The thing I find puzzlling is the repeated claims by some of these feminist bloggers that the PA guys are somehow rape apologists.
There is not a single one of the relevant comics or posts that could be interpreted by a reasonable person as being pro-rape or apologetic for rape. At worst, you could argue that the comics were insensitive on the topic of rape. But there is a wide gulf between lacking the appropriate level of sensitivity on a topic and supporting the bad behavior in question.
And it might be getting repetitive to say this at this point, but the crux of the joke in the 1st comic was not about rape. It was about a supposed hero ignoring someone in a shitty situation because he had met the minimum requirements of his assigned quest. The slave being raped by dickwolves isn't who we're laughing at in this joke, it's the supposed hero who can't be bothered to rescue him.
Thankfully, there isn't an outraged Worgen blogosphere, or the PA guys and everyone on this thread might well have been ripped to shreds by angry wolf-people by this point.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
I clicked on it and I’m not seeing it either. Both her and the person who sent her the comic are arguing that they don't like being hit on when they're spending time by themselves and not giving off any signals that they want to be hit on. That doesn't seem all that crazy.
I even made a quick search and while it seems other people were talking about rape, she never brings it up. Unless I'm missing something here.
It was quoted a few pages back that the author of the blog considers any invasion of personal space rape. Though considering someone a fuck hole probably covers rape.
I think, and if you can dredge up the quote I'm ready to admit my error, that she actually said that an invasion of personal space is like rape. Which is kind of an important difference.
Furthermore, equating a polite comment with considering a person a fuck hole is not an intelligent statement to say the least.
I don't want to make this about street harassment, but unsolicited compliments are not always benign, and when you don't know the intention, and don't want the attention, you may be forgiven for not taking them with grace and aplomb.
Melissa McEwan believes that every compliment a man gives a woman is an attempt to have sex.
So would you admit that she doesn't actually reference rape explicitly, much less accuse Mr. Munroe of engaging in rape apology? That you made that up to generate outrage, even?
And it might be getting repetitive to say this at this point, but the crux of the joke in the 1st comic was not about rape. It was about a supposed hero ignoring someone in a shitty situation because he had met the minimum requirements of his assigned quest. The slave being raped by dickwolves isn't who we're laughing at in this joke, it's the supposed hero who can't be bothered to rescue him.
Indeedy. Specifically, the slave is in an awful situation, but the hero, having gotten his reward, sees no purpose in releasing him.
The slaves awful situation involves being raped.
Rape is awful.
I cannot see any other way to read that comic, unless you are actively trying to find it, as Monsch suggests may be the case.
Hmm... How did they even find the comic to begin with?
They learned of it from second hand sources. Sources such as Melissa McEwan.
And the 4chan raid is because she accused XKCD of rape apology.
THIS COMIC IS TOTALLY ABOUT RAPE. IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE RAPE INHERENT IN IT THEN YOU MUST BE A RAPIST.
CLICK ON THE COMIC TO SEE A BLOG POST WHERE SHE ACCUSES XKCD OF RAPE APOLOGY.
Good God, every time I think I've established a bar for how fucking nuts McEwan is, she manages to raise it. She's like Glenn Beck of the Psycho Feminist world.
Monch, thank you. As a male victim (or 'survivor,' to be catch-phrasey) of sexual abuse/assault, under two different circumstances, I'm glad somebody said what you did. I hate to be the guy who says 'get over it,' because, quite frankly my experience just wasn't as traumatic as some, I guess.
It upsets me deeply that the first comic has been interpreted the way it was; it makes me extremely angry, in fact. I feel as though the response comic was, while a 'bad PR move,' a natural reaction from two people who may have been deeply offended, hurt and angered that they were being accused of promoting rape; that somebody dug deep enough to take offense at the use of the word rape is fairly insane as well. That somebody may have 'triggered' at the word... well, it's an argument that has been used a few times, but it stands: there are a million discreet possible 'triggers' waiting for any PTSD-sufferer, minority group, or opressed people. As a black man in rural America, who has been the victim of racial violence, I find that if I try to avoid 'triggers' or dig for offensive shit, I'm just not going to be a productive human being. I can not fathom the core of self-centered knee-jerk goosery in a person that it would take to actually think the PA crew somehow owed them an apology for that joke.
Conversely, I feel a great amount of sadness for other victims of sexual assault. It is a terrible thing to experience, and to have it effect your life on a day-to-day basis must be excrutiating.
