Don't be a dickwolf at PAX East next month

Me
Friday, February 04, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Brett Bates

Dennis gives a superb analysis of the "dickwolves" controversary surrounding Penny Arcade and PAX East this year. Whether or not you'll be going to the convention next month, you should read this article.

I was unaware of the Penny Arcade "dickwolves T-shirt controversy" until late last week when my wife brought this blog post to my attention. The author, who goes by the name "kirbybits," is a game designer in Boston, MA. She is also a rape survivor and suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Kirbybits has decided not to go to PAX East this year for fear of facing numerous "triggers" --  a sound, smell, image, or other sensory input (in this case, a t-shirt) which triggers a memory of a traumatic event for PTSD sufferers. Considering PAX East is meant to be an inclusive environment for gamers to celebrate their culture, I don’t think this is something to be taken lightly.

 

The dickwolves controversy originated from a Penny Arcade webcomic published last year. It’s a joke about the ridiculousness of MMO quests and the idea that a player would save X number of victims from a horrible fate and then leave everyone else behind. Yes, rape plays into the humor, but I don't think it's fair to say that rape is necessarily what the humor of the strip hangs upon.

Penny Arcade Strip

People who are sensitive to rape as a punchline nevertheless felt that this context was inappropriate and took umbrage with the strip. Their position is outlined nicely in this post on the feminist blog Shakesville. Penny Arcade's Jerry Holkins and Mike Krahulik then responded with a second comic. In the accompanying news post, Krahulik expresses his disbelief that anyone would be offended by the original strip, especially if they were Penny Arcade fans. In the minds of their critics, this was an inadequate response and betrayed the fact that Holkins and Krahulik clearly didn't understand what they were upset about in the first place.

It was after publishing this second comic that Penny Arcade decided to print and sell “Team Dickwolves” T-shirts. By this point the controversy had developed enough that the shirts were considered a slap in the face by anyone who’d been offended and a bona fide trigger for some rape victims.

Which brings us back to kirbybits and her post. Shortly after it began garnering attention, Penny Arcade removed the dickwolves T-shirt from their web store. We’ll never know precisely why this decision was made barring an official statement from PA. Either Krahulik and Holkins had an attack of conscience or the right kind of external pressure was applied.

The situation then went completely off the rails, with Twitter accounts created explicitly to call for sexually assaulting kirbybits for her role in getting the shirts pulled, pundits confusing what this was about, and even another batch of T-shirts to express dissatisfaction with the entire affair.

I got myself caught up on all this in the space of about an hour after my wife showed me kirbybits' post. It felt like the situation had been as addressed as it was going to get and the book was closed.

But then I started thinking about PAX East, which takes place right in my own backyard in five weeks. And I realized that this issue is definitively not settled -- and it might actually have an effect on the atmosphere at PAX East that no one wants.


PAX

It took a comment from a writer I respect to decide that this does actually have enough to do with video games to warrant commenting on, but I still wouldn’t do so unless it was towards a constructive end.

To wit: I am asking PAX East 2011 attendees to please reconsider any ideas of wearing their dickwolves T-shirts to the event.

You will not be making any kind of brave statement about free speech by doing so. You will not be standing up for the right to use offensive humor. What you will be doing is disrespecting the spirit of a gathering which is meant to be inclusive for all different sorts of people.

Part of the issue here is that things are getting conflated. On the one hand, there’s a discussion about the comic and whether it was offensive or not. On the other hand, we have the production of T-shirts which were deliberately meant to inflame an issue which should have been laid to rest, T-shirts that should've never been produced in the first place.

I would argue that this isn’t about the right and wrong of rape humor, and cries of “Censorship!” aren’t something I have the patience to engage with by explaining to anyone what the word actually means. Nor is this about people being hypocrites for finding one sort of offensive humor acceptable while decrying another, which is how some figures in the games press are warping the story inappropriately.

We could talk about Wheaton’s Law -- “Don’t be a dick” -- which has become a mantra for PAX attendees in the interest of making the Expo a comfortable space for throngs of nerds who take enough abuse in the course of their lives.

But this T-shirt business is a conversation about sensitivity and nothing else.

My concern is that PAX East 2011 will be populated by Penny Arcade fans proudly flying the dickwolves' colors. I would not be surprised if we saw large congregations of Dickwolves Standard Bearers marching through the halls to defend their “right” to be insensitive unless someone tries to defuse this mess. And I have little doubt that the people who are against what they perceive those shirts to mean are going to have something to say about that.

What do you do when you are well aware that the humor you are about to employ is most certainly going to have severe, even debilitating ramifications on some members of the audience you are about to share it with? Do you go ahead and be deliberately offensive anyway because your “right” to speak however you want without consequence is being trampled, or do you make the decision to not use that particular joke at that particular time?

This wouldn't even be a concession that you would never use that humor again! You would simply be choosing not to use that humor in that particular moment.


Anyone who goes to the Penny Arcade website has to know what they are getting into. Holkins and Krahulik can be rude, crass, and insensitive. I have limited sympathy for anyone who goes back to Penny Arcade after the first time they’ve been offended by something tasteless.

Penny Arcade the webcomic does not equal the Penny Arcade Expo, however. They are completely different entities -- so we can argue for Holkins and Krahulik’s right to have all the offensive humor on their webcomic they want while at the same time arguing that to bring that humor out into a massive public event populated by an incredible diversity of gamers is inappropriate. That’s precisely what those T-shirts are going to do if they’re worn at PAX.

It’s worth reflecting on the fact that once an idea is released into the world, we don’t get to control it. The origin of “dickwolves” is moot to what we're discussing here. Whether or not the joke in the first comic was predicated on laughing at rape victims or wry commentary on the false morality choices in MMO quests is also moot. It definitively turned into a joke about rape, and that's when I wish someone at Penny Arcade had thought a little more carefully about producing those shirts.

We don't always get to decide whether someone else’s issues are valid or not. If someone says to us, “Seeing these T-shirts triggers me into horrible PTSD and causes me substantial amounts of distress,” our choice is to either respect those feelings and seek not to cause that distress or tell them, “Sorry, our right to wear these shirts is more important than your not having panic attacks while walking the halls of this event you would otherwise attend.”

