Salon “Journalist” Amy Mccarthy Insists Metal and Hardcore Shows Are Unsafe For Women

The Black Dahlia Murder at the Warped Tour 2013. Moshpit

Apparently country, metal, and hardcore shows can all be lumped into one large group of live shows that perpetuates a “War On Women.  We now all know that the people who go to see Stick To Your Guns also go to see Carrie Underwood.    Who would have thought?!?!

I strongly doubt our friend Amy Mccarthy has actually been to a hardcore or metal show, but it didn’t stop her from slandering the scene and equating the “dangers” there to something resembling the Congo.   She mentioned posers in her article, and if there is one in the room, its not any of us.  If her writing is any indication, she’s never been to the Warped Tour, to SXSW, Mayhem, Riot Fest, Chaos, ect.

This still doesn’t stop her from equating metal/hardcore shows with country and others to the point that she never bothers to really distinguish between them.   It’s not incidental, its deliberate so that her article appears to encompass as many genres as possible.  All shows are lumped into the “evil” category via guilt by association.    Obviously, she has been to a country show, but she dishonestly tries to pretend that hardcore/metal shows present similar “dangers” of which will be covered soon in this piece.

Well, the “War On Women” now spreads its grimy manly tentacles into our scene – and Amy Mccarthy is downright appalled.   How do we know this?  You can read her entire, “Punched, groped, beer thrown in my face: Being a woman at a concert can be terrifying, at the vestige of powerful, fair, and unbiased journalism that is Salon.    Wow, I didn’t know only women could be terrified at shows, but who cares when the other gender gets hurt, right?    Also, until Amy Mccarthy told us, I didnt know that girls who attend shows are fragile, scared, helpless, and frightened creatures who can’t think for themselves whatsoever.  I’m glad I know this now though.

Before I forget,  shame on AltPress for promoting this hit-piece. 

She talks a big game, but lets look at some of the points she makes about metal and hardcore. She’s one of us – not a poser, groupie, ect – right?


“Most women who frequently attend live shows will tell you that they have been harassed, groped or assaulted as they listen to their favorite bands. A standing-room-only show, when you’re wedged into a massive crowd fueled by beer and testosterone, is particularly scary. There seems to be a spectrum of violence that women experience at live shows, ranging from misogynist verbal harassment to sexual assault.”

Notice her claim about “most women”.  Well, if we want to accept her bizarre anecdotal claims, ask girls you know who go to live shows how often they have been harassed, groped, or assaulted.     No, having your butt touched when crowd surfing doesn’t count.  Neither does it when you are jumping up and down, moshing, that OTEP incident, or trying to get a better spot closer to the front.  You will hear some stories, but they are exceedingly rare – you know like false rape claims.

“A standing room-only show.”  

How many metal/hardcore shows have you been to where it has not been standing room only?  Yea, that’s what I thought.   Maybe she is referring to other genres, but she doesn’t bother to make that distinction.  Accident or assassination?  Our reputation lies in tatters.    (Only exception I’ve experienced to this was Summerfest in Milwaukee when August Burns Red and The Devil Wears Prada played in which the stands cut down on much of the area available to stand and mosh.)

“Most important, though, the dangerous and unpredictable nature of concert culture means that it is often entirely unsafe to be a woman in a dark, crowded music venue.”

Red flags.

Anyone else get the idea that she hasn’t been to any metal/hardcore shows in a dark, crowded scary horror movie-like music venue?   How many stories has ANYONE heard about someone actually being sexually assaulted – real sexual assault that is  – or being raped at a show?

“Even when the violence doesn’t escalate to the level of rape, unsolicited touching and aggressive come-ons from drunk musicians and fans alike is all too common.”

This isn’t at all subjective.   Unsolicited touching.   Consider when A Day To Remember played The Rave up in Milwaukee and it sold out.  It was so damn packed that in no way could you not touch someone.  But yea, I suppose there were thousands of incidents of unsolicited touching that happened there.

Drunk musicians and fans? That is very specific to certain festivals and shows.  Most smaller shows don’t have that many people drinking, and for some its not even available. I.E,  how many people actually drink at the Warped Tour? Consider the price of beer and if they are even of age and its pretty damn slim.



“Venues can implement a number of procedures to make shows safer for women, like adding barricades to mosh pits and increasing security presence in the crowds, but it’s still difficult to control what happens in the middle of a frenzied show.”

Catch that?

“Adding barricades to moshpits.”

How exactly is that even possible – considering how, when, and where moshpits actually break out at show?  You would think she’s never even see a pit before. Neither has she considered the fact that putting barricades around a pit would end up hurting people pushed out of the pit…   This in particular flabbergasts me.   Add “Fun Police” and moshpit killer to Amy Mccarthy’s resume.