But I truly, deeply feel that G&T's original joke in no way validates the mud that has been slung in their direction.
And it might be getting repetitive to say this at this point, but the crux of the joke in the 1st comic was not about rape. It was about a supposed hero ignoring someone in a shitty situation because he had met the minimum requirements of his assigned quest. The slave being raped by dickwolves isn't who we're laughing at in this joke, it's the supposed hero who can't be bothered to rescue him.
Indeedy. Specifically, the slave is in an awful situation, but the hero, having gotten his reward, sees no purpose in releasing him.
The slaves awful situation involves being raped.
Rape is awful.
I cannot see any other way to read that comic, unless you are actively trying to find it, as Monsch suggests may be the case.
The comic wouldn't make much sense if the slave's situation involved daily massages and loving blowjobs from beautiful pussy-wolfs. The joke only works because these poor souls are in a horrible situation.
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Melissa McEwan believes that every compliment a man gives a woman is an attempt to have sex.
Even if you are talking to a girl initially just because you find her attractive and know nothing else (which is, uh, kind of the point of talking), what possible mindset is that wrong?
Are people just supposed to never interact with others? I wonder how she feels about women doing that? I, relatively recently, was hanging out with a girl just for her company and she thought it was going the romantic route when that's not really what I was after with her - does that mean she just wanted me for a personal on call penis? I don't think it does, I think it means she was interested in a relationship, but then again like I said I don't understand the mindset over at Shakesville at all. Like I'd need a giant multicolored light and sound making apparatus to attempt communication with them.
Good God, every time I think I've established a bar for how fucking nuts McEwan is, she manages to raise it. She's like Glenn Beck of the Psycho Feminist world.
And then there are the ones helpfully trying to educate me through the cunning deployment of mansplaining and/or engage me in dialogue about what a silly, misguided lady I am:
"Throughout your writings you make reference to a need to redefine manhood; I wonder if you might explain how or why this might be necessary? You frequently allude to men's boorish behavior toward women - to be sure, the examples you give are just ludicrously offensive. I have nothing but scorn for men who would grab a woman on a train, for example, or whistle at them. I have very rarely seen such behavior, though, and I know a large number of men who would never even consider acting so obnoxiously. I wonder if perhaps you are not projecting a couple of semi-civilized idiots' misogyny onto about half the world."
Melissa McEwan believes that every compliment a man gives a woman is an attempt to have sex.
So would you admit that she doesn't actually reference rape explicitly, much less accuse Mr. Munroe of engaging in rape apology? That you made that up to generate outrage, even?
What.?
Read her fucking post.
I cannot understand how we even have a disagreement.
I think, and if you can dredge up the quote I'm ready to admit my error, that she actually said that an invasion of personal space is like rape. Which is kind of an important difference.
You're right.
She merely thinks complimenting someone's net book is merely similar to rape. What a wonderfully balanced world view.
I don't want to make this about street harassment, but unsolicited compliments are not always benign, and when you don't know the intention, and don't want the attention, you may be forgiven for not taking them with grace and aplomb.
You keep doing this. We are not talking about generalities. There is a specific comic, using a specific context, that the writer of the blog and one of her fans has interpreted in a completely horrendous way.
Good God, every time I think I've established a bar for how fucking nuts McEwan is, she manages to raise it. She's like Glenn Beck of the Psycho Feminist world.
If you follow the links, you'll find that they were also offended by this comic, for some reason:
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
The joke is that "the hero", who does ignore the situation, is being an asshole (the classic reversal of the traditional trope joke). The joke is pretty much saying: "ignoring that someone is being raped is actually a terrible thing to be doing".
I clicked on it and I’m not seeing it either. Both her and the person who sent her the comic are arguing that they don't like being hit on when they're spending time by themselves and not giving off any signals that they want to be hit on. That doesn't seem all that crazy.
I even made a quick search and while it seems other people were talking about rape, she never brings it up. Unless I'm missing something here.
It was quoted a few pages back that the author of the blog considers any invasion of personal space rape. Though considering someone a fuck hole probably covers rape.
Furthermore, equating a polite comment with considering a person a fuck hole is not an intelligent statement to say the least.
I get that she agrees with the user who said that, which is awful, but her own comments are pretty much just about making eye contact and that being hit on isn’t something she wants all the time.
