Dear Audi

This post contains a description of sexual assault.

Dear Audi,

I saw your new commercial the other day.

Here's how you describe it:

A slightly insecure teenager is unhappy about going to the Senior Prom without a date. But when Dad lets him borrow the new Audi S6 for the night, he gains more and more confidence with every mile, arriving at the Prom a changed young man.

Here's how I would describe it:

A teenager is getting ready to go to the prom, but he's feeling self-conscious about going alone.  His mother tries to tell him that it's fine to go alone.  His father tosses him car keys.  He drives to the prom.  (There's some odd moment here with a girl yelling at him from another car, but since I can't understand what she's saying or why, I don't know what the significance is.)  He parks in the principal's spot (bad-ass alert!) and strides into the prom.  He walks right up behind the apparent prom queen, grabs her, and kisses her.  Judging by the "wow!" sounds in the background, this is supposed to be a great moment.  The prom king (presumably the prom queen's date/boyfriend) charges over.  We next see our "hero" back in his car, now with a black eye, looking happy.  There's a brief shot of the prom queen smiling, and then a shot of the guy in the car howling at the moon in celebration/victory/triumph.

Let's replay the key moment here again: he walks up behind her, grabs her, and kisses her.

It's a crowded, noisy, busy, dark room.  She's busy speaking with her friends and doesn't see him come up from behind.  She has no idea that he's even in the room, much less directly behind her, much less about to touch her.  Suddenly, someone she doesn't realize is on the premises and hasn't had time to recognize has seized her and is holding onto her and kissing her.

This is what we call sexual assault.

There's no indication that she wants this to happen.  There's no indication that she expects this and every indication that she doesn't.  There's no indication that she even knows who he is, given the "popular girl at school is so shallow and in her own world that she doesn't even recognize the nerdy guy who sat beside her in class all year" theme we keep seeing in movies/on TV.

Even if, generally speaking, she'd like to kiss this guy, there's no real chance for her to recognize that he's the one kissing her.  It happens too quickly and with no warning.  (Is his scent so overpowering that she smells it and recognizes him immediately, as he grabs her?  This isn't an Axe commercial.)

To sum up: Guy feels insecure, guy's dad lends him a bad-ass car, guy feels more confident in himself, guy commits sexual assault, guy gets punched in the face, guy feels great about it.  Then you slap on an image of the prom queen smiling, because some complete stranger sexually assaulted her and wow, wasn't that dashing and romantic of him!

Then these words come onscreen:

Bravery.  It's what defines us.

Bravery.

Let's not play around.  You just called sexual assault brave.

It isn't brave to commit sexual assault.  It isn't daring or courageous or heroic.  It's criminal and common and wrong.

Do you know what's brave, actually?  Reporting sexual assault.  Admitting to yourself that you were sexually assaulted.  Telling someone about it.  Standing up and announcing it in public.  Testifying about it in a courtroom.  That is brave.  That is daring and courageous and heroic.

Oh, and while I have your attention: I'm not entirely thrilled with your gender stereotyping, either.  The boy's mother tries to tell him that he'll be fine, because women are nurturing like that, but it doesn't have any effect, because moms, man, they just don't understand, they're so out of touch, they don't get the harsh reality, am I right?  But the boy's father, a man of few words, a man of action, he gets it; he just tosses over those keys, and that solves everything.

I hope that you'll reconsider your disgusting advertising choices.  I hope that you'll stop promoting criminal behavior as romantic.  I hope that you'll learn the difference between "bravery" and "sexual assault."  Coincidentally, Liss at Shakesville opened up a discussion thread the other day about bravery.  Here's a sample comment from whistlewren:

I was brave when Ieft an abusive relationship of seven years last year. 

I had been trying for years. I thought it was just leaving, actually packing my bags and finding a place of safety, that I needed to be brave for. And I did it! I left! I was ecstatic! I was shaking uncontrollably the whole time but I got out that door, and got myself and my two kids to a friend's house. 

Then came all those other things I hadn't counted on. Going to court to apply for restraining order. Going back to court to stand in the same room as my abuser to defend the restraining order. Finding legal advice I could afford. Finding a refuge to stay in when threats to my friend from my ex made it unsafe for us to stay there. Commuting 2 hours to work via public transport each way to work with two kids under five because the only refuge that had space was many suburbs away. Fighting in court for supervision on access visits when my ex started custody proceedings. Not jumping whenever my phone rang. Facing friends, other parents at school, my boss, all of whom now knew everything. Finding a therapist I could afford for my daughter and for me. Having to see and talk to my abuser every week at handover after the supervision period ended and he got unsupervised access. Doing all this while trying to keep up with my study, negotiate extra hours and pay, getting my daughters epilepsy diagnosed and dealing with PTSD, and the general panic of making ends meet, finding childcare, getting more temporary housing... 