Personally, I think that the quality of a person’s life is a little more important than whether someone gets to wear a particular T-shirt or not. There are plenty of other T-shirts they could wear. The only statement that anyone wearing a dickwolves T-shirt at PAX East will be making is that they’re a real-life troll exemplifying everything that PAX is not.

At last year’s PAX East, an attendee told a story about being in a hospital most of her life, and how much she appreciated Holkins and Krahulik’s Child's Play charity for bringing video games and toys to children who are in the position now that she already lived through. She broke down at the microphone, and Krahulik stepped down from the stage and embraced her. It was a poignant and touching moment that, to me, represented everything that’s good about PAX.

That’s the Mike Krahulik I want to remember, and the spirit of the event I want to feel, and if we ask ourselves honestly, that’s what we all want. So don’t be a dick. Leave the dickwolves shirts at home. After PAX East is over, you can immediately log on to the Internet and express your disgust at not having stood up for your principles if you feel so inclined…but give everyone else a break and don’t take the chance of ruining the event for anyone. The wrongness of asking people to skip PAX East just so someone else can be an ass should be obvious.


Dennis Scimeca is a freelance writer from Boston, MA. He has written for The Escapist, Gamasutra, and @GAMER magazine, and maintains a blog at punchingsnakes.com. Follow him on Twitter: @DennisScimeca. First Person is his weekly column on Bitmob concerned with meta-questions around the video-game industry and the journalism that covers it.

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (47)
Twitpic
February 01, 2011

I love the way you presented this, Dennis. Nice job and great article.

Barj_sketch
February 01, 2011

I'm still wondering where all the fuss started. The "raped by dickwolves" line was really a throwaway one and didn't contribute to the humour of the strip at all. It was just something negative that happened to the character speaking. It could easily have been "abused by trolls" or "whipped by dire badgers" and the strip would have had the same context, punchline and humour.

I think this is why PA were initially bemused by the whole situation; it was raised over quite literally nothing. Rape was not the punchline or the humour. If anything, rape was shown as something very negative.

Pshades-s
February 01, 2011

There was an official posting about the removal of the T-shirts: http://www.penny-arcade.com/2011/1/28/dickwolves/

I really like how you handled this whole issue without pointing fingers or succumbing to hyperbole. You make a great point - whatever "dickwolves" once meant, it means something ugly now and everyone at PAX should be aware of that. Robbed of that context, I think "Team Dickwolves" is a pretty funny idea, but we can't turn back the clock and undo what has developed since then.

Img_20110311_100250
February 01, 2011
If the aim of the protestations is to ask attendees not to wear dickwolves t-shirts, then hear hear. However, I find it ironic that this article is filled with "triggers" for a rape victim. The word "dick" was used a handful of times as well as "dickwolf," if we are serious about protecting people from thoughts maybe the title of this article should be "Don't be a d******f." I understand the desire to want to protect people from anything and everything that could do them harm. That should be our default setting as responsible members of society. But attempts to cleanse the world of triggers will never work. Any attempt to do so leads to misplaced blame. We blame the word and the image and the people who laugh at the word. It is born out of a desire to provide no air for rapists to breath, which is noble. Society so fully despises the rapist that the mere acknowledgment that such a thing as rape exists won't be tolerated. That doesn't help. All it does is alienate innocent people. It implies that a person laughing is complicit in the pain caused by a rapist. How does that make anything better? We have someone to blame. Someone to point the finger at. Someone who deserves all the shame and scorn that all of us want to heap upon them. Of course, that said, only an ahole would wear that shirt at PAX when they know someone will be there who is going to be hurt by it.
Photo_159
February 01, 2011

I have to agree with Jeff.

I have been following this thing for a couple days now as well...in fact I was just putting the finishing touches on my own bitmob article. I won't post it because you did such a nice job of covering everything here.

Just to add, PA did post a blog about why the dickwolf shirts were taken from the store. It's on the PA blog.

You can also see that someone put together a tumbler for tracking everything since august:

http://debacle.tumblr.com/

However most of these posts are one sided.

Additionally I feel that Mike and Jerry have been unfairly accused of a lot things - specifically being called rape apologists and rape culture advocates. That is not exactly how to convince someone to apologize for something they did that was taken heavily out of context.

Hib1
February 02, 2011

The issue is that PA did a terrible job at handling the issue. Each time they did something that could be seen as an appology, they turned themselves into victims and pointed fingers on who to blame. Now their most rabid fans are trolling the hell out of anyone who opposed the dickwolf t-shirt.

The controversy around the comic is long gone and now it's all about the t-shirt and the comments made mainly by Mike. If you check back on his twitter feed, he has been a real asshole about it. If they had just removed the t-shirt, post a notice saying "yo we removed the t-shirt" and then shut up about it, none of this would be happening.

Now we have a twitter feed called @teamrape that Mike is supporting (classy) and they are harrasing rape victims that opposed to the t-shirt (@kirbybits in particular), asking them for proof of their rape (double classy). Th fact that Mike is behind them and that Jerry is strangely silent on the whole thing only makes it worse.

Robsavillo
February 02, 2011

Jeff, you're not considering the different contexts in which Dennis and Penny Arcade have used those words.

Really good job summarizing and arguing against wearing the shirts at PAX, Dennis. But I do think that you're placing an artificial wall between the event itself and the web comic, much like Holkins and Krahulik have in the post about dropping the shirts from the online store. There's a strange dichotomy expressed in separating the two.

The Penny Arcade website is the face of the event -- Holkins and Krahulik are the organizers, hell, the event is named after the comic! Anything the comic does will reflect upon the event, whether they want it to or not. Implicitly (and materially) you support the comic by attending the event.