I mean, let’s get something straight here: I think Shakesville is awful. I’m not a fan of McEwan at all. But her own comments on this particular webcomic strip aren’t that extreme.
I clicked on it and I’m not seeing it either. Both her and the person who sent her the comic are arguing that they don't like being hit on when they're spending time by themselves and not giving off any signals that they want to be hit on. That doesn't seem all that crazy.
I even made a quick search and while it seems other people were talking about rape, she never brings it up. Unless I'm missing something here.
It was quoted a few pages back that the author of the blog considers any invasion of personal space rape. Though considering someone a fuck hole probably covers rape.
Furthermore, equating a polite comment with considering a person a fuck hole is not an intelligent statement to say the least.
I get that she agrees with the user who said that, which is awful, but her own comments are pretty much just about making eye contact and that being hit on isn’t something she wants all the time.
I mean, let’s get something straight here: I think Shakesville is awful. I’m not a fan of McEwan at all. But her own comments on this particular webcomic strip aren’t that extreme.
She just thinks the person who said the absolutely crazy things is right.
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
The joke is that "the hero", who does ignore the situation, is being an asshole (the classic reversal of the traditional trope joke). The joke is pretty much saying: "ignoring that someone is being raped is actually a terrible thing to be doing".
Honestly, to answer someone earlier in the thread, the joke would have worked just as well if it was orphans. You'd have to go out on a limb to suggest that an orphan actually being raped by a dickwolf wasn't terrible (although my first reaction would be to laugh, since the concept of a dickwolf is so ludicrous that it's really the only reaction I can have, if a vaginawolf was devouring people I would have a similar reaction), but I think it would be just as funny because the point isn't what's happening to the victim, it's that it's horrendous and the hero doesn't give a shit
The hero's utter lack of giving shits is why it's funny
Good God, every time I think I've established a bar for how fucking nuts McEwan is, she manages to raise it. She's like Glenn Beck of the Psycho Feminist world.
If you follow the links, you'll find that they were offended by this comic:
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
The joke is that "the hero", who does ignore the situation, is being an asshole (the classic reversal of the traditional trope joke). The joke is pretty much saying: "ignoring that someone is being raped is actually a terrible thing to be doing".
Honestly, to answer someone earlier in the thread, the joke would have worked just as well if it was orphans. You'd have to go out on a limb to suggest that an orphan actually being raped by a dickwolf wasn't terrible (although my first reaction would be to laugh, since the concept of a dickwolf is so ludicrous that it's really the only reaction I can have, if a vaginawolf was devouring people I would have a similar reaction), but I think it would be just as funny because the point isn't what's happening to the victim, it's that it's horrendous and the hero doesn't give a shit
The hero's utter lack of giving shits is why it's funny
Seriously. I laughed so hard at the word 'dickwolf,' and it was a good, long laugh. The word still makes me chuckle for real. I can imagine a few people had the same reaction. And that would probably be a good motivation for making a shirt.
This is an entirely hypothetical question here, and I am not putting it forward for any other reason than it might be an interesting point of discussion:
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
In order to prove libel in court, you need three things. You need to prove the statement was false. You need to prove the statement caused harm, be it to a person or persons, a business or business interest, etc. You need to prove the statement was made without proper research conducted, and not made in private, directly to the person/persons/business.
Most of us can agree that the accusation has been levied at PA that they are rape apologists, misogynists, etc, and that those claims are both very public and very inaccurate. People have already begun to talk of refusing to attend PAX events; if enough people opt to take this route and word of mouth spreads to make even more people follow suit it could very well be financially harmful, as well as harmful to the Penny Arcade brand -- not to mention the mental health of Mike, if all of this is stressing him out for the worse. The entire set of complaints sprung from an overreaction to a very specific event and seems to willfully ignore the well documented history of the style of humor Penny Arcade is noted for -- specifically the fact that prior to this event there have been several comics that border or surpass the same topic.
It seems like enough. And I will state it again: This is a hypothetical question, being posted because I find the idea interesting as a topic for discussion. I am in no way suggesting any kind of legal action be taken. Just curious if it could be taken, in a hypothetical universe.
This is an entirely hypothetical question here, and I am not putting it forward for any other reason than it might be an interesting point of discussion:
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
This is an entirely hypothetical question here, and I am not putting it forward for any other reason than it might be an interesting point of discussion:
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
No.
