In some ways this is an expression of a new form of power, which impacts the powerful. It is an affliction that is shutting down speech on college campuses regardless of the speaker's political leanings. It doesn't impact the powerless, because nobody knows them there is, of course, no effort to mount a campaign to stop their speech.

I'm not sure I'd have the courage to keep at it in the face of that kind of sustained grotesque harassment. It seems to me that the laws haven't really kept up with how people behave on the Internet. If hordes of people followed someone around in physical spaces everywhere they went screaming threats at them non-stop, it would be considered a matter for law enforcement. But on-line, as far as I can tell, Anita and others who are impacted by this kind of behavior are mostly told by the police and prosecutors that there's nothing they can do. Maybe because almost all these people are privileged white dudes, and can't comprehend how damaging the incessant verbal attacks are, even though they're "just words on a screen"?

I'm surprised there hasn't been a mess of nasty comments posted here. If trolls are sharks, the name "Sarkeesian" is like chum in the water.

From what I've seen on the topic, both Sarkeesian and many of her critics are on the wrong end of respect and responsibility. That is likely why things have blown up as much as they have around her. She does seem to have a tendency to stretch and manipulate things beyond what they are to suit the angles she takes.

Be critical of ideas as the inclination suits you, but defend the public airing of all of them.

It's not just fighting. This, paired with gamer gate is going to drive women away from the industry entirely.

The harassment she has suffered is horrible, but it's almost made it impossible to have a debate about whether any of her theories are correct. The industry won't change unless voices within the bigger game studios and publishers want to make games that appeal to feminist ideas. Sarkeesian could be 100% correct, but she's still an academic making academic arguments in a industry based on $.

I really defy anyone to read this post by Zoe Quinn and find any sort of balance in Gamer Gate. It's the perfect storm of online trolling, IRL misogyny and a legal system that doesn't understand either. It's exhausting to read, so I can only imagine what it's like to live. Like having a thousand abusive exes with no restraining orders.

http://ohdeargodbees.tumblr.com/post/107838639074/august-never-ends

I don't mean to diminish the threats to Ms. Sarkessian's life or her safety at all. It's deplorable behavior, and direct threats should be investigated.

Does anyone know of any good studies on how common death threats are online to public figures of either gender? My first few google searches aren't turning up much scholarly - almost everything is linking back to this specific issue.

Nearly every blogger I read with any kind of following and controversial opinions, many game developers, webcomic authors -- they all speak of receiving death threats and abuse from anonymous people on the internet. The frequency seems to track with how likely they are to be read by teenagers.

But that's just my anecdotal experience. I'm curious what any actual science says about it, and about how many of those threats are found to be credible.

Some people have pointed to this and said she needs to get a tougher skin. That's not the point I'm making here - Anita should be able to challenge the views of the gaming industry without her physical safety being threatened -- but her experience seems to be indicative of a greater problem with human interaction on the internet than the specific results of gender policing.

Perhaps a silver lining to the phenomenon is the likelihood that the level of vitriol being spewed by misogynistic trolls represents their level of existential fear at the rapid and ongoing loss of the social dominance they feel entitled to. And that holds whether one is a self-motivated freelance troll or a paid shill (something has to motivate someone to pay shills to disrupt forums, after all).

That means it's time to push harder. The thing to do when Archie Bunker-style sexist meatheadedness is on the ropes is keep pummeling it until it's down for good.

All the whining about "free speech" is just a red herring and stems from the fact that losing one's dominant social status feels like an unjust attack and being treated 'just like everybody else' is perceived as defeat (religious leaders react this way a lot too, since religion is losing its former status/dominance as well). In other words, it's a juvenile temper tantrum thrown by a spoiled adult (the kids making the same comments are mostly just imitating the "adults").

When those who enjoy (or embody, as it were) the currently-dominant paradigm feel that their position is secure, they are dismissive of (or smug and condescending towards) challenges to that dominance, like how Archie Bunker treated Edith.