So Misogynistic. So Metal
So Misogynistic. So Metal

Consider what happens when “security” is added to pits.   They usually attempt to break them up, fights occur between moshers and security guards, and the show is often then usually stopped.   Give it a few weeks, and you fight that yet another venue will no longer hold shows.

“In fact, they should be using their positions to outwardly do everything they can to ensure that these shows are safe for female concertgoers.”

The point of hardcore shows is that they are not safe specifically for anyone – including women.  The aggression and danger is part of the reason people go.  It’s not a Blake Shelton concert environment, and we shouldn’t pretend that it is.  You can’t demand that the shows become made “safe” for a specific group and then get mad when people call them posers, because lets face it then; they wouldn’t actually want the same treatment as the rest of the “group” gets.     If you go to a show to see The Acacia Strain and you get near the pit, people aren’t going to stop moshing or suddenly restrain themselves because you have to decided to enter the area – man, woman, or otherkin.

Entitlement much?

Well, you heard it from her.  We need to show special care, treatment, and deference toward women at shows – because they might get hurt.   I think Amy has a strong developed sense of female narcissism.   Toss out that equality concept.    Perhaps she should go to a Terror show and tell them how it needs to be a safer environment.  I can’t help thinking, does she actually care about the safety of all concert-goer, or just women?

I’m five foot seven and I have to carefully consider what pits I go into and I have to be very aware of who is moshing to ensure I don’t take a punch to the face.    Apparently, my safety doesn’t matter – unless I’m a woman.   Then again, if I go to a show, I don’t expect the atmosphere and environment of the show to change just for me.   You would think that Amy Mccarthy believes women are these weak creatures to be entirely helpless and completely unable to protect themselves.   (Equality right?)


“As for the fans, well, it’s probably unrealistic to ask that they keep their hands to themselves and quietly enjoy the music. Ultimately, it is the artists who have the most responsibility and the greatest ability to ensure that the environment their music cultivates is not inherently aggressive toward women.”

Yes, its VERY unrealistic to ask fans not to mosh and to “keep their hands to themselves.”    Any metal/hardcore artists that ensure an environment that is not aggressive isn’t going to be around very long.

Notice though that the aggression is fine, as long as its not toward women. Earlier, she quotes Lorena Cupcakes complaint, “Our motives are cast as disingenuous; we’re called groupies, posers, and hangers-on. Male dominance is established by questioning our right to be there at all.”

Well, this is why your motives are being questioned.  You want to be there, but you don’t want to participate equally in the aggressive nature of the shows? You want the shows to be specifically made safe for you, but your not a “hanger-on?”

Amy mentioned earlier in the article that, “Depending on the genre you enjoy, male fans who share your interests might call you a “poser,” or insinuate that you’re not as punk or metal or hip-hop (or as whatever) as you claim to be.”    Labeling an environment like a hardcore show as being aggressive toward women, makes it easier to call women  “posers” who participate, because instead of being treated the same as any other guy, you show them special treatment.

The irony is that shows are filled with men who literally white-knight for women all around. Plenty are nice of enough to stand in front of them and shield them from the pit, taking those windmills to the face because equality.  Or helping them to safety when the pit really starts to get going during a The Acacia Strain set.   Girls will tell you tons of stories like this.  Oh wait, I forgot.  Women are weak, helpless, can’t think for themselves, or even enjoy a show!

Personally, I’m a bit more of an asshole and a true equality feminist. Unless I know a girl, and she gets near the pit, I’m not shielding her body with mine – cause equality.  She’s not a poser, she can take – just like me or any other guy – right.    On the flip-side, guys usually care if they hurt a girl in the pit.   They don’t however if you are a guy – your size doesn’t matter.


“Other times it involves being forcefully shoved across a raging mosh pit by someone three times your size, or being touched inappropriately as you try to crowd-surf. These may seem like harmless little interactions, something that should just be expected in a rowdy crowd.”

For once, know your pits.  This applies to literally everyone at the show, regardless of whatever Tumblr gender identity you have that day.   I’m a smaller guy, so I have to pick when and where I go in, especially when the breakdown hits.  I doubt she has ever experienced one.   For two, “women being pushed into moshpits”.  If you are standing near to where a pit suddenly breaks out – that could be anywhere, especially at larger shows – everyone gets either pushed into  the new pit or pushed back out of it, something she isn’t aware of.   I smell a rat Scoob.

Notice how she talked about crowd surfing. It’s pretty damn near impossible not to have your butt touched as you are getting passed toward the stage – or getting your wallet stolen if its in your back pocket.
Surprisingly, Amy actually talks to an “expert” that gets it:

“Metal expert and weekend editor of VICE’s Noisey, Kim Kelly, is particularly used to being banged up at the end of a show. “If I’m at a death metal show or a DIY thrash show in a basement, I know things are gonna get crazy, bottles are gonna fly, and I’m probably going to come home with a few bruises,” she says. “I’ve always been able to hold my own, but women who are smaller or less brash than I am might absolutely feel intimidated by the testosterone-fueled violence. In my experience, if you don’t want to get hurt, you stand in the back or on the side, and keep your guard up.”