It has been a big year :-) I never thought I could do even a half of what I have done. I learnt early on in the year that bravery isn't necessarily about not being scared. Sometimes it's about being so scared you can hardly move, your limbs are shaking so much, but you just breathe as best as you can, do it anyways, and collapse in a heap later on when it is safe to do so. Preferably with friends, and chocolate.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear Blizzard

Misogynist slur ahead, "joking" reference to sexual assault.

Dear Blizzard,

It's been a lovely day on the WOW forums.

Someone started a thread called, "Phrases/Quotes that you really like."

Guess what the very first reply was?

"I'm gonna ook you in the dooker!"

Guess what also made the first page?

''Watch your clever mouth, !@#$%.'' - Garrosh Hellscream

Who's Garrosh, again?  Oh, right, the Warchief of the Horde.  He wasn't the warchief when he called Sylvanas a bitch, but I guess that's the kind of misogyny Thrall was looking for when he had to decide whom to promote.

You throw in these lines for reasons of your own, but your playerbase has a ball with them for reasons of its own.  A misogynist playerbase finds a line like that in-game and is thrilled.  You've just given them license to call Sylvanas a bitch.  The thinking may go something like this: Sure, maybe Garrosh is crude, but he's right, isn't he?  She really is a bitch.  It must be okay to call women bitches, right?  You know, if they deserve it.  Now it's up to the player to decide what kind of behavior warrants the term "bitch."  You may or may not be surprised by where each player draws the line.

As for ooking people in the dooker, ha ha ha.  Threats of sexual assault are hilarious.  Rape jokes are hilarious.  Obviously, it's perfectly cool that you no longer censor the word "rape" on the forums, because we're certainly all mature enough to handle sexual assault responsibly.

Some players brought up good lines in that thread.  Funny stuff, dramatic stuff, some moments your writers are probably very proud of.

Wouldn't you rather players look back and reminisce over "I am the lucid dream" and Medivh's farewell from WC3, than, "Watch your clever mouth, bitch?"

I hope that you would.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear NBC

Dear NBC,

I've heard about your new show, "1600 Penn."

I don't know much about it yet.  What I do know, I'm not thrilled about.

The cast is very white.  Seven white people and one black man whose character is described as "savvy" and "loyal."  Thrilling, to have the lone black character work for the powerful white man in charge.

Here in the real world, the people living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are black.  Now, I wouldn't necessarily love a current sitcom about a black First Family, because I wouldn't trust it not to be read as a commentary on the Obamas.  However, you could create a more diverse cast by adding more roles or by making the First Family multi-racial.

On the show's home page, I see the same image twice, once as a stand-alone shot and once as a video still.  It's a shot of the characters with the "fat" eldest son comically breaking the table he's sitting on, presumably by being too heavy for it.  The other characters are laughing and looking dismayed.  I would hope that a new sitcom that hasn't even aired yet would bring some fresh comedy ideas, but "fat people are too heavy for the world around them and frequently break furniture with their huge fat asses and it's extra hilarious because they should know better but ha ha ha fat people are too stupid to realize how fat they are" is a theme we've all seen too many times to count.  It's not new.  It's not interesting.  It's old and tired and stale, and the fact that you're relying on such overdone tropes for your show's advertising tells me that you don't have anything better to offer.

Largely white cast with one token person of color in a subservient role.  Fat jokes.  It's not looking good.

The friend who alerted me to your new show said that it's being promoted as NBC's answer to "Modern Family."  Here are a few things "Modern Family" has that you might want to consider:

Three people of color.  Two gay characters.  An out gay actor in one of those roles.  Fat characters who make it through many an episode without breaking furniture with their enormous fat asses.

Please add more diversity and tone down the fat jokes.  I'd really like to have a new sitcom to add to my to-watch list, but as things stand, I'll give "1600 Penn" a pass.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear Feminists

Dear Feminists,

Thank you.

I experienced street harassment the other day.

Because of where I've lived (the middle of nowhere) and how I've lived (like a recluse), street harassment has been uncommon for me.  I'm not used to dealing with it.  However, I've spent enough time among feminists on-line that I've heard it discussed and dissected.  I've learned about other people's experiences as they've shared their own stories.  I know what street harassment is and how it works.

Thanks to you, when it happened to me this week, I was prepared for it.  I recognized it and understood it.  Before, it would've completely unnerved me and sent me into an anxious tailspin.  Instead, it was, in the moment, something of a non-event.

Thank you, feminists.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear White People

Dear White People,

You know that situation where you're talking with a person of color and the topic of tanning comes up and you say something to the effect of, "When I tan, my skin is as dark as yours!"

Stop that.

Please, please stop.