Could.. you explain why not? I'm asking because it seems like it meets the criteria.
I don't think a defamation lawsuit would be successful. The fact that some of the comics are pretty crass, and that the feminist blogging community would probably come out in droves to support the two defendants, would sink PA's suit so fucking quick. They would be ruined.
Also, who the fuck hits on Melissa McEwan? She doesn't seem like she'd be very pleasant to be around at all.
The last thing she needs is that kind of attention
True, and making her a legal-system martyr would be bad as well, as it would reinforce the idea that being a godamned maniac zealot is ok; I think we've got enough of that going around every else.
However, it's nice when crazy assholes suffer the consequences of flinging shit in the wrong direction.
This is an entirely hypothetical question here, and I am not putting it forward for any other reason than it might be an interesting point of discussion:
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
In order to prove libel in court, you need three things. You need to prove the statement was false. You need to prove the statement caused harm, be it to a person or persons, a business or business interest, etc. You need to prove the statement was made without proper research conducted, and not made in private, directly to the person/persons/business.
Most of us can agree that the accusation has been levied at PA that they are rape apologists, misogynists, etc, and that those claims are both very public and very inaccurate. People have already begun to talk of refusing to attend PAX events; if enough people opt to take this route and word of mouth spreads to make even more people follow suit it could very well be financially harmful, as well as harmful to the Penny Arcade brand -- not to mention the mental health of Mike, if all of this is stressing him out for the worse. The entire set of complaints sprung from an overreaction to a very specific event and seems to willfully ignore the well documented history of the style of humor Penny Arcade is noted for -- specifically the fact that prior to this event there have been several comics that border or surpass the same topic.
It seems like enough. And I will state it again: This is a hypothetical question, being posted because I find the idea interesting as a topic for discussion. I am in no way suggesting any kind of legal action be taken. Just curious if it could be taken, in a hypothetical universe.
In this case, the plaintiffs (G&T) must show malice on the part of the offenders for any recovery, even if all those elements are met. G&T in this situation are public figures not only because they are celebrities in general (PAX, Child's Play, recognition and awareness, Time 100), but also because they voluntarily injected themselves to that particular controversy and function as a public figure for those limited issues. Therefore McEwan gains the benefit of the free speech protections of NY Times v. Sullivan and G&T must show malice (knowing falsity or recklessness as to truth) with convincing clarity. I doubt they'll be able to succeed.
I don't think a defamation lawsuit would be successful. The fact that some of the comics are pretty crass, and that the feminist blogging community would probably come out in droves to support the two defendants, would sink PA's suit so fucking quick. They would be ruined.
Also, who the fuck hits on Melissa McEwan? She doesn't seem like she'd be very pleasant to be around at all.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
EWom on
Whether they find a life there or not, I think Jupiter should be called an enemy planet.
Yeah, the last thing Penny Arcade needs is for this to turn into a lawsuit, even if they won. it seems like a shitstorm right now, but really, it is only in a small section of the internet. If this went to court it would become far worse as other media outlets picked it up.
Penny Arcade need to tell get a public relations officer to avoid any of this happening again. They're big enough now that they've got so much to lose, and smoeone skilled in PR could really help them in other avenues, such as awareness of Child's Play and so on.
In this case, the plaintiffs (G&T) must show malice on the part of the offenders for any recovery, even if all those elements are met. G&T in this situation are public figures not only because they are celebrities in general (PAX, Child's Play, recognition and awareness, Time 100), but also because they voluntarily injected themselves to that particular controversy and function as a public figure for those limited issues. Therefore McEwan gains the benefit of the free speech protections of NY Times v. Sullivan and G&T must show malice (knowing falsity or recklessness as to truth) with convincing clarity. I doubt they'll be able to succeed.
Very well put. What "kirbybits" put in her blog about gabes personal problems could be something that G&T might take specific issue with, but I believe she removed it.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
Man, what the hell is this? Do you think you're adding anything? Do you think this is clever?
This is an entirely hypothetical question here, and I am not putting it forward for any other reason than it might be an interesting point of discussion:
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
In order to prove libel in court, you need three things. You need to prove the statement was false. You need to prove the statement caused harm, be it to a person or persons, a business or business interest, etc. You need to prove the statement was made without proper research conducted, and not made in private, directly to the person/persons/business.