Me
February 02, 2011

@ Jeff - I originally was going to lead in with a warning about rape triggers because I was worried about precisely what you bring up. My wife, who is my ever-ready body of knowledge on this issue, suggested that using the title "Don't be a Dickwolf" was all the signage that someone who might be triggered by the conversation would need. Also, she feels that once you start putting trigger warnings on things, you build an expectation that you are going to put trigger warnings on everything you write, and that's unrealistic for Bitmob.

But I did think hard about this. :)

This also isn't about cleansing the world of triggers - it's about asking for sensitivity in a specific circumstance. If someone walks into a comedy club to hear a Gilbert Gottfried show, chances are they know what they are in for, and they can't really complain about being offended.

If someone walks into a concert pianists' performance, and then halfway through the show Gilbert Gottfried walks out and starts in with Holocaust jokes, that audience didn't expect to be ambushed with that material. It's not an appropriate venue for it.

Saying to someone "Hey, you know that you might be triggered by a Dickwolves shirt if you go to PAX East, so don't go," is like telling someone "Hey, you know that Gilbert Gottfriend might walk out in the middle of Beethoven's Fifth, so maybe you shouldn't go to that performance." PAX has never, ever, been advertised, sold, or celebrated as anything other than a safe, inclusive environment for a bunch of nerdy gamers who in all likelihood are otherwise mocked and ostracized for being really into anime, painting little toy soldiers, playing with cards, or all the other nerdly graces we celebrate at PAX.

Therefore, it's an inappropriate venue to wear a Dickwolves t-shirt to the event after everything that's taken place. Perhaps we'll have some people who haven't taken the time to educate themselves as to what the controversy is actually about (which is why it's important, I think, for the gaming press to be talking about this now such that people have every opportunity to get caught up) and who therefore wear the shirts without realizing what they're doing at this stage of the game, but for anyone who does know, and chooses to wear the shirt anyway, they're being a dick, plain and simple.

@ Evan - I'm not satisfied that we actually know why the t-shirt was removed. If it was just about not offending or arguing with people, that had been going on for quite a while before the t-shirt was yanked. Something changed. Personally, I suspect it had everything to do with PAX East. Scuttlebutt is that exhibitors were threatening to not appear on the show floor over this. That, then, effects the Penny Arcade bottom line from the event. Money talks.

@ Bruno - My wife has been digging around online, trying to figure out why this happened in the first place, and Mike has written a lot about his awkwardness with women. He's written about being medicated for anxiety, anxiety attacks being a common symptom of a PTSD sufferer being triggered. That's not to imply that Mike has PTSD, mind you. Let's be clear on that; but I think that Mike is trying so hard to engage on this issue because it touches upon two subjects (women and anxiety stress) which have had profound effects on his life.

And at a guess, I would say that Jerry is being silent because he's protecting someone who, for all intents and purposes, is family to him. If my brother was publicly going through a tumultuous series of exchanges online which touched upon issues that had debilitated my brother in the past, I'd probably stay silent too. While I agree that Penny Arcade has handled the whole thing rather poorly, I could understand this being Jerry's motivation in remaining silent, and I respect it.

Img_20110311_100250
February 02, 2011
@Rob because a rape victim will take the time to consider the context to decide whether or not the mention of the weapon of the rapist will trigger them? That isn't really my point though. We don't make the world a better place by blaming completely innocent people for the actions of a few. It may feel righteous, but it won't really help the victim and it only makes otherwise sympathetic people feel defensive. Attempting to draw a causational link of any stripe between a joke and a rape is asinine. "Sure, I would go to prison for twenty years, be marked in a national database as a sex offender, and will always be an outcast, but I really didn't feel comfortable raping until I laughed at a joke that contained a rape-related
Robsavillo
February 02, 2011

Jeff, my point was that, as Dennis implicitly mentions, context is important. The word "dick" by itself is not necessarily a trigger, but "dickwolves" carries a negative connotation because of events surrounding that word's use. There's nothing ironic in this article's discussion of the term, either, because Dennis' use of the word exists within an academic context. Certainly, there's risk involved in that you cannot predict others' feelings, but there's nothing ironic about its use here.

And no one is drawing a casual link between a joke and rape. I read through Kirbybits' articles on this, and no where does she call Penny Arcade a bunch of rapists. I'm not sure what your point is about "blaming innocent people for the actions of a few" -- who are you referencing?

The issue seems to be that the joke, and Penny Arcade's explicit approval of the messages contained within, contributed to an environment that makes violence against women seem OK.

Hib1
February 02, 2011

@Rob I agree with you but this is far beyond the comic and the joke now. It's cashing in on the first "controversy" (wasn't really a controversy, criticizing something is not calling a ban on it) that swelled the issue. In turn, the fact people would be wearing t-shirt basicly saying "your problem with rape is no big deal" would be making PAX not that much inclusive.

But yeah, like you said, PA's approval is contributing to an environment where violence against woman is OK. Fans are harassing rape victims telling me to get raped, die by getting rape or posting pictures of dead woman. Not cool bro.

The worst is, people who opposed the t-shirt and that are now objecting to the way the matter was handled are being called too sensitive. The problem is that there seems to be, in the mind of PA's most rabid supporter, a link between being mature and being totally detached from others problems. Like there's no place for compassion on the internet.

Img_20110311_100250
February 02, 2011
Rob, that ignores that the character that was raped by the Dickwolves was male. Which suggests that people don't really care about context. The joke wasn't approving of rape in any way. It simply included rape in the punchline and that made people uncomfortable. The mere concept of rape was enough to offend some people. If you want to blame Mike and Jerry for creating a rape-friendly climate, go right ahead. All I'm saying is that by doing that you are only making things worse and diluting the justifiable rage that should only be targeted at rapists.
Robsavillo
February 02, 2011

[quote]The joke wasn't approving of rape in any way.[/quote]

I never said that it was. Again, critics charge the comic with contributing to an environment that suggests violence against women is OK, and that was only exasperated by Penny Arcade's reaction to their concerns. While the character in the comic is male, society at large views rape as a woman's issue. That's the important context here.

My understanding is that critics' concerns went beyond "the mere concept of rape" because their problems arise from Penny Arcade's explicit approval through issuing t-shirts and other merchandise -- not to mention the follow up comic that essentially makes fun of them for feeling hurt by the initial comic.