One of my friends (let's call her V) is a black woman.  Her skin is a chocolate brown shade.  White people insist on telling her all about how their skin becomes as dark as hers when they tan.  They say this as if they expect her to bond with them over a shared skin tone, as if she'll merrily reply with, "Oh, that means that we have something tremendously important in common!  Obviously, you understand the black experience so much more than other white people do!  You and I are forever bonded by our dark skin!"

In V's particular case, these white people are lying.  At the very least they're exaggerating.  However, even if she weren't chocolate brown, even if her skin were a light caramel shade, it would still be rude, insensitive, and racist for someone to try to bond with her over some perceived shared experience of color.

If you, for some reason of your own, insist on talking about the various shades of brown your skin changes to when you tan, please stop trying to relate that particular color to the people around you.  Simply determine on your own how you want to describe that color.  Try using color names relating to food and/or trees, like mocha and mahogany and cappuccino or something.  If you can talk about your own skin tones as if they aren't a commentary on someone else's, that would be terrific.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear Blizzard

Use of homophobic slurs ahead.

Dear Blizzard,

Do you remember how I wrote to you a week or so ago to ask why you stopped censoring the word "rape" on the forums?

I didn't even realize, at the time, that you'd removed other words from the filter.

For example: fag.

I don't want to repeat my entire argument from last time, but here it is in short: You filtered the word in the first place because it's a disgusting, homophobic insult.  By censoring it, you discouraged your players from using it and signaled to them that it's not an appropriate word to toss around in idle or angry conversation.  By removing it from the filter, you're giving your players license to use the word whenever and however they wish.  "Never mind, go ahead and say it!  It's cool with us!"

You say that you take harassment seriously.  You claim that players aren't supposed to harass each other.  How do you imagine the word "fag" coming into the conversation in a way that isn't homophobic?  In what context do you anticipate players using that word in a sentence in a positive, friendly way?  And does that imagined context counterbalance all of the negative, nasty, homophobic uses?

I suppose that you'll suggest that if we find someone using homophobic language, we should report that person, and you'll handle it.  As usual, the onus is on the players to clean up the community, and you take a step back from responsibility.  You do realize, of course, that we were already reporting people for homophobic language.  We've been doing that all along.  Before, however, it seemed like we had your support in that; you were discouraging bad habits, censoring the most abused words, using your influence to squelch common, egregious homophobia.  Now, we're in this on our own, and if we don't report it, you won't do a thing about it.  You won't even bother to censor the words.  Remind me, again, how much effort that took on your part?

"Just report the offender," you say.  We all know, after all, how responsive and efficient the reporting system is.

I would love to understand the thought processes behind these decisions.  "It was wrong of us to discourage our players from using homophobic slurs and making rape jokes.  We should let their contempt run free!  Who cares if that makes the gaming community even more hostile to marginalized populations?  We've been using our influence to make WOW more inclusive, and that was obviously a mistake!"

The censor works automatically.  It's a "set it and forget it" sort of system.  Why not leave it alone?  Why make the decision to remove words from the filter?  Who had this idea?  Who decided what to include and what to remove?  I certainly don't want to sit down with a list of misogynist terms and racist slurs and see what makes it through the filter, but I would love to know which other delightful little words you've given your blessing lately.

With love,
Frank Lee

P.S. Again, that little problem I had?  Still a problem.

Dear Blizzard

Notice for discussion of misuse of the word "rape."

Dear Blizzard,

Anyone with a subscription to the game can post on the World of Warcraft general forums.  There's no "are you a decent human being" test to pass in order to gain posting privileges.  While the rules state that certain words and behaviors aren't allowed, you know that some posters will break those rules.  So you gave us a profanity filter.

It was one of your better ideas.  Knowing your playerbase as you do, you didn't stick to the typical curse words.  You also included words like "homosexual," because some of your players are homophobic douchebags.  You also included obvious racial slurs, because some of your players are racist douchebags.  You also included "rape."

I was glad that you chose to censor "rape."  Gamers use it often as a metaphor for general in-game violence. Putting it behind the censor indicated that you didn't want it to be used that way, that you understood that to be an inappropriate and harmful use of a word with great significance to victims and their allies.  It seemed as if you were exerting your influence against misogyny.  I appreciated the effort; it's good to discourage the use of "rape" as a win/loss metaphor.

I've played WOW for years and visited the forums for years.  "Rape" was censored to the extent that we couldn't type "grape" or "drape" or "therapist" without tripping the filter, and forum regulars knew that.  It was understood that "rape" was censored.

Suddenly, it's not.

A little while ago, I noticed that "drape" and "grape" weren't censored anymore.  Cool, I thought.  Looks like the filter's more sensitive now, and can differentiate between "rape" and other variations.

And then I read a post where someone claimed to have been "raped by tigers" in-game.

