rally, the Westboro Baptist people picket a soldier's funeral, or listening to anything that falls out of Sarah Palin's mouth. I may dislike it or flat out want to take a baseball bat to one of the Fred Phelp's people, but I can't. That's the balance of our free speech, it's not just the stuff you believe in or like to hear.
Nothing Mike has ever put in the comic or any comments made on the website or in emails comes anywhere close to inciting a riot, promoting violence, or getting into the "yelling fire in a crowded movie house" example. This comic specifically deserves all protection because as a combination of written and visual art it's the definition of a free speech scenario. Rape wolves et al. It's not beyond reproach or criticism by any means, but to judge everything that later touches Penny Arcade or any of the fruit from the tree that started as a webcomic for videogame nerds is as stupid as those folks who jump on advertisers of shows with actors/actresses who say things they don't like or people who chose to boycott Dole foods because they thought the company was related in some way to politician Bob Dole who did things they didn't like. It's short sighted and plain ignorant, not to mention intolerant...the same word that some of the more hypocritical use to condemn others for not sharing their opinion.
Is PA perfect? No. Have they at times recanted? Yes, they have chosen to pull pieces at times after criticism, and that's their choice as the people who put out the media item to listen to other people's opinions and reexamine what they made. Changing an opinion after receiving new data or hearing a counter opinion is not weakness, capitulation, or a sign that you got caught being [insert: racist, sexist, rape culture enthusiast, homophobic, a Mexican Jew Lizard, a Nazi, Pro-Obama supporter, etc] and are just saying sorry to get people off your back. Sometimes people change opinions once they get feedback. Sometimes they do not. Neither means they were right or wrong, or you were right or wrong.
In either scenario, nobody has a right to not be offended. That one isn't written into law or ingrained into our culture. You have a right to freely express your opinion about it to the point just before promoting violence or some sort of aggressive retaliation. If you're the type of person that wouldn't promote a charity like Child's Play because 'those PA guys' are involved, I'm not going to say I hate you or you're a complete asshat. I will say that I truly feel that we may never be close or as friendly as we possibly could have been because of it. That charity has done amazing things in only a few short years, and I'm glad I've supported it since the inception. To just toss it aside because some guy didn't agree with your opinion on something else is gay...and retarded. In the butt and stuff. Fuck whitey and the police too, just for good measure.
This is my opinion, and I know I'm an asshole already. I don't need a reminder, but if you want to call me one so be it. I still like you all, except for Tube. He's a right bastard.
Secret Satan 2013 Wishlist
That's unfortunate, understandable, but unfortunate.
I'm going to draw a line here
Things that people should not say
__________
Things people should not be allowed to say
I'm all for freedom of speech, it's one of the absolute rights I believe in, but people sitll shouldn't be hurtful or marginalizing to other people, as a rule. Even if you have the right to do so!
I don't like social conflict of any kind, so I don't get involved, no matter how I feel about a topic. The side effect of that is near-total social isolation, both online and off, because nearly any interaction has a potential for conflict, and any time I see that possibility I just delete what I'm typing and close the browser tab.
Also, @gatsby, this forum would be a much worse-off place with you taking your voice from it. I understand the reasons, and I really understand the desire to disengage from those that cause hurt and pain, but I feel disengaging is a lot of why our society is where it is these days.
the cure for bad speech is more speech
they say something wrong, you explain why they are wrong. sometimes peoples say things that are wrong and don't know they are doing it! the only way for them to learn is to be told they are, and if they refuse to accept it at least the attempt was made and maybe somebody else who was listening learned something from it.
Non sequitir. There are many things that are legal to say but should not be said.
I agree
That doesn't take away from the idea that people shouldn't say things to hrut others, though, and that kickstarting a particular vein of empathy is still owing to the idea that you shouldn't say dismissive things about victims of rape or mean things about trans people, or what have you
Cheers, I'm humbled to hear that, but I also feel it is not on the onus of those who are a voice for some whether they mean to be or not, to constantly feel obligated to engage with an audience who they feel just doesn't listen any more.
That's just where I'm at now, personally.
No it does not. Those are things that shouldn't be said for a variety of reasons, all of them good. But you can never make law or rule saying that nobody can say those things.