Img_20110311_100250
February 02, 2011
Yep, that's what I said, context doesn't really matter to those who want to be offended.
Redeye
February 02, 2011

Personally I think that it's pretty cut and dry. The people who harass rape victims over a t shirt are stupid, but the controversy is overblown and without context. Honestly most of the internet is pretty much a no fly zone for anyone who is easily offended, and it disgusts me that their are people who are seriously invested in being terrible to other people just for the hell of it.

I don't know enough about the exacts of who said what and who did what, but neither side really handled this at all well. In disagreements like this it's way too easy for people to throw out the concept of compromise or forgiveness way too early and just turn things into a pitch battle that makes both sides look like idiots.

As for the actual controversy itself. I personally am of two minds of the issue. I personally think that any subject is fine for humor as long as you aren't meaning any real harm to people, but intentions are a tricky thing, as are peoples reactions to them.

It's pretty much impossible to please everyone.

Bman_1a
February 02, 2011

I think it's incredibly (and destructively) dismissive to say people 'want to be offended'.

Img_20110311_100250
February 02, 2011

Brendon, I agree, so I should make it 10,000 percent clear. 

Rape victims don't "ask for it." They don't "deserve it." They don't have to produce four witnesses. A "yes" once isn't a "yes" always. If someone says "yes" and then changes their mind, but the other person doesn't stop, that is rape. 

If anyone does or says any of these things they are rapists and rape apologists. 

I would not hesitate to die defending someone from rape, whether I knew them or not.

And if I have to state this at the beginning of every post I make on this subject, I will. If that is what it takes to make everyone comfortable.

Bman_1a
February 02, 2011

Jeff, that's good to know, but beside the point.

I think when people say "I'm offended", rather than engage in a discourse of what causes offense, it's easier to say, "Man up, nancy". Because that puts all the onus for feeling offended on the person who expresses it, and shuts down the idea that the perpetrator has any responsibility for what they put into the world.

Taking responsibility for what you put out is not about self-censorship or tempering your work to cause the least trouble. It's accepting that, when someone expresses offense, they are speaking from a position of honesty. They aren't making a choice, they are having a reaction.

Where this situation seemed to go off the rails is when PA didn't accept that someone found the material offensive -- they decided to celebrate it and intentionally aggravate the issue. Because man-up-nancy, feeling ways about stuff is for niggerfags. I don't think that's the right way to approach the issue. I think it does more harm than good.

Img_20110311_100250
February 02, 2011

I think most people say "I'm offended" when they are legitmately offended. I certainly believe that any rape-survivor who was offended was legitmately hurt by the joke, but they can't help themselves. They've been traumatized and cannot handle something like that. 

However, just because someone was hurt by joke doesn't make the joke hurtful. There is a difference between trying to protect someone from an agressor and attacking someone that didn't know or intend to hurt anybody. 

Going after Penny Arcade doesn't help the rape-survivor and all it does is make them and anyone who laugh at the joke feel defensive. "I know I didn't do anything wrong, why do they hold me accountable for the pain caused by a rape?" That is hard to understand, because it isn't rational. 

A chorus of defenders all joining together to demand an apology for something that wasn't wrong won't solve anything. It will only produce an us-versus-them atmosphere. 

Me
February 02, 2011

Conversations like these are why I love Bitmob and think that, taken amongst all the other video game journalism outlets, this is a unique and extremely important space.

Photo_159
February 03, 2011

I think Jeff nailed it right here:

"However, just because someone was hurt by a joke doesn't make the joke hurtful. There is a difference between trying to protect someone from an agressor and attacking someone that didn't know or intend to hurt anybody."

I know Dennis states in his post that he was trying to steer away from debating if the PA content is offensive but I am sure the PA guys will be the first to tell you that their comics are offensive on the regular.

I have seen numerous posts by them claiming just that. They have acknowledged it many times without apology in the past so it's confusing why people expect them to apologize now.

In regards to the follow up comic I don't think they were telling anybody to "man up." They were more likely pointing out the ridiculousness of the logic being used to claim that their comic about tragically flawed game design is actually about subversely teaching people rape is a laughing matter.

I agree with them. You would have to assume that the readers of PA are incredibly incomptent to imply that the PA community would just simply become less sensitive to rape as result of that one comic or even 10 comics. Sure some real "winners" came out of the wood work via twitter (and for the record those people were not supported by PA dudes in fact there is a direct message that "Gabe" wrote to one of them telling them to knock it off) but those type of people are being exposed repeatedly to other types of influences that have nothing to do with PA(parents for example). Besides why should PA be held responsible for what crazy people do simply because those crazy people read their site?

I also agree that the intial joke is not about rape. You can replace the poor slaves suffering with any other terms and the comic would still make sense. It would still be a commentary about tragically flawed game design.

As for the T-Shirts...man what a terrible idea. However, I can understand why they were made. As Dennis touched on before they were probably created as a reaction to something that got blown way out of context. The shirt seems like an inside nod suggesting that those who wear them know that "the sixth slave" is not actually a comic about rape at all. Unfortunately the more simple explanation is that the shirt is meant to hurt people by being offensive. I am glad they were removed.

@Dennis
I hope you are not suggesting that Mike responded the way he did simply because he is mentally unstable. I tihnk he would have reacted the same way if it were men telling him the same things: "your comics are really offensive because they are teaching people that it's okay to laugh about rape." I am not sure if I would have reacted much differently - perhaps with more composure and a straight up explanation though...

Also I tihnk your beethoven example is kind of bad. I have never been to PAX but I assume there are a lot of the same toxic people who play games online. If I was prone to snesitive or offensive comments, music, comics, and t-shirts I would definately think 10 or 12 times over before deciding to go to something like PAX. Gilbert G has no way in heck at showing up to a concerto because that is a serioulsy organized program. Your talking about an event hosting thousands of people...in my mind literally anything can happen. Perhaps I am uneducated, is it possible that people with PTSD have never experienced a trigger before and don't know that something could trigger them? This might be a bad example too but I am vegan, I certainly don't go to a restruant expecting there not to be any meat or dairy products. Nor do I even go to a vegan restruant expecting there to be nothing carnivorous on the menu. I guess I get your point though now that I think about it.
 