And I noticed that the word "raped" was right there, uncensored.

You removed "rape" from the filter.

I could try to interpret this generously and assume that your reasoning was, "Hey, our players are mature and sensitive people, they don't need to be censored like this, we aren't giving them enough credit."  But we both know that's not true.

No.  No, your playerbase hasn't changed.  The word "rape" hasn't changed.  Common misuse of it hasn't changed.  The only thing that's changed is your stance.

By changing your stance, you're signaling to your players that it's okay to use "rape" as a metaphor.  You're letting everyone know that there's no need to be sensitive to victims.

You were doing the right thing.  Then you stopped doing the right thing, turned around, and said, "LOL!  Never mind!  Ugh, what was up with that?!  Why be so sensitive?  Let's go rape some elves!"

You just gave forum posters your blessing to be more hostile to rape victims (and more hostile to populations already under threat of rape, like women and gay men and trans people, all of whom already deal with plenty of other hostile bullshit in the gaming community).  You just removed that minor check that might have discouraged rape jokes and made some posters and readers think twice about rape as a metaphor.  You've mentioned that only a minority of players visits the forums, but even a small percentage of people in such a popular game is a significant number of people, and those forums are busy.  Even if only a small percentage of players visits the forums, turn that around: how many people reading and posting on the forums play the game?  How will this new freedom to misuse "rape" affect conversations in-game?

It would be one thing if you'd never taken a stance at all.  Instead, you chose to take a position and then reverse it.  In that reversal, you sent a very clear message.  Maybe it wasn't the one you intended to convey.

I hope that you'll reconsider.

With love,
Frank Lee

P.S. That other little problem I have still hasn't been resolved.

Dear Good Men Project

Dear Good Men Project,

I'd never heard of you before Jill at Feministe mentioned you in a series of blog posts I linked to here.  Reading those posts and hearing other people's experiences with you in comments, I came up with a cloudy but troubling idea of who you are and what you're about.

Suddenly, it became much more clear.

Jill posted a link to a Twitter conversation involving one of your people, Tom Matlack.  She called him your "head honcho," and I see that he's named on Wikipedia as your founder.

Here's what he says in the middle of that Twitter conversation:

@sjjphd my privilege? I grew up with nothing. My parents didn't have enough money. You have no idea what you are talking about.

He's speaking with feminists in a conversation relevant to gender studies, and he doesn't understand what the word "privilege" means in that context.

I don't think that you can get very far in a progressive conversation without examining your privilege.  I don't think that a feminist man who doesn't understand what privilege is can actually be feminist.

If you haven't examined your privilege, if you haven't put forth some effort to cast a critical eye over the patriarchy and notice how you benefit from it, then you don't genuinely understand the deeply entrenched systems of oppression operating in this culture.  If you don't understand how men benefit from sexism, or how white people benefit from racism, etc., you don't understand the patriarchy.  Flailing around in social justice or gender studies circles without understanding the basics of the conversation generally means that you're hindering more than you're helping.

Someone who doesn't understand what "privilege" means in this context can't participate in the conversation in any meaningful, productive way.

He absolutely cannot lead the conversation.

Yet Tom Matlack is your founder.

As far as I can tell, he's male, white, and currently quite wealthy.  I don't know him very well, but let's say for the sake of argument that he grew up cis and straight.  As a man, he benefits from sexism.  As a white person, he benefits from racism.  As a cis person, he benefits from transphobia.  As a straight person, he benefits from homophobia.  And when a feminist in a conversation on gender says the word "privilege," his immediate response is: I grew up poor.  I wasn't wealthy.  As if the advantage of wealth is the only advantage of importance.  As if the economic class we're born into is the only privilege of relevance.

He has no idea, then, how being white has helped him in life.  How being a man has been a benefit.  How being cis and/or being straight is an advantage in a transphobic, homophobic society.  (That's not even to get into TAB privilege, thin privilege, and the rest.)

If you don't understand privilege, you don't understand oppression.  If you don't understand the kyriarchy, you don't understand what progressives are fighting for, or why.  How can you ask what it is to be a good man if you don't understand what being a man means in the patriarchy?  How far can that conversation among men progress if you don't begin with a fundamental understanding of your own shared privilege?

It's a truth that the patriarchy hurts men, too.  Yet a man who doesn't realize that he benefits from the patriarchy by virtue of his very maleness is ignorant and needs to approach gender studies from the very beginning.  A man who doesn't know how he benefits from sexism doesn't know what sexism is.

Your founder isn't at the "What does it mean to be a good man?" portion of the conversation.  He's at the "What does it mean to be a man?" portion.

What sorts of men is the Good Men Project for?  How can you invite all kinds of men to the conversation if you don't understand the dynamics of oppression?  If Tom Matlack doesn't understand his own white privilege, how does he include men of color?  How does he reach out to them to share their experiences and discuss their issues if he doesn't understand racism?