I find it humorous that someone – girls specifically – are going to feel intimidated by testosterone-fueled violence.  Consider the amount of places left that you can actually let out your aggression and feel the testosterone coursing through your veins is pretty slim.   Metal/hardcore shows are about all that’s left.


A space that isn't safe for women.
A space that isn’t safe for women.

Hardcore shows are probably the only place where its part of the show.  It should be obvious, but feminists types like Amy want to curb our outbursts of toxic masculinity at our last remaining refuges where they aren’t shunned, but are actually embraced – a sense of community if you will.

When we get upset and speak out about the nonsense, outright lies, falsehoods, and the tripe she spews, we are then of course proving exactly her point – that metal/hardcore aren’t safe spaces and places for women and that we are all terrible misogynists.  Yea, well fuck her.    Maybe eventually, she will name one of these many survivors who has ever been “raped” in this epidemic at the Warped tour. Or Chaos. Or SXSW.  Or Mayhem.  Or any of the hundreds of others.



“It doesn’t seem like too much to ask that the women who are just as much a part of these respective scenes — we buy just as many records, concert tickets, and band T-shirts as men, and are equally supportive of our favorite acts  – not feel physically intimidated when they’re out at shows. In New York’s hardcore scene, bands like the recently reunited Kill Your Idols make it a point to cultivate “positive mental attitude” at their shows and address inequities in their scene, proving that it is possible for these safe spaces to exist without compromising the rowdy vibe that is expected of hardcore punk.”

Safe spaces…

At hardcore shows…

In New York’s hardcore scene…

Yea, she just said that.   Based on everything she has said in this article, she doesn’t want to just kill off the rowdy vibe, she wants to salt the earth after she’s buried the corpse.   She wants to eliminate it and replace it with a safe space that doesn’t wreak of sweaty testosterone misogynistic fueled aggression.    Mccarthy believes that women are too fragile to be exposed to anything that involves… testosterone.

You would think she would know this, but the entire point of a hardcore show – especially in Boston, LA,  and New York is to let yourself go in the pit and at the show. Don’t expect “special” and “safe” treatment. If you want to roll with the guys, expect to be treated like anyone else in the show – especially if you go into the pit.

“Until we address the systemic issues that drive this violence, though, like rape culture and the nonsensical idea that women have to somehow “earn” their place as legitimate music fans, it is likely that even that wouldn’t be enough to make live music a safe and positive experience for women. Still, hearty encouragement from the acts onstage and the venues that host them would be a really helpful start”

What was that about posers? Groupies? Disingenuous?

Oh, that’s what safe-space demanding Amy Mccarthy thinks women are.  In fact,  if we created safe spaces and destroyed New York’s Hardcore scene by turning those triggering mosh-pits into seats filled with male zombies gazing unmoving and silent at the stage, it still wouldn’t be enough.

Don’t give into people like Amy Mccarthy.   If they are unhappy with their scene, they will go after yours, and attempt to kill it if they can’t be as happy as anyone else.  This is the worse form of narcissism – the take-no prisoners kind.    You know why people hate feminism? It’s because of women like Amy who demand that everything revolves around them and hell with everyone else.

Oh and just in case you actually like Country and think she might be over blowing things,  a commenter on Salon called out at least two of the examples which weren’t exactly true – if not outright lies:

While not attempting to minimize or dismiss any of the legitimate complaints of women who have been assaulted or otherwise abused, at least two of the examples provided are flat out false:

1) Tim McGraw was not grabbed “on the leg” — he was grabbed *on the crotch* and rightfully and justifiably responded by hitting the woman who sexually assaulted him.  Had the sexes been reversed, would you offer that up as an example of mistreatment?  I doubt it.

2) The “rape” at the Keith Urban gig at Great Woods was not a rape.  The charges were dropped because it was a consensual act.  The claim of the young woman was not that it was not consensual, but that she didn’t really want to have done it — and that’s a distinction worth making.  Its the difference between things happening without your consent, and things happening with your consent that you wish you hadn’t agreed to do. Huge difference, with massive implications for the other person involved, and definitely needs to be paid attention do.

Oh, also Amy Mccarthy: Don’t talk shit about metal and hardcore shows, until you’ve been to plenty of them.

Weight Loss and Caring About Your Friends

How much do you care about your friends?
How much do you care about your friends?

A friend of mine has been struggling in the dating market – to put it simply.  She wants a guy that is attracted to her, and she wants to share in that same reciprocity.   We will call her Liz.  A Facebook status about it went up.

(Disclosure: Liz had a crush on me for a long time.  Her weight was the main reason I didn’t share the same feelings.  You can’t force attraction. ) 

Now Liz isn’t exactly the most attractive girl, and the fact that she is overweight doesn’t make it any easier for her to improve this.   Most of her friends posted things like, “Oh you are sooooo pretty,” and “Guys will and/or should like you for your personality.”

