There’s an article making the rounds right now called To My Someday Daughter. The articles takes the form of a letter from gamer Geordie Tait to a daughter he may someday have, apologizing to her for the ways gaming culture will ostracize her, punish her and just generally treat her like crap – unless some things change between now and then, of course.
Tait zeroes in on a recent incident in the gaming community: Gizmodo recently published an article in which one of their interns, Alyssa Bereznak, discussed feeling duped by a man she met through an online dating service because his profile didn’t mention that he was a hardcore gamer – in fact, a champion gamer with many gamer fans. Bereznak talked about quizzing him to determine that he gamed often and gaming was a big part of his life, and that was when she lost interest. In response, many members of the gaming community called her all manner of gendered slurs, harped on how “shallow” she was, and just generally punished her for suggesting their champion wasn’t a good catch. [ETA: Bareznak did not name him in her article (found here). Gizmodo later edited the article to include his name, for reasons I cannot fathom. Any comments criticizing Bareznak for publicly naming him will be deleted, even though it's perfectly understandable why people are confused, because it won't make for a worthwhile comment thread if there are lots of comments about something that never happened, followed by lots of comments clarifying what did happen.]
Except Jon Finkel, the gaming champion she briefly dated. According to Tait, he never put her down as a person for deciding he wasn’t her type. I’ll have more to say on this in a minute. [ETA: based on this, Finkel may well be an actual nice guy as opposed to a Nice Guy (tm). The article title comes from my feeling that the gamers who punished Bareznak see him as a Nice Guy (tm) and therefore one of their own kind, and is not meant to impugn Finkel as a Nice Guy (tm).]
Here’s the thing: sexual freedom means you get to choose who you date. If you choose to date only within your race, then even if that’s a racist choice, sexual freedom demands that you be allowed to make that choice. If you refuse to date people who aren’t conventionally gorgeous, that’s your business. And if you don’t want to date gamers because you believe they will put gaming way ahead of you, then even if you’re wrong about that, it’s still your sexual choice. And you know why? Because the only person who stands to lose or gain from your fussiness is you.
In business situations, the law is intended to force bigots to hire qualified, quality workers no matter how they feel about those workers’ races, beliefs, orientations, etc. This is because people need jobs to feed themselves – it’s a matter of survival. It’s also because employment biases tend to be widespread, so it’s not like a worker rejected for his race can just go to another employer and expect a fair shake. Dating, on the other hand, is not a matter of survival. Nobody ever died of not dating. And while one person may refuse to date gamers, chances are someone else will consider your gaming a neutral or even positive factor.
Basically, your right to date is trumped by someone else’s right to pick and choose who they will date. This is really an issue of safety as well as sexual freedom: if someone you’re dating has no boundaries, they might hurt you physically, steal from you, deliberately chip away at your sense of self-worth, isolate you from friends and family, persuade you to make big life choices you’ll later regret (such as moving to a new city or giving up a career opportunity you really wanted), etc. Your dating choices don’t just impact your love life; they can potentially impact your whole future.
Finkel understood this. He may have disagreed philosophically with the way she seems to have painted all gamers with one brushstroke (as do I), but he managed to separate that from her right to pick and choose who she will date. He also managed not to take her rejection personally.
But now let’s look at the other side. I have to say that Bereznak’s article is inflammatory as far as I’m concerned, and had she left something like this snippet as a comment on this site, it would have been deleted by a mod based on the first sentence alone:
Just like you’re obligated to mention you’re divorced or have a kid in your online profile, shouldn’t someone also be required to disclose any indisputably geeky world championship titles?
I later found out that Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people I sort of know, including one of my co-workers. Mothers, warn your daughters! This could happen to you. You’ll think you’ve found a normal bearded guy with a job, only to end up sharing goat cheese with a guy who takes you to a one-man show based on Jeffrey Dahmer’s life story.
Let’s break this down. More than likely, Finkel was neglecting to mention this facet of his life because he’s had negative knee-jerk reactions to it before, which are probably based entirely on stereotypes. But Bareznak treats this as a deception rather than a strategy for negotiating your way around stereotyping (the original version of the article said “This is what happens when you lie on your profile” – it has since been edited to “leave things out of your profile). By that logic, if Barenzak has ever been overweight, which means all those fat cells are still there just waiting to balloon up again even if she’s slim now, she should be sure to put that on her profile so that fat-phobic men can avoid her. And for heaven’s sake, if you’re a “feminist”, you should put that on your profile so that people who think “feminist” means “man-hating woman with butch appearance” can be sure to avoid you, even if you don’t hate men at all and look quite feminine. I mean, it’s up to all of us to protect stereotype thinkers from being confronted with the people they stereotype! Won’t someone please think of the stereotypers?