Let's go back to the tweet I quoted above.  During Tom Matlack's conversation with other feminists, he said something which drew Sarah J. Jackson (@sjjphd) into the discussion.  It does not thrill me to notice that while the other ongoing conversations overlap, his conversation with Sarah J. Jackson involves no one else.  I wish that she didn't have to go it alone, that others had spoken up with her as they supported each other.

For context, she's a woman of color who describes herself on Twitter as an "Asst. Prof. Researching & Teaching about Media Narratives of Race, Gender & Political Protest."  Here's the comment she replied to and their ensuing conversation.

@hugoschwyzer do you assume all black people are felons since they commit more crimes on average than white people? http://t.co/nhVHnbfv
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 08:20:33 AM PST 

@TMatlack This analogy is SO spurious. Please don't use it tom argue ur point if u want POC to have any part in what ur doing. @hugoschwyzer
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 09:36:51 AM PST 

@sjjphd @hugoschwyzer groups aren't guilty. Individuals are.
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:13:18 AM PST 

@TMatlack men=historically privileged, POC=historically oppressed. Comparing stereotypes 2 make point=inaccurate, unproductive, & ingnorant.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:22:56 AM PST 

@TMatlack It's cool 2 get caught up in a heated debate but using false racial hyperbole in it? Your privilege is showing & I know ur better.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:25:04 AM PST 

@TMatlack And that's with all due respect to the arc of what you're doing at GMP. Sensational & spurious discourse helps nothing.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:26:56 AM PST 

@sjjphd calling all men rapists or all POC criminals equally sexist/racist IMO. I am a white man. Does that make me guilty ?
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:27:36 AM PST 

@TMatlack It is NOT equal because -isms have 2 do w/ the structural power grps historically & contemporarily have over others.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:30:16 AM PST 

@sjjphd my privilege? I grew up with nothing. My parents didn't have enough money. You have no idea what you are talking about.
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:32:50 AM PST 

@TMatlack Last time I checked men weren't continuously structurally disenfranchised. You're def guilty of is a lack of racial sensitivity.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:33:13 AM PST 

@TMatlack I was talking about white privilege Tom, it exists and even poor white people can experience it.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:34:17 AM PST 

@sjjphd btw if you actually look at my writing I have been the taking most on GMP about race and sex tracking, the real stuff not judgement
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:35:07 AM PST 

@TMatlack As a POC who wants 2 support what ur doing at GMP I was simply requesting u not use racially insensitive language to make a point.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:36:10 AM PST 

@sjjphd read my work on race, prison etc before you go calling me racist please.
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:37:08 AM PST 

@TMatlack I know! Which is why I was suprised u made the comparison u did. I know u know better. Why the defensiveness?
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:37:33 AM PST 

@TMatlack HOLY SHIT I DID NOT CALL YOU A RACIST. I said the racial comparison is spurious, which it is. Your defensiveness is shocking me.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:39:06 AM PST

@TMatlack & it is possible 4 ppl not 2 be racist & still be capable of saying less than accurate/sensitive things re race. #thoughtyoudcare
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:43:44 AM PST 

@sjjphd I was being sensitive to the many black men in prison who feel they were a victim of racism.
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:47:52 AM PST 

@TMatlack Um? That's not how it came across. It seemed u were comparing black oppression 2 stereotyping of men. Not the same but #Igiveup
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:50:49 AM PST 

@TMatlack 4 the record I greatly respect what u do. Sad u can't hear from a POC & some1 who studies race that ur comparison was problematic.
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 10:53:58 AM PST 

@sjjphd I don't believe I ever criticized *you*. You tried to educate me on race/gender which I find demeaning since I have my own views.
TMatlack 15/Dec/2011 10:58:29 AM PST 

@TMatlack U find fact men aren't oppressed grp & black ppl are, & my trying 2 alert u in good conscience abt prob w/ comparison demeaning?
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 11:42:43 AM PST 

@TMatlack #Icantanymore but hope ppl read ur friend Steve's & my pieces on having convos abt race: http://t.co/1h7Pxyci http://t.co/Q2q87X5G
sjjphd 15/Dec/2011 11:44:27 AM PST

The entire back-and-forth echoes countless conversations playing out all across the sphere of feminism and social justice.  She points out that his language is harmful to a marginalized population.  She takes pains to compliment him, to soften her critique, to make it a point to acknowledge his efforts.  He replies with ignorant statements.  She tries to educate him and explain what she means (all knowledge he should already have).  He doesn't thank her, doesn't agree with her, but instead explains that he's already got all of this stuff down pat and has been doing the real work on these issues all along ("the real stuff not judgement").  He plays the "I'm not racist" game.  He continues to insist that he's done nothing wrong, that he's entirely in the right, and that he can't be educated.  She continues to try to explain while still offering compliments.  He refuses to listen ("I have my own views").  She gets tired.  He stops responding.  She gives up.