I decided to be more honest, though I made sure to cushion it, “It wouldn’t hurt to lose some weight.”

Sensible advice right? Weight loss is one of the most effective ways to make yourself more attractive, assuming you are overweight.  Your 20s are a time when you should be making the most out of your looks – regardless of how limited they may be.   It is when you are at your physical prime.


Getting to a normal healthy weight?

Damnable fat shaming, body hate social media heresy.

One response involved something like, “Those people are shallow anyway, they should like you for who you are, and they wouldn’t be worth it if they don’t like you now.”

That’s flattering and to some extent is true, but it doesn’t nullify the fact that the potential dating pool of nice guys who may be interested in Liz for her personality and who she is are far and few between.   Then then throw in the percentage of “those”  nice guys who Liz is actually attracted to and the prospects are rather grim.

It is in fact a comfortable lie, but it ignores a fundamental truth; People are shallow. I’m shallow. Even those people who are not are very unlikely to give her a chance to reveal her inner beauty.

Instead of telling Liz the truth like real friends would, they continue to lie and tell her things she knows isn’t true.

As Andrew from TheRulesRevisited pointed out, in regards to a guy and his girlfriend,

“When you do these things, you are letting your girlfriend wallow in her mediocrity. If you tell your friend that she looks good when she doesn’t, she isn’t going to make an effort to look better next time”

You can boost her ego, but that won’t help her situation get any better. It also won’t promote REAL confidence.

Liz’s situation isn’t unique. It’s far more common then we realize and it means that there is a large group of people all seeking romance, but doing it with what is essentially a paper bag on their heads when compared to the more in shape parts of the population.

Basically there is an abundance of overweight people who don’t want fellow overweight people, but the slimmer more attractive folks they see in TV shows and film.   We all want a mate of the opposite sex who is more attractive then us.  (Excluding the 5% or lower of “other” sexual attractions.)

Don’t believe me?

A Large Nation-Wide Problem


Obesity and curse of being overweight have struck our society hard. Romance – or at least the possibility of finding it – is made even more difficult for a rather large percentage of the population:

  • Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are obese: 35.1% (2011-2012)
  • Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are overweight, including obesity: 69.0% (2011-2012)

Let’s not pull punches.  Being overweight and obesity has killed members on my dad’s side of the family because of things like heart disease, diabetes, and sleep apnea.   Thing is they already know about this and about how bad it is, but it’s so hard for them to lose the weight and there is a rather scary reason for it.

If we are perfectly honest, if you were overweight as a kid, it’s much harder to lose weight as an adult than it would be if you at a normal weight as a kid.

“The number of fat cells a person has is determined by late adolescence; although overweight and obese children can lose weight, they do not lose the extra fat”

What can we do with inconvenient truth?   Well, I could encourage her to “accept her body” and hope things get better.  Natural confidence right?  It won’t change the situation and it isn’t going to magically attract any “good-looking guys” to her,  but it should make her feel happy and proud about her body.

According to the body and fat acceptance crowd at Identities.Mic it will.

“The intersectional issues of size, health and weight loss are far more complicated than we’ve been led to believe, and this lack of understanding has led to weight-based discrimination becoming a serious problem across the world. Widespread anti-fat prejudice typically stems from misconceptions about health, weight and body positivity, and negatively affects millions of people every day.

People are allowed to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies, but we need to start treating people of all sizes with respect.”

Somehow, I don’t see how this is going to help these overweight people find the storybook romance they so desperately seek instead of the in-game WOW partner we are encouraging them to quest with.  Nor will it deal with the vicious health problems that will occur once you hit your 30s and later.  Note some damage is irreversible, and when that becomes the kind of body power/acceptance doesn’t seem very “feminist” to me.

Now, your life doesn’t exactly stop when you are overweight – nor should it,  but will you actually get the romance and love life you desire from the people you are attracted to?  The crew at RandolphRiot definitely seem to think so.

“Fat Fashion is all about women feeling comfortable in their own bodies no matter how big they are! This form of feminism is helping women feel empowered by their own bodies no matter how small or big the woman might be, and I believe that is an amazing accomplishment. This gives me hope!”

Hope.  It’s a big deal – for anyone. In fact without it, people have loss the will to live.  It can motivate you, but is the self-backlash worse if you realize the hope is false and/or misplaced?

“…Do you think this form of feminism can lead to the elimination of the perfect body image?”


Because people are visual creatures, and because some kind of “preferrable” standard will always exist.   We can eliminate all the current media driven standards on beauty and any words used to describe them, but culture will simply form new ones.    Why?

People are shallow.

I’m shallow.