Me
February 03, 2011

@ Evan - Here's the thing...if someone tells you a joke was hurtful, it was hurtful. To them. It's not your place to decide whether it should be hurtful, or whether they have a right to be hurt by the joke. They were. It IS your place to decide whether you're going to be sensitive to their having been hurt or not.

You're conflating issues here. I don't think anyone's asking Penny Arcade to apologize for the comics at this point. We're way, way beyond that. If anyone did want an apology it would likely be for *mocking* people who are sensitive about rape humor on account of, you know, having been raped.

In terms of PA's "responsibility," I'm not sure that's the best way to phrase the question...but I'd recommend you take a look at what Leigh Alexander had to say about this on her blog:

http://sexyvideogameland.blogspot.com/2011/02/love-means-sometimes-having-to-say.html

To cull some choice quotes from that post:

"Something I learned in writing about games is that after a point you do kind of have to feel responsible. "I'm just doing my own thing and if you don't like it you can leave" doesn't work anymore after you've taken active steps to cultivate and lead a community.

"Nobody asks to have others look up to them, and you could argue that if you're just making art, or comedy, or commentary, it's others' decision to pay attention or not and that you don't owe them anything...

"But like it or not, if your audience grows large enough, people will start to look to you to help them shape the way they feel about issues or interact in their community..."

Please, read the rest of her post because I think it's brilliant, and spot-on.

Anxiety attacks by themselves are not considered a sign of mental instability, not the way I think you mean it.

Finally, there's a BIG difference between a t-shirt or other article of clothing which *might* be offensive, and something which is decidedly and undeniably an established issue like the Dickwolves t-shirts. That's a really specious argument to make.

Img950653
February 03, 2011

After catching up on all this via the "debacle" tumblr account, I was tempted to write an article addressing all this. But Dennis did such a great job of getting a dialogue going up here that it doesn't seem neccessary to throw yet another point of view into an already overcrowded ring of people, many of them screaming at the top of their lungs. So instead, I'll keep my comments brief.

I had every intention of going to PAX East this year. I've never been to a video game convention, and it seemed like a great opportunity to network with other writers, meet some of my favorite Bitmobbers in person, and check out some great games. Unfortunately, my hectic school schedule conspired against me, and I decided it was best that I save my dough for PAX Prime, or maybe 2012's PAX East. I was seriously bummed.

After all this, though, I'm decidely less so. The way this whole thing was handled by PA post-comic is what REALLY grinds my gears; jokes in poor taste notwithstanding. PAX struck me as the anti-E3; a place where gamers of all kinds could show up and feel energized by its inexclusivity. What's Gabe and Tycho's repeated responses have done have served to purposefully alienate a portion of the games community. They can go on and on with the familiar cries of "if you don't like it, don't read the comic" if they wish; but PAX represents something bigger than a haven for fans of a particular webcomic. Or at least, it did.

It makes me sad that these guys would go through the trouble of actively offending so many people (and again, I'm speaking of what's transpired post-original "dickwolves" comic) in order to make a dubious, obtuse point.

I won't be missing PAX very much this year. And barring some de-snarkified redaction on the part of Gabe and Tycho, I doubt I'll be in any hurry to make it to another one.

Img_20110311_100250
February 03, 2011

I guess I just don't feel nearly as bad because I would have responded similiary if I had made a joke and was immediately called a rape apologist. That is actually pretty offensive in itself. To equate the joke that was made in the original comic to someone saying "she was asking for it" is simply wrong. And I don't blame Mike and Jerry for reacting in a competely defensive manner. 

Still, the shirts were a problem for some people in regards to PAX, so they took down the shirts. It really should have gone away after that. 

But people want them to apologize for the original joke, and they won't do that. That is why this is still an issue.

Img950653
February 03, 2011

I can't think of a less mature way to have handled the response to the original comic than by mocking the nature in which those people were offended. Gabe's mockery of trigger warnings, in particular, was just plain mean-spirited.

I don't think the original joke is the issue at all, and an apology for it wouldn't change the way I feel, since it's not particularly offensive in and of itself (just my opinion.) As several industry personalities (Arthur Gies, Leigh Alexander) have pointed out, it's their handling of things since the original comic that are shocking, and the reason it continues to drag on is that Gabe and Tycho continue to have something to say about it.

Photo_159
February 03, 2011

I don’t mean to conflate issues it just seems mostly everything I read (and I have read a ton) is less about the shirts existing at PAX and more about the second comment not being an apology and the shirts being an extension of that "anti-apology." Then consequnetly about how Mike and Jerry responded to people who were offended. I also feel that all of the events should be considered because people are quickly jumping to the conclusion that Mike and Jerry’s responses were either aggressive, inappropriate, or simply un-called for.

You can’t just look at the end and say... “these guys are wrong”

I read Leigh’s formspring in response a couple days ago:



"I love Penny Arcade. But what have we got to lose by having some respect for people's feelings in our community when they speak up and ask us to hear them? I don't want to be part of a community where people say "hey, we're really hurt," and we say, "shut up, bitches."

I understand this - but I don’t think anybody was saying “I was accidentally hurt by this.” I think most posts were saying - “I read your comics - You guys were funny until you alluded to rape.” - my paraphrasing



In response they did what seemed natural - “We make offensive content everyday, you should probably know better then to read it.” - my paraphrasing

(Not to get into the origins much further but then there were a bunch of posts categorizing their response into the symptoms of being rape apologists)

The same people who are saying “I am not going to PAX because of this or because of the T-shirts," have happily read the comic for a long time and attended PAX in the past without even thinking. To stand up and say "now you have gone too far" seems crazy - especially when PA produces stuff like this regularly:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/11/17/

I am disappointed by how a lot of people are ready to turn on Mike and Jerry and say they were wrong to respond the way they did because of an outcry that is clinging to hurtful accusations against not only their content but more specifically of their person. That is wrong.