She shouldn't have to work this hard to communicate with someone who considers himself a feminist ("@jennpozner I didn't take it personally. I consider myself a feminist. But apparently that word has many meanings.") and a tireless worker on issues of racism.  He should be her ally.  She starts off with "please" and spends the entire conversation offering him cookies.  She points out, for the record, that she's a person of color who studies race.  She explains all of her points in a way that anyone who's written about race should easily grasp.  Yet he doesn't seem to hear a word she says.  He has his "own views," and he clings to them until he exhausts her and she gives up.

He doesn't know what privilege is, and he doesn't seem to care.  When a member of a marginalized population asks him to reconsider his analogies, he defends himself and argues back without seeming to accept anything she says.  Not once does he agree with any of her points.  Instead, he implies that he's doing the real work while she's not ("the real stuff not judgment" in a conversation where he clearly feels judged), he directs her twice to read his work (when she's already praised his project), he calls her comments "demeaning," and he says, literally, "You have no idea what you are talking about."

He doesn't know the basics of gender studies.  He doesn't know the basics of racism.  He doesn't know what "privilege" is (either the word itself or the general concept).  He doesn't respond well to criticism.

How can the Good Men Project progress when the man at the top thinks that he knows it all already and isn't open to learning?

As I said earlier, if you want talk about what it means to be a good man, you need to start by talking about what it means to be a man.  Part of being a man in a patriarchy means benefiting from sexism.  Understanding how you benefit from sexism means understanding privilege.  You have to start somewhere; try these two posts by Liss at Shakesville.

A final tweet from Tom Matlack:

it's the good "mens" project. women are welcome but the point is to inspire men to be good.

Like many others, I would be very happy to have more good men around.  Most of us would be glad to help.  Many of us have been trying to help.  And when we try, bringing our experience and expertise and years of study to the table, we're told things like, "You have no idea what you're talking about."  Is that really what a "good man" would say?

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear Rape Apologists

Discussion of rape, rape culture.

Dear Rape Apologists,

At Feministe and Shakesville lately I've seen discussion of a site called the Good Men Project, where rape apologists and friends of rapists and actual rapists are having a lively conversation about how rape is such an abstract thing, and consent is such a tricky thing, that it's easy for good, well-meaning, decent guys to be rapists.

(More on Feministe: one two three.)

Jill and Liss and tons of feminists all over since forever have been discussing and explaining why all of that is bullshit.  As you can see from the linked posts, studies and stats and everyday experience demonstrate that's not how it works.  But here's my question: what about the men?

Yeah, I went there.

You see, arguing on a site called the Good Men Project that "Nice Guys Commit Rape Too" (actual title!) is a really nasty insult to all of the actual good, nice, decent men out there.  Talking about how it's so easy for nice guys to be rapists and how good men slip up, too, lumps good men who've never raped anyone into the same category with actual rapists.

This guy is a rapist:

When I sit down and think about it, it seems like I’ve accepted a certain amount of rape as the cost of doing business, and so have most of the people I know.

Compare to:

Last summer, I was at a party and had two drinks, which is a lot for me because I drink very occasionally (2-3 times a year) and am also on medications that amplify alcohol’s effects. I was half passed out on the couch, and a dear friend of mine, a man who I know has in the past been sexually attracted to me, came in and found me on the couch. What did he do? Did he stick his hand up his shirt? Did he get on top of me? He’d been drinking, after all! No, he fucking got me a glass of water and talked to me until I was awake enough to rejoin the goddamn party.

My brother hung out with a really wild crowd a few years back, and after partying with them one of the roommates told me I was welcome to go crash in the bed downstairs. What he didn’t tell me was that that bed had an owner who showed up a couple of hours later very, very drunk. I woke up to the guy saying “alright!” and crawling in next to me; he threw an arm around my waste, cuddled up to my back and promptly fell asleep. The next morning he brought up the idea of having sex over a glass of water. Turns out the creep who’d told me where I could sleep undisturbed told him he had a girl waiting in his room for him. He wanted to get laid, was informed that he had an invitation for sex, but because he wasn’t a rapist he put the matter on hold till I was fit to respond. He missed out getting his dick wet, but he was also spared the guilt and moral confusion that these accidental rapists claim to be so tortured by.