However, most people aren’t going to wade through the unattractive waters to see if anything desirable lies beneath. Liz won’t be given the chance.  Perhaps those guys who don’t give her the chance aren’t worth it, but the guys who will?   Chances are, she isn’t going to be attracted to any of them.   I’ve seen it happen many times already.   Is there still a chance for the magical and mystical quest that is Romance?  Some fat-acceptance advocates on Psychology Today seem to think so:

“Love, sex and romance did not stop for close to a hundred million people! Let’s face it—we live in a culture that shames fat. An entire diet industry is built around that shame

We also live in a culture that shame cigarette smokers, but I suppose that doesn’t count. Well, is it shameful to encourage people to be healthier?

“The message that is being delivered in great big heaping doses is pretty simple: if you lose the weight—you will find love, romance and sex. Thin equals happy and entitlement. Fat equals broken and not worthy. What they don’t tell you is that there are plenty of unhappy thin people too. Thin is simply not the magic bullet”

She actually is right, but it will greatly increase your chances. People might actually give you a second look on Tinder before they swipe.  They might be more likely to help you out in the store – happens to me alot.  Guys might actually look directly at you for a while before looking at your friends next to you.

Is this mean?

At this point in the social justice epidemic, I can’t be bothered to care anymore if I want to continue merely drawing breath; thanks Tumblr and feminist fat acceptance screeds.   However, boosting their self-esteem by lying to them isn’t going to land them any more success in the dating market.   It doesn’t mean that they should give up and stop trying, but things could be much easier.

In case you don’t know, I’m actually a hopeless romantic.

Deep down, I want everyone to find someone to live that idea Notebook life with – that includes social justice warriors and ardent radical feminists.  I want them to experience love, romance, and that good old life that I myself desire.

Something else the manosphere has got wrong is its reaction to the fat acceptance movement and this whole “fat shaming” theory that is raging in the feminist blogosphere.   I’m not shocked that overweight obese feminists want to abort beauty standards, “cultural norms” of what is attractive, and the ideal body weight.  You would too if the men you were interested in were getting snagged by more attractive and fitter competition.

However, Fat Shaming” isn’t the answer.    If I’m brutally honest, I found ROK’s #fatshamingweek to be hysterical with some of their tweets.  Yes, I still find dark morbid jokes that deal with obesity to be funny.  (All or nothing when it comes to my take on comedy and what the limits are.)

As Mike has later realized, this does nothing to actually help, besides generating outrage, which it did very successfully.  None of that however is going to convince people to lose weight.  They already know they are overweight, and they know it is affecting them.    The hope you can provide support to the people you value in continuing to help them lose weight, exercise, and even diet.

What Can You Do?

If you really care about someone, you present them the cold harsh truth, but you are supportive in how you do it.  You are essentially giving a friendly critique, rather then a trolling criticism designed to make them feel more shitty.

Here’s a personal story that relates to my family:

My dad who was about 5 foot 7 inches and weighed over 360 pounds struggled to be able to do any exercise.   He started to rapidly gain weight when he hit about 23 and the weight just kept adding up.   Around 48, he started experiencing nausea, dizziness, feeling light-headed, and he was drinking an excess of water as he felt constantly thirsty.  He was was exhausted and never felt rested; his sleep apnea made this even worse.

A similar weight, lack of exercise, and bad diet had killed my dad’s father at only 54.  I was worried about his weight and so were my mom’s parents in particular.

What woke my dad up was finding out that he had the signs of type two diabetes.   From this point, he did everything he could to try to improve and change his diet.  He started to eat only whole foods, and avoided processed foods.  When he ate meat, it was grass-fed.  He would switch to actual raw milk.

Upon reading “Forks Over Knives” and doing a lot of his own research, he would become a Vegan for dietary reasons.  Fast forward just about two years and my dad has lost over 120 pounds.  He reversed the type 2 diabetes, has lower blood pressure than me, and has no signs of heart disease.

Just over a year into his Veganism, he started to be able to finally exercise, play floor hockey, and feel refreshed and full of energy.   (Note, I’m not a Vegan.)

That support is key.   Once you hit a certain threshold, it becomes VERY difficult to lose weight, like it was for my dad.  Often people’s jobs actively hinder exercise and our American time centered culture usually entails to many people frequently eating terribly on the run.

Often, I see many people in the fat acceptance movement promote the same kinds of lifestyles that killed my Grandpa so early as something to be embraced. It is isn’t and it rather angers and disturbs me that the movement is lying to people in the way it is.

However, that won’t blind me from the fact that it really is hard to lose weight, my dad being the anecdotal evidence.   My dad’s life didn’t come to a stop just because of his weight issues, but they were a profound barrier and hindrance to him living well, active, and actually enjoying each day.

People in the Fat Acceptance/Body Acceptance movement will stand by it, but sometimes it’s critics – myself included – overlook the efforts they put in to trying to live healthy lifestyle, being active, exercising,  losing weight, and trying to get healthier. (Diet may be the easiest approach at first.)  Instead of trashing them, we should be encouraging them.