Leigh's SVGL post gets into the “echo chamber” which is a great way to describe what’s happening:

“I do understand it sucks a lot to be at the center of an echo chamber that seems to be saying you're a bad person because you made a joke you didn't intend as offensive. But the willful refusal to even consider "hey, we may have been wrong here, and we feel bad that some of our fans are hurt" just seems weird, and inconsistent with the smart, fun tone I've always enjoyed about PA.”

If they were to apologize now, admit they were “wrong,” or make a post about saying they apologize for the T-Shirts they would have to start and end every comic with an apology. That's certainly not going to happen.

They know where they stand on sensitive issues like rape and the holocaust - it's insane to suggest that they are even remotely okay with promoting those things.



 Even more so to say you won't support them because someone else said they were okay with supporting those things.
 

Profile_pic4
February 04, 2011

First off, fantastic job on this subject and article, Dennis.  Your writing and presentation was clear and meaningful.

This article and the subsequent comments are a perfect example of why I consider Bitmob one of my favorite sites.  I’m not talking about just gaming sites.  I’m talking about ALL the Internets.

Regarding this Whole Big Thing, I never really gave PA too much thought before, and this certainly doesn’t make me want to climb on board their bandwagon now.  For me, even though their art-style is great, their comics seem naïve and really don’t bring the funny.

More to the point in this case, PA just does not seem to get it.  That they argue they get it is even worse.  It’s not up to PA to determine HOW or WHY someone gets offended by something said or done.  It certainly isn’t up to them to fix it or, perhaps more importantly, place the blame.

These guys CLEARLY aren’t married… or they’d know better.  Sometimes you trigger something from another person’s baggage without even realizing it.  Understanding why or how isn’t enough and really isn’t relevant.  Accepting you have made a mistake, understanding the other's feelings, and being 100% apologetic in a genuine way are most important.  No deflecting, no defending, no arguing, no “shoulding” on people.  And certainly no ill-conceived T-shirts.

Note: I have found snarky T-shirts and/or sarcastic comments mumbled under one’s breath negate ANY goodwill towards any and all previously proclaimed apologies by 100%*. 

This brings me to my next point. Life (and I suppose the Internet) is not about the mistakes you make, whether they be real or realized by someone else.  Rather, it is about how (and if) you get back up, dust yourself (and others) off, and go about business.  PA hasn’t done so hot in the dusting off department, resorting instead to the alternative “rub some dirt on it” method.  Sometimes we (tough) guys are guilty of thinking this method works for anything, when it really only works (and poorly at that) on physical injuries.

I will take their advice and just choose not to go to their site. Instead, I will continue to visit Hyperbole and a Half, The Oatmeal, or The Onion for my laughs.  Because these sites actually bring the funny.

*+/- 0.001% margin of error.

Img_20110311_100250
February 04, 2011

Keith, I appreciate all of that. I understand that "apologizing and moving on" has become the accepted solution to confrontational problems in our society today. And I understand that people just want stuff to go away when someone gets hurt. 

But, it is really, really depressing to me to read all across the Internet that intent no longer matters. Accepting that you made a mistake when you actually made a mistake is one thing, but to apologize for a mistake that only exists in another person's head is difficult to swallow. 

More than that, it doesn't actually solve anything. We are a culture now that just wants to hear the bad person apologize so we can all move on with our lives. 

Dave Letterman makes a joke about Sarah Palin's daughter and we can't move on until he gets on his knees and says he is sorry. Don Imus says "nappy headed hos" and the same thing happens. Randy Marsh says "nigger" on South Park and society won't let it go until he kisses Jesse Jackson's ass -- literally. Great, the pain is buried again, but the underlying issue went unaddressed.  

I continue to argue that the exact wrong thing that we could do in this situation is immediatley gang up on Mike and Jerry and demand that they apologize. Instead, we should turn to the person who was hurt by the joke and see what we can do to understand them and help deal with their pain. 

Intent should matter. If it doesn't, then morality is subjective. 

Robsavillo
February 04, 2011

Wait, wait, wait. Did you just defend a clearly racist comment?

Freedom of speech is a two-way street, Jeff. Those who say something offensive and hurtful shouldn't be surprised when others call them out on their shit.

Img_20110311_100250
February 04, 2011

I did not defend a clearly racist statement. 

I absolutely agree it is a two-way street. That is my point. I never said Imus shouldn't have apologized, only that forcing them to apologize and then moving only shuts down the dialog. 

Me
February 04, 2011

I don't think that's true, Jeff. Quite the opposite, in fact. Apologizing usually means that the party in the wrong has recognized that they've -done- something wrong, which -opens- the doors to dialogue. It's when a party -doesn't- apologize for a perceived wrongdoing that the aggrieved parties begin to feel even more aggrieved and things begin to spiral.

I don't think you meant it this way, but it comes across as a little patronizing when you say "Instead, we should turn to the person who was hurt by the joke and see what we can do to understand them and help deal with their pain." When it comes to something like rape, do you really think any of us here are equipped to help a rape victim deal with their pain? That's the kind of thing that calls for some serious professional training in order to handle adequately.

Authorial intent is a tricky business. Not everyone agrees that intent even matters when it comes to art and film criticism. Like I said in the column, we don't always get to control an idea once we release it into the world. You can never take it for granted that someone is going to first ask what you meant by a thing before they react to it.

Finally, of course morality is subjective. There's no universal law of morality that all human beings share. We might have some basic principles that recur in various societies and cultures, but if morality *wasn't* subjective we wouldn't have thousands of years' worth of history killing each other over disagreements.

Default_picture
February 04, 2011

@Keith. They are both married and both have children. (Unless you knew that and were being sarcastic and I did't catch it. If so, feel free to call me an idiot ;)

Img_20100902_162803
February 04, 2011

I really dig the notion of authorial intent.

The PA guys are coming off as bastards, no one questions that it was artistically wrong to make a joke about rape, they just come off as abject human beings.