But when the Barbarians are at the gate (i.e. uppity women who 'don't know their place') and the walls of the castle are crumbling then that condescension turns to fear manifesting as the vicious spite one would expect from a wounded and cornered dog.

"Fixing" the issue requires abandoning the idea that greater equality and mutual
respect is a "loss" of something, or if it is a loss it's a loss of something that was always undesirable (so good riddance). Then it might dawn on the misogynists that being lonely or unable to form a stable, fulfilling relationship (or get a date) is their own damned fault and that women "owe" them absolutely nothing, especially subservient obedience.

A sad irony in all this is that if the trolls and assorted misogynists were to snap out of it and declare surrender in their war against respect and equality then the quality of their own lives would improve to a degree they probably can't even imagine.

Couple of points:

First I'm not seeing the argument that Sarkeesian is some embattled critic of power. Sarkeesian has made a lot of money off her crowdfunding effort and she could probably raise as much money as she needs for her projects for the rest of her career. Her ideas are mainstream and uncontroversial in this country's education which is dominated by people who share her views. She has a large built-in audience who will always be interested in hearing what she has to say in speeches, blogs, and books, and paying her money to hear her say it

Given that her supporters are the heart of academia and government, I'd say she's at the center of power - far from a rebel.

Second, the internet is a vicious place when it comes to this country's culture wars. I could come up with a list of hundreds of people who have been harassed, threatened with death, and even worse - lost their jobs - due to things they've said online.

There is really no difference between a person like Sarkeesian who is supposedly doing important work "critiquing the system" or whatever and people who have had expressed wrong views, unpopular views, or simply said the wrong thing online - the internet punishes everyone equally.

Personally, I think we need to get past this idea that "you have the freedom to say whatever you want, but I have the right to try to ruin your life in response" morality which has become dominant in the internet culture wars and which takes down both left and right speakers. Either that, or we will have to accept that for safety's sake radical views are best expressed anonymously, and allow for anonymous speech zones of various types.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0

So many things wrong here, OK firstly she has not been silenced. The obvious hypocrisy of saying she was silenced, while making a speech. That has some fundamental gaps in logic. That's like someone saying they are starving while eating a thanksgiving dinner. Any of the silence that she faces she puts on herself, and here's why. The podcasts, media interviews, and such that she declines are all her decision. All of those are controlled environment type of situations, and hell she could even just do them via satellite or phone . If it truly worried her so much that she declines media opportunities, why does she continue to make videos. If the reason for her going on media outlets is to talk about the issues she is advocating against is she gets harassed, then why does she make videos during the same thing. That is her decision as if she were silenced as she says, then we would have no Anita videos, plain and simple. As for the public speaking, why would she be afraid to speak spontaneously in public, yet still do planned public events. Wouldn't it be more dangerous to be at an event where your harassers have known when and where long enough to plan something, not justifying the death threats, but that part just didn't make sense to me. Also for her complaints of having to watch what she says, and basically be more diplomatic, and how that's so horrible and her harassers fault. no thats called being a public figure, especially as an activist. because your opposition will wait for any slip up, or lapse in reason to tear you apart. If you can't handle the heat, get the fuck out of the kitchen essentially. Now to the biggest crock of shit that she can't express her emotions, namely fear. Bullshit, have you looked at your twitter feed Anita, all you do is express your anger at "misogyny" or express your fear or anger over harassers . Also that women can't express feelings without etc...Bullshit. If anything men cannot express their feelings on this issue because they are either told to check their privilege, basically saying it doesn't matter what you say because you have social power (but you just demonstrated the power to make all white males opinions, not matter at all. Which is a fuck ton of power, if it really were male dominated the idea of male privilege would have never been allowed make it past the first girl who uttered those words.) or they are labeled as a sexist harasser or rape apologist. Even if they are neither of those things, but since they are men its ok. (but a girl being called bossy a far less horrible accusation than a death threat harasser or rape apologist, needs to be banned, even if women do show that characteristic ).