Take for example a somewhat better known fat acceptance advocate by the name of Ragen Chastain who runs the advocacy site, “Dances With Fat”.   While we may facetiously chuckle at the title, Ragen is on the frontlines fighting the fat fight – but doing at least some of it in a healthy way.   She teaches a dance class, does some dancing herself, as well as from what I can tell some form of exercising.

Dancing is very good exercise.

She of course is a social justice advocate, member of the “fatosphere”, an ardent feminist, and she brings awareness to tumblrisms like, “Thin privilege,” in her fight against “cultural beauty norms”.  It perturbs and saddens me.  She lists more about her ideas:

As a plus-sized professional athlete, I practice Health at Every Size and as a human being I am an unwavering advocate for Size Acceptance – the civil rights truth that every body deserves respect and that the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable, not contingent on size, health, or dis/ability.

Wait what?

The civil rights truth that everyone deserves respect…  Well,  with ideological opponents, you often have to agree to disagree.

She also promotes health at every size.   What exactly is that?  Well according to her it is:


  1. Accepting and respecting the diversity of body shapes and sizes

  2. Recognizing that health and well-being are multi-dimensional and that they include physical, social, spiritual, occupational, emotional, and intellectual aspects

  3. Promoting all aspects of health and well-being for people of all sizes

  4. Promoting eating in a manner which balances individual nutritional needs, hunger, satiety, appetite, and pleasure

  5. Promoting individually appropriate, enjoyable, life-enhancing physical activity, rather than exercise that is focused on a goal of weight loss

Well there is plenty there that I and others would point out is wrong, but instead let’s focus on what she said that she get’s right which I’ve underlined and bolded.   At least she is trying to do better and get others who struggle with weight to engage in things like, “Life-enhancing activity.”    In fact, she does actually have some decent diet and activity ideas worth checking out.

(She actually finished a 26 mile marathon in Seattle about two years ago.  For her size and weight, that’s pretty damn impressive. I haven’t even attempted a marathon that long.) 

Good for her.

Hopefully, she lives a well-fulfilled life and enjoys every moment of it to the max.  I do however suspect that if she lost some weight, her beauty wouldn’t be as obscured.  Like it or not, people are more respectful, are friendlier, and more partial to those they regard as beautiful.

Insisting that everyone is “beautiful” at every size isn’t going to magically make it so.     Reducing the word so that it means essentially nothing won’t change that either.   It will just be replaced by words like, “preference”.

That is the point.  

If you want to widen your net to include more attractive dating partners, you will have to make an effort to do the same.   This may be shallow, but it’s something that will never change – regardless of how many times social justice warriors insist that it just merely another cultural norm that must be eliminated.

Encourage your friends to widen their nets by losing weight.  Yes, you can be happy and still be overweight, but you could be so much more.

Speak up.  


Don’t be afraid.


Tell the truth.


Support them. 


“Harassment” Doesn’t Affect Nor Negate the Validity of #GamerGate’s Call For Ethics in Gaming Journalism


Retaking The Narrative: Ethics in Gaming Journalism

“Guilt by Association” or rather “Wrong by Association” is one of the most utilized tactics of the online media age. It panders to the to the intellectual laziness in our culture which finds it much easier to dismiss arguments based on where they come from rather then what they are.

It is why you will see/hear people dismiss arguments and positions based on retorts such as, “Alex Jones nut”, liberal whackjob, bible thumper, fundamentalist, ect.  instead of bothering to actually examine people’s arguments  Why? Because it is far less tim consuming to simply dismiss ideas based on who has said them. This is essentially intellectual laziness, which as we can see, is really bad for a culture.

These tactics are used today by not just SJWs, but by most passionate souls on the internet.  Often in order to discredit your opponents argument(s) in the ever watchful internet eye,  opponents will attempt to associate a group or a movement with (1) their most radical members who are examples of poor judgement and unwise actions (2) define what the movement is about primarily about rather then it’s own advocates.

Essentially, they attempt to dictate and control the narrative and construct straw men about what you supposedly believe, and then proceed to beat the ever loving shit out of them.   It’s a dirty sneaky tactic and it is one we should be aware of.

Currently, I believe anti GamerGaters and SJWs have managed to dictate the narrative and determine what we will talk forcing us to often be on the defensive.

We’ve been sidetracked defending ourselves against “harassment” claims of people like Wu, Randi, Chu, ect.  While many in #GamerGate justifiably dislike what SJW’s have slowly done to gaming, they are not the main focus – Corruption and a complete lack of ethics in gaming journalism is.  To make matters worse, it isn’t even just gaming journalism that has gone down hill,  it’s the majority of publications, newspapers, and websites that have been influenced by the “Post Now, Update Later” mentality.