I do think the gaming community had reason to take offense at her thinking on this. The problem was that they conflated her thinking with her rejection of Finkel, and punished her for rejecting him – as if all would have been well if she’d just continued to go out with him, thinking perhaps, “Well, maybe this is an exceptional gamer, even if all the rest of them are immature, socially maladjusted people who aren’t worth knowing.” It’s as if gamers didn’t really care what she thought of them, so long as she puts out, so it was the not putting out that really bothered them. And that’s familiar, sexist territory for women – having men not care what’s in our brains as long as we provide them a sexual outlet.
And then there’s one last little thing, which is undeniably sexist: gamers chatting on about how stupid Bareznak is for not dating Finkel, on the basis that Finkel is in very good financial shape. Right, because what every woman wants is a man who will spend money on her, and when we unwittingly reject rich guys for any reason at all (valid or otherwise), the joke’s on us! Yes, guys, thank you for meeting Bareznak’s stereotyping of gamers (who, as mostly white, educated guys, are really not as disadvantaged a group as they might believe, as Tait points out) with the patriarchy’s 1950′s stereotypes about me. Screw how often a gamer games, or how good he is at it: if I ever find myself on a date with a gamer, I’ll be alert for signs he’s a sexist jerk. But then, I’m alert for those signs on any date, because instead of stereotyping people by how they spend their time, I actually try to get to know them. It’s neat, and so much more accurate than broad, baseless assumptions.


{ 45 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Isabel C.,
All of this, including the phone call from a friends.
Maria(Quote) (Reply)
Maria: One day, I will post the Surly Girl’s Guide to Online Dating (almost typed “Gaming” there, which, hee) because…yeah.
I also seriously don’t get the deception stuff. I mean, the goal of online dating is generally to meet up, so…do people really think I won’t notice? Or that I’ll think: “Well, you’re clearly ten years older and have fifty percent less hair than you do in your picture, and you’ve just told me you’re a libertarian, but I did put my shoes on and leave the house and everything, so I might as well fuck you, I guess.”*
Note to online dating people: I have never thought this. Ever.
*Or I guess that there’s some bullshit “oh, once she knows the real me, it won’t matter what I look like” thing going on, which: no, it does. You may have a great personality, but if your appearance doesn’t do it *for me*, then why the fuck, pun not intended, would I have sex with you? That Truth About Cats & Dogs movie has a lot to answer for.
Isabel C.(Quote) (Reply)
Isabel C.,
No lie: once I faked food poisoning to get out of a date about ten minutes in.
Maria(Quote) (Reply)
Isabel C., Maria,
There are a lot of women who can’t get dates to save their lives. That’s what men are relying on. I cannot say it too many times: the myth that men will date anything is bullshit. Men are EXTREMELY picky, and the media has taught them they are all entitled to date supermodels. It’s worse in L.A., of course, where being “pretty” isn’t even good enough, but it’s bad everywhere I’ve lived. Just being average looking or shy or a bit on-guard can be enough to keep you embarrassingly dateless for years on end. (Yes, there are average looking and shy girls who get dates; I’m sure there are a lot more factors, but what I’m describing happens a LOT.)
So as long as women who can’t get dates think they NEED dates, or just sincerely WANT dates, or entertain any hope of marrying and having kids someday, that will preserve the extremely low standards for male behavior that you two are encountering. Because women who can’t get dates have to settle a lot… or do without. There isn’t another option.
I feel like this is sort of like a privilege issue, within a larger anti-privileging structure (for women). Some het women have the “privilege” of picking and choosing in a dating structure that’s entirely designed to benefit het men, but they’re standing on the shoulders of an awful lot of invisible women who have to settle for the dregs or be alone. It’s not any of the women’s faults – it’s all down to this system in which “looking good” is the “normal” way for a woman to attract male attention, and the standard for “looking good” naturally just rises and rises until men can no longer get it up for any living woman at all, and all resort to sex robots or other guys or something, and the species goes extinct for lack of actual, adult sexuality in the males of its species.
[ETA: I edited this a few times because I'm anxious to make sure it doesn't come across like, "Well, you lucky ladies who can pick and choose who to date have it soooo easy." What I mean to be saying is: the dating system is geared to provide men with a huge variety of women to "settle" for while they continue trying to better-deal them with someone new. That's what creates in men the expectation that you'll put up with a lot of crap... and what creates a schism between women who can't get dates at all and women who get a selection of men to choose from.]
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
I’m not sure this is even relevant, but I read some weeks back one of those “what guys really want in their wimmin” articles. One of the things was that they want women to not wear so much make up: they want her to be as beautiful rolling out of bed as she is the rest of the day.
So, basically, if you’re not naturally beautiful with all those traits that are airbrushed and photoshopped onto magazine images, you are SOL.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
Yeah, that describes me right now. And yet, the alternative, the ‘dregs’, is just not an option. I can’t even *pretend* for extended periods of time. I used to be able to, though–once I did it for three years straight! Now I can barely last two months. It’s a good thing for me overall, but not so great in the short-term.
The prospect of being alone sucks, but I’ve been alone before. It doesn’t scare me more than spending the rest of my life with some random asshole.