Most of us can agree that the accusation has been levied at PA that they are rape apologists, misogynists, etc, and that those claims are both very public and very inaccurate. People have already begun to talk of refusing to attend PAX events; if enough people opt to take this route and word of mouth spreads to make even more people follow suit it could very well be financially harmful, as well as harmful to the Penny Arcade brand -- not to mention the mental health of Mike, if all of this is stressing him out for the worse. The entire set of complaints sprung from an overreaction to a very specific event and seems to willfully ignore the well documented history of the style of humor Penny Arcade is noted for -- specifically the fact that prior to this event there have been several comics that border or surpass the same topic.
It seems like enough. And I will state it again: This is a hypothetical question, being posted because I find the idea interesting as a topic for discussion. I am in no way suggesting any kind of legal action be taken. Just curious if it could be taken, in a hypothetical universe.
In this case, the plaintiffs (G&T) must show malice on the part of the offenders for any recovery, even if all those elements are met. G&T in this situation are public figures not only because they are celebrities in general (PAX, Child's Play, recognition and awareness, Time 100), but also because they voluntarily injected themselves to that particular controversy and function as a public figure for those limited issues. Therefore McEwan gains the benefit of the free speech protections of NY Times v. Sullivan and G&T must show malice (knowing falsity or recklessness as to truth) with convincing clarity. I doubt they'll be able to succeed.
I suppose. I just don't see how accusing Mike of being a rape apologist could be anything other than actual malice.
As an unrelated to this line of discussion side-note: Games press member Jim Sterling (of Destructoid) got into a back-and-forth with some other blogger this morning. This argument was wholly unrelated to anything PA related. However, feminism was brought up, Sterling was ultra-crass in his criticism of it and the blogger.
The exchange is now part of the Debacle timeline. Because it's a games related personality, and feminism. That is literally how the average person is seeing this.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
Man, what the hell is this? Do you think you're adding anything? Do you think this is clever?
But if he's edgy enough, does he really need a point?
The answer is always still yes.
Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
Hmm... How did they even find the comic to begin with?
They learned of it from second hand sources. Sources such as Melissa McEwan.
And the 4chan raid is because she accused XKCD of rape apology.
THIS COMIC IS TOTALLY ABOUT RAPE. IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE RAPE INHERENT IN IT THEN YOU MUST BE A RAPIST.
CLICK ON THE COMIC TO SEE A BLOG POST WHERE SHE ACCUSES XKCD OF RAPE APOLOGY.
Jesus, seriously? Can you dig up a link to whatever post THAT was?
FIRST FUCK COMMENT ON THAT POST
This just perpetuates that tired old idea that feminism keeps anyone from getting laid. You see, we feminists terrify teh menz so much with our insistence on "don't rape people" and "no means no" that the poor menz are paralyzed with fear and don't feel like they have the right to be at all sexually assertive without being branded as creepy sexual harassers.
By having the imaginary woman respond to an ordinary conversational overture as if the man were sexually harassing her, xkcd diminishes the gravity of sexual harassment, portrays women as hysterical and overreactionary, and denies the actual lived experience of women who almost always endure sexual harassment without resounding community support. The impression you come away with after reading this comic is "feminists ruined flirting for everyone" and "women should make themselves more sexually available to total strangers".
Yeah, its the comic that perpetuates the myth, not feminists taking the piss out of everything in the world that keeps people from getting laid.
mrt144 on
0
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
The joke is that "the hero", who does ignore the situation, is being an asshole (the classic reversal of the traditional trope joke). The joke is pretty much saying: "ignoring that someone is being raped is actually a terrible thing to be doing".
Honestly, to answer someone earlier in the thread, the joke would have worked just as well if it was orphans. You'd have to go out on a limb to suggest that an orphan actually being raped by a dickwolf wasn't terrible (although my first reaction would be to laugh, since the concept of a dickwolf is so ludicrous that it's really the only reaction I can have, if a vaginawolf was devouring people I would have a similar reaction), but I think it would be just as funny because the point isn't what's happening to the victim, it's that it's horrendous and the hero doesn't give a shit
The hero's utter lack of giving shits is why it's funny
Seriously. I laughed so hard at the word 'dickwolf,' and it was a good, long laugh. The word still makes me chuckle for real. I can imagine a few people had the same reaction. And that would probably be a good motivation for making a shirt.
I am hoping a number of papers are written about this event in the coming years; I want the word "dickwolf" enshrined in the immortal halls of academia as long as human thought is remembered.