Snapshot_20100211_14
February 04, 2011
I understand what you're trying to say. However, realistically, its the same thing as telling me not to walk while im there to not offend someone in a wheelchair. This whole argument is because some feminist idiot needed to make one of her personal issues heard through an outcry on the internet. I wish the penny arcade guys had stood their ground on this issue much more than they did. Anytime a feminist speaks nobody should take notice. You are honestly sticking up for something with no merit. Maybe we all shouldn't yell while were there because someone was traumatized by someone with torruetts. This is a joke of a topic to even discuss. I know everyone here will see my response as being completely ridiculous for being so far against it, but we should question how passionate you are for your side as well. Its written well enough that i wouldn't be surprised if you were her writing it behind someone elses name. Excuse grammar, i wrote this on a phone lol
Img_20110311_100250
February 04, 2011
Authorial intent doesn't matter in art. It matters in life. Yes, dealing with the pain is far more difficult than just saying sorry. That doesn't make forcing someone to apologize is the right thing to do.
164509_184978324846425_100000027754882_677051_4358835_n
February 04, 2011

Very nice article, Dennis!

While the original PA comic strip didn't really offend me, I find the actions of some of the people involved since then to be a bit nauseating. The people who have been harrassing Kirbybits are just proving another one of PA's comics correct - the Internet F#&%wad Theory.

The whole deal with the t-shirts is incredibly trollish and insensitive as well, but I actually don't mind if people show up to PAX East wearing them. I say take it as a sign...of who to avoid contact with.

Photo_159
February 04, 2011

Nicely put Dennis



Here is the larger problem though. Just because you don’t get to control an idea after it’s released into the wild doesn’t mean you should have to put up with the people who are interpreting that idea entirely out of context - one way or the other.



For the record, I don’t think it’s wise to antagonize those people either.



I would have ignored them too. It’s not my job to police the internet looking for every corner that these vile trolls are spewing garbage and then slap them on the wrists. Nor is it my job to try teach people the correct way to interpret my work.



It is more frustrating when people are pointing fingers at Mike and Jerry even though this type of terrible rampant “community” behavior exists in almost every online community out there - Including the same community who is trying to point the finger.



Should PA have spoken up when things started getting really out of hand and before people threatened to murder one of their families? Probably.



They didn’t, but they did end up apologizing (FEB 3rd PA post) and telling people to knock it off. What more can they do?

I am not asking to be antagonistic I am really curious to know what they can do to make things better... a lot of damage has been done and honestly I feel like people are just digging the heels into the ground instead of looking at it from both sides.

I have yet to see someone suggest a realistic solution to the problem post dw shirts.



@Dennis

I saw your blog post the other day(yesterday?) - I hope you don’t think I am just trying to be a saber rattler or anything (I wont assume one way or the other). I have never even been to PAX nor did I ever plan to attend one. On top of that I have only read the comics occasionally. I just think people should be more practical when considering perspective and context instead of just assuming things. Sorry for writing so much.


Default_picture
February 04, 2011

I'm pretty sure PAX East will be a better place without these people attending. After reading kirbybits' blogpost, I feel her anti-male sentiment would create a threatening environment for me at PAX.

Me
February 04, 2011

@ Jeff - Authorial intent doesn't make sense conceptually as applied to "life." And it's kind of ridiculous to propose that anyone "forces" anyone else to apologize. There's always a choice.

@ Stefanie - The idea of warning signs of whom to avoid isn't an invalid one, but that's also precisely what I'd like to avoid happening. It will utterly ruin the idea of PAX as a unified haven for gamers, and will create "Us," "Them," and the other people who might not care one way or the other.

@ Evan - Apologizing for writing too much? That's what we DO here, isn't it? ;)

I don't know what "put up with people" means in this context. Is not putting up with them telling them shut up and go to hell? That doesn't tend to work out well for anybody. To a point, part of living in a society is learning to put up with everyone. If you want to be in the public eye, you have no choice but to "put up with" everyone in your audience, or else you lose that audience and become irrelevant.

And then you certainly don't have to "put up with" anyone...because no one's "putting up with" you, either. Food for thought to anyone who wants to be a writer.

I would leave the "what more can they do" to people like my wife who have a vested interest in this sort of thing, but I believe that what some people are waiting for is a simple admission from Mike and Jerry that they screwed up by  not trying to understand what people were upset about in the first place rather than mocking them. I personally haven't seen that apology yet. I've seen apologies for behavior following the production of the t-shirts, and I've seen Jerry's latest post where he talks about what he's learned, and then ends with saying he assumed a dialogue wasn't possible, but perhaps he was wrong.

I think he was. Admitting that is step one. Step two is actually having that dialogue now that he understand it's possible to have one constructively. All the bad feelings, all the anger, are within MIke and Jerry's power to heal...but first they have to admit to having made a mistake. It's like I said above - when you admit error, you open the door to discussion, and eventually to putting the issue behind you.

I won't pretend that's easy. It takes a very mature, confident and self-aware person to be introspective enough to look at themselves without judgment and recognize error. It's the "without judgment" part that gets tricky.

Think about the last time you screwed up. I mean, really badly. And it adversely affected someone you respect, admire, or love. Parents. Siblings. Partners. Friends. Are you going to be able to reflect on that and admit your error without feeling bad about it? And if you feel bad about it, are you likely to also feel shame? And if you feel shameful, are you likely to be willing to admit the mistake easily?

IMHO, as long as a person is willing to examine what they've done, they deserve some space to figure it out. The problem with the rabid attacks on Mike and Jerry is that they push them into a corner and deny them the space they need to figure out -how- they screwed up such that they can make honest amends.

Default_picture
February 04, 2011

Thank you Dennis. But this comment thread makes me quite sad (and not on any single side).

Eugene Jarecki in this week's Questions For in the NYT: "We’ve reached the point of such hysteria and the stupidification of the American discourse that to simply approach a subject in a measured fashion is to totally jam the circuits that currently exist for that kind of communication."