I’m one of the ones that wants someday to marry and have children. Strangely, if anything, that’s only *heightened* my standards, if that makes sense. I don’t want a random jerk who can’t be bothered to speak nicely to me. The idea of staying with one of THOSE for the rest of my life is just a nightmare. Nobody should have to live like that.
But yeah. The choice is that, or go it alone and hope that you meet someone who respects you and your standards. Self-respect is hella sexy–the rest of the dating world might not’ve caught on yet, but it totally is.
Chai Latte(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
I totally saw the argument in a forum about… class privilege, IIRC, that women don’t know what it’s like not to be desired, and that women can pick and choose but men constantly feel rejected etc etc, ergo women are privileged like rich people, and I totally thought of your post about erasing non-beautiful women. I didn’t think the poster was still reading the thread, though (there was, after all, nothing he could learn from it), and even if he was I’m sure it’d have gone right over his head.
Shaun(Quote) (Reply)
Shaun,
You talking about this post? http://thehathorlegacy.com/ironic-take-on-female-privilege-exposes-male-ignorance/.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
@Jennifer: Ooh, good point. I *am* lucky, in a way: I don’t want marriage or kids, I’m really happier being single than not, so I mostly date because I get a charge out of flirting and/or sex. So, if the guy’s disappointing, I’m irked, but it doesn’t really bug me, and I have no incentive to settle for anything.
Except, of course, that the media is all “You will die alone and get eaten by your cats”, and some days my conscious mind has trouble remembering that a) marriage and kids is no guarantee of that *not* happening, and b) I have friends and family, and shut up, media. Goddamn, that shit is pervasive.
I’m torn on the subject of pickiness. On the one hand, *I’m* picky, and it is appearance-based, in large part–the best personality in the world won’t make me want to fuck a guy if his looks don’t do anything for me–but…I also know what I’m realistically going to get, I’m good with that, and I’ve (generally) worked out a standard that works for me between what I’m willing to compromise on, what I’m not, and what I’m willing to do to expand my pool of potential men. Whereas I see a lot of guys complaining because “good-looking women” won’t date them, and those guys…do not. themselves, hit the gym regularly. (Which itself runs into the whole thing about fitness and beauty standards, but I guess my view boils down to “if you want to date someone of body type X, you will stand a better chance the closer you are”. Not always true, but often.) Or *shower* regularly, in many cases. Le sigh.
@Chai Latte: Ooof. I agree, and I’ve got a couple friends in your position. Good luck out there.
@Maria: Ooh, I only wish I’d thought to do that on some. (Dudes, PROTIP: asking what someone likes to watch is good. Responding to her answer with a half-hour elaboration on “Oh, I hate that show–everyone’s too bright and witty”, not so much. Tact can be Your Friend.)
Okay, that was a really long post. Probably a sign of bedtime.
Isabel C.(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
Yes, that one.
Shaun(Quote) (Reply)
It really REALLY is.
I break it down this way. I think the whole idea of dating “leagues” is really unfortunate, and not the product of evolution people like to claim. It’s probably derived from classism and other -isms which create artificial divides between people, and it’s based on superficial shit rather than stuff like whether the person is likely to respect you or try to kill you in your sleep, so it sucks a lot. But the concept is here, and none of us can fully escape it, so it is ridiculous to hear someone complain, “Hot girls won’t date me!” instead of complaining about the system that makes it as difficult to date outside your “league” as it is to move up a socioeconomic class! That’s the real problem. So, everybody should just go ahead and be as picky as they feel like being, and folks should get mad at this ridiculous way we’ve been conditioned to approach dating rather than at the people who refuse to date us.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
One other thing, an addendum to my other post–i also don’t want JUST ANYBODY as the father of my children. You know what I mean? XD
Although, if it is my fate to be eaten by cats, I will happily sacrifice myself as sustenance for our glorious fluffy overlords. ;-D
Chai Latte(Quote) (Reply)
Yes! I wish more people took that into consideration when deciding to have kids. For so long, society has taught people that having kids can solve the problems of loveless/abusive marriages, and that’s a line of bullshit that’s produced some really unhappy kids.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer Kesler,
EXACTLY. It just seems like a vicious cycle, and not something I’m willing to do to myself, another person, and our theoretical children.
Chai Latte(Quote) (Reply)
After I edited the article to clarify that Bareznak did NOT publicly name her date in the original version of the article, a commenter wrote in, insisting they read it the day it came out and all that stuff was in it, and did I have any evidence.
The original version is now linked in the post.
What’s pathetic about that commenter is how quick they were to assume they knew best without bothering to do the slightest bit of research. When we talk about male mods at gaming forums being assholes, they do screenshots trying to prove us wrong. But when people think Some Bitch did Something Bitchy, they’re just so comfortable with that misogynistic assumption that they assume anyone claiming the woman did not do Something Bitchy and therefore may in fact not be a Bitch at all is lying in a hopeless attempt to make women look good.
Way to make misogynists look like the leaky douchebags they are, my friend! Well done, asshole!
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
← Previous Comments