I don't think a defamation lawsuit would be successful. The fact that some of the comics are pretty crass, and that the feminist blogging community would probably come out in droves to support the two defendants, would sink PA's suit so fucking quick. They would be ruined.
Also, who the fuck hits on Melissa McEwan? She doesn't seem like she'd be very pleasant to be around at all.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
I'm thinking she's incredibly egotistical. Hell, even enjoyable people with a modicum of self-esteem don't assume everybody's hitting on them.
I don't think a defamation lawsuit would be successful. The fact that some of the comics are pretty crass, and that the feminist blogging community would probably come out in droves to support the two defendants, would sink PA's suit so fucking quick. They would be ruined.
Also, who the fuck hits on Melissa McEwan? She doesn't seem like she'd be very pleasant to be around at all.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
I'm thinking she's incredibly egotistical. Hell, even enjoyable people with a modicum of self-esteem don't assume everybody's hitting on them.
That is pretty obvious. I feel like I need to put up a neon sign that says, "Tearing apart or acknowledging the craziness of some radical feminist bloggers on this issue doesn't mean the issue goes away, or that they represented the majority of concerned followers."
Hmm... How did they even find the comic to begin with?
They learned of it from second hand sources. Sources such as Melissa McEwan.
And the 4chan raid is because she accused XKCD of rape apology.
THIS COMIC IS TOTALLY ABOUT RAPE. IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE RAPE INHERENT IN IT THEN YOU MUST BE A RAPIST.
CLICK ON THE COMIC TO SEE A BLOG POST WHERE SHE ACCUSES XKCD OF RAPE APOLOGY.
Jesus, seriously? Can you dig up a link to whatever post THAT was?
FIRST FUCK COMMENT ON THAT POST
This just perpetuates that tired old idea that feminism keeps anyone from getting laid. You see, we feminists terrify teh menz so much with our insistence on "don't rape people" and "no means no" that the poor menz are paralyzed with fear and don't feel like they have the right to be at all sexually assertive without being branded as creepy sexual harassers.
By having the imaginary woman respond to an ordinary conversational overture as if the man were sexually harassing her, xkcd diminishes the gravity of sexual harassment, portrays women as hysterical and overreactionary, and denies the actual lived experience of women who almost always endure sexual harassment without resounding community support. The impression you come away with after reading this comic is "feminists ruined flirting for everyone" and "women should make themselves more sexually available to total strangers".
Yes, the comic perpetuates the idea that feminism keeps people from getting laid. Not feminist interpretations of the comic.
CLICK ON THE COMIC TO SEE A BLOG POST WHERE SHE ACCUSES XKCD OF RAPE APOLOGY
EDIT:The comic in my post.
mrt144. You need to fix the formatting of your post.
Melissa McEwan is so emotionally damaged that she believes every casual compliment a man makes toward a female is flirting.
I sincerely hope that her entire public persona is a deliberate troll/attention grab because otherwise that's just fucking sad.
I barely have a clue who Melissa McEwan is but I have to say I love how people in this thread go on the warpath about folks calling Mike a rape apologist and now here folks are going on and on about how they think some feminist blogger acts around men, pulling out all the anti-feminist cliches.
I am hoping a number of papers are written about this event in the coming years; I want the word "dickwolf" enshrined in the immortal halls of academia as long as human thought is remembered.
This type of situation should be referenced as "The Dickwolf Dilemma" much like how "The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory" is referenced.
I barely have a clue who Melissa McEwan is but I have to say I love how people in this thread go on the warpath about folks calling Mike a rape apologist and now here folks are going on and on about how they think some feminist blogger acts around men, pulling out all the anti-feminist cliches.
Posts
There is not a single one of the relevant comics or posts that could be interpreted by a reasonable person as being pro-rape or apologetic for rape. At worst, you could argue that the comics were insensitive on the topic of rape. But there is a wide gulf between lacking the appropriate level of sensitivity on a topic and supporting the bad behavior in question.
And it might be getting repetitive to say this at this point, but the crux of the joke in the 1st comic was not about rape. It was about a supposed hero ignoring someone in a shitty situation because he had met the minimum requirements of his assigned quest. The slave being raped by dickwolves isn't who we're laughing at in this joke, it's the supposed hero who can't be bothered to rescue him.
Thankfully, there isn't an outraged Worgen blogosphere, or the PA guys and everyone on this thread might well have been ripped to shreds by angry wolf-people by this point.