While it is unwise to ignore the actions of the SJWs that will do anything to destroy those who support GamerGate, we can not focus on them, yet we must still be aware of them. Remember, they are their own worst enemy.

I sense a disturbance in the Force

Their actions in doxing, outing, harassing, and threatening minorities, gays, women, transgenders who support GamerGate prove that they really don’t care about them to the neutrals and the rest of the world that is watching.  It shows that identity politics and ideology trumps even the most non-cis transgender black ect, ect, ect, person if they dare to support GamerGate.

It is not enough to be one of the “oppressed” according to SJWs. You have to fall lock and step in with their conclusions on anything, or you will be thrown to the wayside.   Even those who do acquiesce to their complaints about racism, sexism, homophobia, trans-phobia and every kind of phobia and “ism” out there still can’t win.

In the end, SJW’s have seriously curbed the artistic freedom of developers and have been able to successfully shame people with cyber twitter lynch mobs if they don’t hit all of the items on the checklist of Social Justice.  Daniel Vavra who has worked as a designer and writer for 15 years in the gaming industry has some sobering insight as to what SJWs are slowly doing to the industry:

The biggest problem we have is, that there is a group of people that think they know what’s right and what’s wrong and that they have a mission to make the world a better place and protect the oppressed by any means. They don’t even care what the “oppressed” people think. They censor any feedback they don’t like. They try to censor Twitter. They think that they are better than the rest. It’s funny that they are absolutely unable to have any discussion or provide solid arguments. Have you ever seen any of them in direct confrontation with their opponents? I guess you didn’t, because they only know how to bark at others from behind the fence and then how to play victims when somebody barks back.

And they will never be happy. If you don’t have a gay character in your game, you are homophobic, if you do have gay character in your game, you are homophobic, because they don’t like the character. If women in your game look good, you are sexist, if they look bad, you are sexist, if you can fight with them, you are misogynistic, if you can’t fight with them, you are using them as objects, if you don’t have any women, because there is no correct way how to have them, you are misogynistic.

It’s a witch hunt and it’s affecting my artistic freedom.

What is even more concerning is that they have become arguably the dominate representation in Gaming publications and sites and they are only too happy to throw the notion of journalistic ethics out if the “ends justify the means”.

They have been and still are willing to promote terrible game and give them unjust scores that don’t reflect their quality, plot, gameplay, ect as long as said games have the “right” messages.  If the game’s don’t have those “right” messages, they are willing to let that shortcoming unduly effect their reviews and discussion of it.   This is a double-standard that I will address later in this article.

The “Harassment Debacle”

I’ve seen countless twitter battles going back and forth in which Anti-GamerGaters continually attempt to put us on the defensive and divert the narrative away from talking about Ethics in Gaming Journalism to talking about supposed harassment that has happened to Anti-GamerGaters.

Observe that even minor “E celebs” like Mike Cernovich haven’t been just harassed, they’ve been doxxed and with no remorse from the supposed denouncers of harassment.  In fact, Zoe Quinn herself knew about it and helped in the dox.    So much for her complaints about doxxing.  Dox up not down right?

The hypocrisy is noteworthy.

Now, whether every case of harassment they claimed has actually happened or not, it is irrelevant to the our strongest demand – Ethics In Gaming Journalism, but I’ll focus more on this later.

A conversation I had on Twitter with an Anti-Gamergater and what I assumed to be a feminist – rightfully so later as I would find out – kept bringing up the “harassment” claims, as well as the supposed allegations on Hotwheels supporting child porn. Whether 8chan having Child Porn on their boards is factual or not, it doesn’t invalidate any of the arguments being made by GamerGate supporters there.   This is a point I’ll drive home later in this post, but first let’s take a quick look at the story.

I found an interesting forum thread while browsing through the story and one poster summed up the thought process at play here far better than I can:

Think the other major problem is that he’s just being disingenuous. Hotwheels and his volunteer moderation team have always been pretty clear that they do not tolerate illegal content on their boards. The article was supposed to be on how the moderation team at 8chan were complicit in the distribution of child pornography, and I mean the legal definition of the word here. As much as I am opposed to that shit on moral grounds alone, most of the ‘CP’ shown there is completely legal under United States law. If SJW’s don’t like it, then they should be lobbying to get it declared illegal, not complaining about the distributors. But Hotwheels himself has said that he received no reports of CP the night the author of the article supposedly went through 8chan to find CP, which indicates that the author made no effort to actually contact the moderators of the website to get it removed.

This could mean multiple things: 1. He genuinely saw CP, but nevertheless made no effort to contact the moderators to get it removed. This, at best, makes the message of the article moot, as mods cannot do their jobs if the community does not direct them to the one thread in the one board out of literally hundreds. It’s like recording somebody getting mugged to use as evidence of the inefficiency of the local police, while not bothering to actually call the police to report the mugging. At worst it indicates that he does not really care about the distribution of CP, just that he can use it as a weapon to attack his opponents). 2: he didn’t see anything that does fit the legal definition of child pornography in the US, and did not report it because he knows it would give Hotwheels a solid trail to link back to him and call him out for lying. 3: he has no idea how the moderation of 8chan works, and is trying to talk shit about stuff he doesn’t understand.