I drank myself blind when I was young. I drank until I had multi-day hangovers, and I was drinking in bars with other people who were–wait for it–also drinking. Some of these people, in retrospect, almost certainly had drinking problems. They were drunk, I was drunk, here’s what happened: we made stupid jokes, fell off barstools, flirted outrageously. On one occasion, I threw up and passed out in the bathroom (I know, I know: I’m very sophisticated). And yet–I know this is amazing, it’s going to blow your minds–not one of my drinking companions raped me. Not once. Not the bartender who found me in the ladies’ room and drove me home. Not the guy I had a crush on, whom I had to call once to find out how I’d gotten home from CBGB. Not the 6’2″ amateur boxer who was the bouncer. Not any of them.

Your narrative of "rape is a terrible thing that good guys accidentally fall into" and "drinking makes consent too blurry for anyone to negotiate ever" and "mixed signals" and all of the rest of it is disgusting, contemptible bullshit.  The difference between the tales of "I had a wild night of drinking and dancing and good times" and "I had a wild night of drinking and dancing and then someone raped me" doesn't hinge on the number of drinks, it hinges on the number of rapists.

Good guys aren't rapists.  Nice guys aren't rapists.  Rapists are rapists.

As EG explains:

And I’m not saying that all of these guys were good guys. Some of them were real assholes. But you know what they weren’t, at least with respect to me? Rapists. It’s a pretty low bar to clear.

With love,
Frank Lee

Dear Blizzard

Note for racial slurs.

Dear Blizzard,

I'm having some trouble with your customer service.

The other day, I was wasting time on the World of Warcraft website.  I decided to see what was going on in the PVP world and which classes were on top.  Looking over the top-ranked teams and players, I noticed something deeply unpleasant.

I contacted customer service.  (I'll post my initial complaint in full here, in the interest of accuracy.  I'll break it up into paragraphs for easier readability.  Names in bold if you want to skim.)

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/pvp/arena/rampage/3v3 

On this page, there are several arena team names which are completely inappropriate and break naming regulations. Rank #21 "iskall suk my deek" from Illidan, rank #22 "purpledrank is fo nagas" from Illidan, rank #23 "We pop Cherrys" from Kirin Tor, and rank #28 "iwnaputmybeefintourtaco" from Stormreaver. While you're posting highly ranked teams for the world to admire, please make sure that they're not a disgrace and embarrassment to the entire community. 

In the 2v2 bracket, rank #8 "shat on ur face" from Stormreaver, rank #18 "Helen Keller VS Traffic" from Stormreaver, rank #18 "cap yo shiz" from Kirin Tor, rank #24 "DAYUM DATASS" from Stormreaver, rank #35 "team nignig" from Stormreaver, and rank #44 "naga needs points" from Illidan.

In the 5v5 bracket, rank #22 "Shytsnmasterbations" from Stormreaver and rank #35 "Fandom Ruckin Comp" from Illidan.

On the "Rated Battlegrounds" page, there is #9 Jackslowfuk from Blackrock and #15 Rapiesroofie from Mannoroth, not to mention all of the player names listed which end in "LOL" or otherwise break the game's naming conventions. Please enforce your own rules for your own game.

Then I wrote this post.

My support ticket received a reply (my emphasis in bold):

Hey there! 

Sir Game Master Ranlim here. I hope this message reaches you in good spirits!  

Thank you for taking the time to submit a petition about those arena teams names. At Blizzard, we encourage and appreciate the role of the gaming community in keeping World of Warcraft a safe and enjoyable environment for all participants. ^_^ 

I want to let you know I am going to be personally investigating this mere moments from now! Following said investigation, I will take all necessary and appropriate actions to address this matter, as determined by our policies (which you can see here: https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/policy).  

With the release of Patch 4.3.4 there is another way to report violation that will also provide a detail contextual report that will assist us to take appropriate action on them. This can be done by using the in-game right-click report option.  

To report bad language, a bad name, spamming, or cheating:
1. Right-click the player's name in chat.
2. Select Report Player For
3. Select the appropriate category for your report. 

To report a bad name or cheating you may also right-click report using the player's portrait. To report a player this way:
1. Right-click the player's portrait
2. Select Report Player For
3. Select the appropriate category for your report. 

Thanks again for your help! It means a lot to us. <3 

Regards,
Game Master Ranlim
Customer Services
Blizzard Entertainment
www.blizzard.com/support

Great, I thought.  Ranlim's on it.  He'll take care of it.

I waited.

I checked the PVP pages again.

The names were still there.

I re-opened the ticket, keeping it simple:

They're still there.

I came back later.  The names were still there.  I checked my ticket.  (Emphasis mine.)

Helllo :) 

Once again we will need you to do this below in order to action these players as we do not take action on names like this and it needs to be sent in differently. 

Please do the following for the names bellow. 

To report bad language, a bad name, spamming, or cheating:
1. Right-click the player’s name in chat.
2. Select Report Player For
3. Select the appropriate category for your report. 