Default_picture
February 05, 2011

I think I'm going to sidestep the comments at large, and just add to the kudos for your piece. I recently got embroiled in a debate about the whole dickwolves thing, and it's so hard to explain that while I am personally not offended by the comic strip, the followup, or the shirt, that I can certainly understand the people who found any or all of the above offensive.

People had a hard time accepting that, even if they think the reason people are getting offended is silly, that it's still an unclassy move to outright troll them for having the gall to be offended, and with a piece of official merchandise no less. And hey, that'd be well within their rights too, but if they're going to continue to be the self-declared ambassadors of gaming, they shouldn't be surprised when something like this blows up in their faces.

Again, good job, and well spoken.

Picture_002
February 05, 2011

Great article. That all said, I have to say part of me is a bothered and conflicted concurring with so much of that Dennis has to say in the article proper and being definitely distanced from so much of this thoughts in this comment thread.

Avi2
February 05, 2011

It's a touching article, but I'm afraid I don't side with your points, valid as they may be. From my socially educated standpoint, I don't believe that the initial trigger was intentional, rendering it a random variable. Now, the later inflation is of course not tasteful, but not even that warrants a blockade of any kind. Purely from a medical standpoint, it's more harmful to try and frantically control your environment at all times than it is to try and create a structure in the chaos.

In any trauma, not just this particular one, there's a huge amount of things that will lead to distress to a person that has not completely put place to the initial attack. But demanding politically correct behaviour from the entire world is just madness in itself; just as much as the madness you're trying to stop. If that person would not attend because of said shirt, it might as well stay home in fear of any other possible trigger. Let's say some inconsiderate person wears a Cannibal Corpse Tshirt; that's bound to throw a red flag up. That person wouldn't be open enough to attend large social gatherings in any case.

I think in all there's a large group that is trying to zone in too much on certain subjects and not viewing the big picture that people who were traumatized need counseling and guidance for themselves, not the environment. That guidance will aid them to stay strong, mend and venture out into the world where people will not view you as an equal. I'd like to conclude that as a paranoiac and agoraphobic person, I know exactly how it feels like when you're thrown into a hostile environment; it's awful. So, here's hoping kirbybits (and any other person of course) may find the help she needs and overcome the problem she's faced with.

Img_20110311_100250
February 05, 2011

With the second comic strip, t-shirt, and snarky remarks on twitter or where ever, the PA guys were responding directly to the people who called them rape-apologists. That was a response directed only at the people who said that the PA guys were as bad as someone who says that "she was asking for it." 
Meanwhile, there were people who were being ignored with real concerns. People like Kirbybits who were simply saying that they were hurt, but weren't conflating what Jerry and Mike did with rape apology. 
If we want to criticize Jerry and Mike for taking the troll bait and only responding to the people accusing them of the worst while ignoring the reasonable people, then count me onboard. I think that Jerry and Mike realize that is what happened now.
The reason I am so defensive, is because I would react the same way. It is only natural. 
If one person approaches me and says in a calm and reasonable manner, "I was really hurt by that last thing you said."
While simultaneously a deranged person is screaming, "RAPE APOLOGISTS! YOU ARE AS BAD AS THE RAPISTS! YOU ARE PROPEGATING RAPE CULTURE!"
It will be difficult for me to ignore the deranged person. Regardless, that that would be the right thing to do. 
I think we are all kidding ourselves if we are going to sit back in our smoking chairs and judge Penny Arcade, without putting ourselves in their position. 

Photo_159
February 05, 2011

@Dennis

"Is not putting up with them telling them shut up and go to hell?"

I could be wrong but I don't think thats what happened at all.

At least I wasn't able to find any posts by Gabe or Tycho to the extent of that - maybe in the twitter feeds? Do you have a link?

From what I saw, PA guys were on Shakesville comments - called the author a hypocrite for saying she though their other comics were funny and then PA stupidly provided links to some of their more offensive content. I dont even know if those were really the PA guys.

By not putting up with people I just mean you are in your right to ignore them especially if those people have taken your work out of context - regardless if those people are offended or offending other people.
 

Me
February 05, 2011

@ Evan - We don't need to take things so literally. Mocking someone's discomfort is, for all intents and purposes, telling them to shut up and go to hell.

You absolutely have the "right" to ignore people who take your work out of context...but if you're a writer with an audience and you begin to alienate segments of your audience, and other segments of your audience are deciding whether to continue following your work based on how you're handling the situation and thus may also become alienated from the writer, isn't it in the writer's best interest not to ignore them and address the situation?

@ Jeff - I think most of the reasonable analyses of the situation, like Leigh Alexander's, do account for considerations of what it must be like to have an audience turn on you; and as I said above, if you push someone into a corner by attacking them, you don't give them room to understand what happened. I agree with you on that point.

@ Daav - Invoking "political correctness" is a derailing tactic to avoid addressing the salient issues, IMHO. It's just too conveniently trotted out to avoid taking any responsibility for speech; and the only "sides" I recognize here, if any, lie between sensitivity to one's feelings or being insensitive. This goes way, way beyond issues of what is or isn't a trigger, or what kind of humor is or isn't appropriate. Those have been reduced to ancillary concerns at this point which may never be resolved adequately. This issue of putting the debate aside for the duration of PAX East is what my column was about.

I think it's difficult to stay on that topic because the situation has become so multilayered, but my immediate concern is maintaining the spirit of PAX East as I've come to know it personally from attending the event on both coasts. Everything else, the whole debate, is something likely to simmer for a very long time.

@ Ron - I think the important thing to note is that people are actually trying to engage with this topic in this comment thread in an open and honest fashion, for the most part. They're trying, and that's what eventually leads to understanding. The discussion has value in and of itself, which is why I've stuck in here as long as I have. I normally would have long since dropped out of a comment thread on one of my columns.

Photo_159
February 06, 2011

@Dennis

Haha, your not wrong. I will give you that much.

Dennis - Thanks for doing such a great job of facillitating this conversation. Im putting my cards down but I look forward to your next post here on Bitmob!

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.