Rigorous Scholarship
I don't want to make this about street harassment, but unsolicited compliments are not always benign, and when you don't know the intention, and don't want the attention, you may be forgiven for not taking them with grace and aplomb.
So would you admit that she doesn't actually reference rape explicitly, much less accuse Mr. Munroe of engaging in rape apology? That you made that up to generate outrage, even?
Indeedy. Specifically, the slave is in an awful situation, but the hero, having gotten his reward, sees no purpose in releasing him.
The slaves awful situation involves being raped.
Rape is awful.
I cannot see any other way to read that comic, unless you are actively trying to find it, as Monsch suggests may be the case.
Good God, every time I think I've established a bar for how fucking nuts McEwan is, she manages to raise it. She's like Glenn Beck of the Psycho Feminist world.
It upsets me deeply that the first comic has been interpreted the way it was; it makes me extremely angry, in fact. I feel as though the response comic was, while a 'bad PR move,' a natural reaction from two people who may have been deeply offended, hurt and angered that they were being accused of promoting rape; that somebody dug deep enough to take offense at the use of the word rape is fairly insane as well. That somebody may have 'triggered' at the word... well, it's an argument that has been used a few times, but it stands: there are a million discreet possible 'triggers' waiting for any PTSD-sufferer, minority group, or opressed people. As a black man in rural America, who has been the victim of racial violence, I find that if I try to avoid 'triggers' or dig for offensive shit, I'm just not going to be a productive human being. I can not fathom the core of self-centered knee-jerk goosery in a person that it would take to actually think the PA crew somehow owed them an apology for that joke.
Conversely, I feel a great amount of sadness for other victims of sexual assault. It is a terrible thing to experience, and to have it effect your life on a day-to-day basis must be excrutiating.
But I truly, deeply feel that G&T's original joke in no way validates the mud that has been slung in their direction.
Does anyone really think that the butt of the joke is the rape-ee? If this type of joke is unacceptable, so is every other joke that makes fun of people who ignore others' misfortune.
Rigorous Scholarship
Even if you are talking to a girl initially just because you find her attractive and know nothing else (which is, uh, kind of the point of talking), what possible mindset is that wrong?
Are people just supposed to never interact with others? I wonder how she feels about women doing that? I, relatively recently, was hanging out with a girl just for her company and she thought it was going the romantic route when that's not really what I was after with her - does that mean she just wanted me for a personal on call penis? I don't think it does, I think it means she was interested in a relationship, but then again like I said I don't understand the mindset over at Shakesville at all. Like I'd need a giant multicolored light and sound making apparatus to attempt communication with them.
I think I have a winner, from this post on her blog:
Like, seriously, what the shit?
What.?
Read her fucking post.
I cannot understand how we even have a disagreement.
She merely thinks complimenting someone's net book is merely similar to rape. What a wonderfully balanced world view.
You keep doing this. We are not talking about generalities. There is a specific comic, using a specific context, that the writer of the blog and one of her fans has interpreted in a completely horrendous way.
If you follow the links, you'll find that they were also offended by this comic, for some reason:
Rigorous Scholarship
The joke is that "the hero", who does ignore the situation, is being an asshole (the classic reversal of the traditional trope joke). The joke is pretty much saying: "ignoring that someone is being raped is actually a terrible thing to be doing".
I get that she agrees with the user who said that, which is awful, but her own comments are pretty much just about making eye contact and that being hit on isn’t something she wants all the time.
I mean, let’s get something straight here: I think Shakesville is awful. I’m not a fan of McEwan at all. But her own comments on this particular webcomic strip aren’t that extreme.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
She just thinks the person who said the absolutely crazy things is right.
Agreeing with crazy ideas is still crazy.
Honestly, to answer someone earlier in the thread, the joke would have worked just as well if it was orphans. You'd have to go out on a limb to suggest that an orphan actually being raped by a dickwolf wasn't terrible (although my first reaction would be to laugh, since the concept of a dickwolf is so ludicrous that it's really the only reaction I can have, if a vaginawolf was devouring people I would have a similar reaction), but I think it would be just as funny because the point isn't what's happening to the victim, it's that it's horrendous and the hero doesn't give a shit
The hero's utter lack of giving shits is why it's funny
Nope.
They were offended by the comic I posted.
Here is a screenshot to prove it.