To report a bad name or cheating you may also right-click report using the player's portrait. To report a player this way:
1. Right-click the player’s portrait
2. Select Report Player For
3. Select the appropriate category for your report. 

While no response to the report will be possible, rest assured that we will investigate and take appropriate action to address the issue as they come in. 

Game Master Pyroidia
Blizzard Entertainment

"Right-click the player's name in chat?"  "Right-click report using the player's portrait?"  Those are in-game actions only; my problem is with names listed on the website.  I made that clear; my initial complaint begins with a link to the arena teams page.  At this point, I began to doubt the sincerity of that soothing "rest assured that we will investigate and take appropriate action to address the issue as they come in."  I was not assured.

Please read my initial ticket more carefully. These are names on the website. I cannot right-click to report names featured on the website; I am not in-game. The first CSR who replied to the ticket claimed to be looking into it. What happened to that?

As you can imagine, after that your customer service representatives began to read more closely and provided more accurate replies.  (Emphasis mine.)

Greetings!  

If you encounter such names in the game itself, negatively effecting your gameplay experience, please report them to us. 

We cannot accept such reports from examinations of the armory. The opinion of a realm itself, and players who encounter such names from within the game are the required impetus for our investigation into whether a name is requiring a change or is a vioaltion.  

An additional technical reason for this workflow, is the beta functionality of the armory itself. It is not updated regulary or instantly (even requiring actual characters to log into the game before an update occurs often times), meaning such reports via 'armory hunting' are at times out of date or innacurate.  

Thank you for your time and patience. Should you need further assistance, please hit the Need more help button below. For any game play questions, please consider visiting our official game forums. 

We now have a one stop shop for all your customer service needs. Ever need to review how a petition was handled? Submit one out of game? Stop by your new 'Support' section of Bnet today to see all the new features available! 

Game Master Mykyroro
Customer Services
Blizzard Entertainment

Oops!  No, instead, I was accused of "armory-hunting."

The link I supplied at the very beginning of my first ticket was not to the armory.  I didn't have to "hunt" through anything to see those names.  They're showcased by you in the main body of your website.  They're the top-ranked PVP teams and players featured in the PVP section under "community."  I didn't look them up; you showed them to me.  You offered them for all of the world to see as the kinds of players we should strive to emulate and overcome.

I don't blame the Game Masters specifically.  I don't blame Pyroidia or Mykyroro for their poor customer service.  I blame you and the corporate policies you set in place and the corporate culture you establish.

You should have a watchdog system set up to catch at least some of the worst names.  While I agree with encouraging the use of the "right-click to report" feature, you should allow GMs to accept other kinds of reports as well.  If someone with an atrocious name runs past me in-game and disappears or logs out before I finish right-clicking and reporting, I should still be able to report that name.  How many reports does it take to get a GM's attention?  Names with obvious racial slurs should only have to be reported once before you take action.  I don't believe that your GMs have poor reading comprehension; I believe that they're rushed, harried, overworked, and too intently focused on closing tickets to be effective at their jobs, and I can only guess that it's because you're emphasizing closed ticket rates over genuine customer service.  Do you see why that's maybe a problem?

You rely on your players to clean up the game for you instead of taking an active approach to it yourself.  You install a new feature and then won't allow any other method of communication to be used.  You set up RP naming conventions and then don't enforce them, and when we ask you to, we're ignored.

In the last GM's message to me, I was instructed to "hit the Need more help button below."  Handy advice, but that proved to be impossible.  Someone closed my ticket so that I cannot reply or re-open it.  If I want any hope of action on your part, I'll have to start all over from the beginning.  Is that really the best method of customer service?  Discouraging us until we give up?

I don't know what happened to the first GM's efforts to help.  I don't know why the conversation deteriorated to accusations of "armory hunting."

I do know that "team nignig" is still proudly listed as a highly ranked team, though.  I suppose that's not a problem, right?  According to your GMs, you need "the opinion of a realm itself" to decide whether a name's inappropriate or not, and you couldn't possibly tell, without taking a realm-wide poll, whether or not the name should be changed.

That's the worst of this.  The racist, misogynistic element of gamer culture is loud and proud.  You know that it's a problem, and I would hope that you would want to counteract it, to make cleaning it up a priority.  The more welcoming gaming is to more kinds of people, the more subscribers you'll gain, right?  But when staring proof of it right in the face, when being asked to clean it up, your employees are too busy insisting on irrelevant protocol to help.

That leaves the racism and misogyny of gamer culture featured on your website for all to see.  Because as far as you're concerned, properly filling out form 32, section B, paragraph 5 is more important than censoring racial slurs.

Or do you think that "purpledrank is fo nagas" genuinely refers to the in-game humanoid and "iwnaputmybeefintourtaco" is a compliment?

With love,
Frank Lee