Comic number 642 is the one that I linked.
Seriously. I laughed so hard at the word 'dickwolf,' and it was a good, long laugh. The word still makes me chuckle for real. I can imagine a few people had the same reaction. And that would probably be a good motivation for making a shirt.
Could Penny Arcade sue McEwan/ Shakesville for defamation of character/ libel against their company?
In order to prove libel in court, you need three things. You need to prove the statement was false. You need to prove the statement caused harm, be it to a person or persons, a business or business interest, etc. You need to prove the statement was made without proper research conducted, and not made in private, directly to the person/persons/business.
Most of us can agree that the accusation has been levied at PA that they are rape apologists, misogynists, etc, and that those claims are both very public and very inaccurate. People have already begun to talk of refusing to attend PAX events; if enough people opt to take this route and word of mouth spreads to make even more people follow suit it could very well be financially harmful, as well as harmful to the Penny Arcade brand -- not to mention the mental health of Mike, if all of this is stressing him out for the worse. The entire set of complaints sprung from an overreaction to a very specific event and seems to willfully ignore the well documented history of the style of humor Penny Arcade is noted for -- specifically the fact that prior to this event there have been several comics that border or surpass the same topic.
It seems like enough. And I will state it again: This is a hypothetical question, being posted because I find the idea interesting as a topic for discussion. I am in no way suggesting any kind of legal action be taken. Just curious if it could be taken, in a hypothetical universe.
No.
Could.. you explain why not? I'm asking because it seems like it meets the criteria.
Also, who the fuck hits on Melissa McEwan? She doesn't seem like she'd be very pleasant to be around at all.
The last thing she needs is that kind of attention
True, and making her a legal-system martyr would be bad as well, as it would reinforce the idea that being a godamned maniac zealot is ok; I think we've got enough of that going around every else.
However, it's nice when crazy assholes suffer the consequences of flinging shit in the wrong direction.
In this case, the plaintiffs (G&T) must show malice on the part of the offenders for any recovery, even if all those elements are met. G&T in this situation are public figures not only because they are celebrities in general (PAX, Child's Play, recognition and awareness, Time 100), but also because they voluntarily injected themselves to that particular controversy and function as a public figure for those limited issues. Therefore McEwan gains the benefit of the free speech protections of NY Times v. Sullivan and G&T must show malice (knowing falsity or recklessness as to truth) with convincing clarity. I doubt they'll be able to succeed.
Of course nobody hits on her, because as soon as a man is within 10 ft of her she starts shouting at the top of her lungs "RAPER!! THAT GUYS A RAPER!! HE WANTS TO RAPE US!!! RAPER!!!!!"
Penny Arcade need to tell get a public relations officer to avoid any of this happening again. They're big enough now that they've got so much to lose, and smoeone skilled in PR could really help them in other avenues, such as awareness of Child's Play and so on.
Very well put. What "kirbybits" put in her blog about gabes personal problems could be something that G&T might take specific issue with, but I believe she removed it.
Man, what the hell is this? Do you think you're adding anything? Do you think this is clever?
I suppose. I just don't see how accusing Mike of being a rape apologist could be anything other than actual malice.
As an unrelated to this line of discussion side-note: Games press member Jim Sterling (of Destructoid) got into a back-and-forth with some other blogger this morning. This argument was wholly unrelated to anything PA related. However, feminism was brought up, Sterling was ultra-crass in his criticism of it and the blogger.
The exchange is now part of the Debacle timeline. Because it's a games related personality, and feminism. That is literally how the average person is seeing this.
FIRST FUCK COMMENT ON THAT POST
Yeah, its the comic that perpetuates the myth, not feminists taking the piss out of everything in the world that keeps people from getting laid.
I am hoping a number of papers are written about this event in the coming years; I want the word "dickwolf" enshrined in the immortal halls of academia as long as human thought is remembered.
I'm thinking she's incredibly egotistical. Hell, even enjoyable people with a modicum of self-esteem don't assume everybody's hitting on them.
mrt144. You need to fix the formatting of your post.
Melissa McEwan is so emotionally damaged that she believes every casual compliment a man makes toward a female is flirting.
I sincerely hope that her entire public persona is a deliberate troll/attention grab because otherwise that's just fucking sad.
I mean, goddamn.
This type of situation should be referenced as "The Dickwolf Dilemma" much like how "The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory" is referenced.