Also another important point that was made is a rather simple but shocking one: What if he planted the child porn there himself?  We have witnessed SJWs often “dox” and harass themselves in order to gain sympathy and appear to gain the moral high-ground. While that doesn’t necessarily mean that the same thing happened here, we should be VERY skeptical of any claims they make considering the dubious tactics they are willing to employ to “win”.

Anyway, back to the “harassment” issue.

So I undertook the foolhardy task of attempting to first question what “harassment” actually entailed.  Enter the mind of a male feminist SJW with whom I still dialogue with on Twitter to this day.

I found this conversation we had to be very useful for seeing what kind of arguments opposing viewpoints would make and how ingrained assumptions – me and him both – about how words are used and the people that use them affects the discourse.

One of the first things you’ll notice here is that they like to define harassment as actions and words that they don’t like – such as the 1000+ notifications and “telling someone to go die.”   I’m also sure some of you have noticed that “harassment” will also often include essentially anything and everything they don’t like.  I find this unfortunate because it destroys the necessary stigma for the words to actually mean something.

It becomes much harder to believe feminists and/or SJWs who claim they have been harassed because the definition has been applied to just about everything.   I just hope that when an actual case of harassment happens, the concept of “crying wolf” doesn’t hinder someone from receiving the help and support they may need.  No it wouldn’t be vengeance through Karma, it would be an opportunity to show compassion.

My Response:


Catch that?

This is a lesson for me to learn and that the rest of GamerGate should as well.  If the other side is going to chose their own “definitions” for what constitutes things like harassment, and any attempt to refute the obvious shortcomings of that definition can simply be dismissed by them as “redefining”, there is no point to addressing any conversational matter with them that addresses the subject of “harassment.”

I won’t make this same mistake twice.  When dealing with people – specifically SJWs – who literally bend ANY word to mean what they want it to mean, you will likely not be able to actually agree on the definition of the word.  Let it be noted that ideology and worldview – regardless of whatever it is affects how you view concepts as well as how you define them.

As that piece of historical and timeless wisdom says, “He who defines, wins.”

Logically Exposing The Double Standards

Many of our opponents, SJWs in particular, have often engrossed themselves so thoroughly in presuppositions that involved double standards.   The spewing of the entire “privilege” and “racism doesn’t happen to white people because they are not the oppressed race/class” manure is a perfect example of this.

Essentially they are convinced that it is okay for them to be “bad”, but only them.   Everyone neutral onlooker with a half a brain that hasn’t been indoctrinated 1984 style by the US public school system will be able to see through this bullshit.   It is our job to point said bullshit out.

When I challenged him statement that their has been little/next-to-no harassment from the Anti-GG side and showed him several links, he responded with:

For some reason the Twitter URL wouldn’t display the tweet on this page so I screen capped it.

Well now.  Isn’t this the same kind of “victim-blaming” behavior they have been accusing us of when we dared to doubt the veracity of Sarkeesian, Wu, ects claims of their supposed harassment?  Note his tweet is evidence of that “double standard.”  I proceed to point it out:

The Fallacy of Taking Responsibility For Others

In the following tweet I asked “her”  whether she would take responsibility for all the terrible things said by the “radicals” in feminism – specifically 3rd wave feminism – and denounce the label.

He predictably would not, and I can see why.  Notice what he said when I applied the same logic to feminism:

I then pointed out why then would he expect GamerGate supporters to do the same?  If it’s just the extreme exceptions to feminism that are saying absolutely horrific things, then shouldn’t we apply that same logic of “exceptions” to GamerGate?

I refused to accept responsibility for “harassment” in GamerGate and denounce the label because he wouldn’t take responsibility for “feminism” for the things said by radical feminists.

Logic hurts. It also is a valuable tool to employee to the onlookers on the sidelines whose minds have not yet been subjugated to the SJW cog.

Maintaining the Focus

In the long run, It actually doesn’t matter if harassment, doxing, ect has taken place or not.  In fact, let me repeat that:   It actually doesn’t matter if harassment, doxiing, ect has taken place or not.

It is a distraction and besides the point because it DOES NOT diminish in anyway nor invalidate our observations that (1) ethics in gaming journalism is a problem both before and right now, (2) the gaming press still has made no real effort to acknowledge the corruption and blatant bias in pretending to be impartial while actually conspiring to drive a very specific narrative that they felt their audience didn’t need to know, (3) a refusal to disclose collusion which was later revealed by lists in which journalists  secretly admitted choosing which stories they would and wouldn’t cover – the very definition of “biased media”, and (4) their persistent refusal to actually admit the glaring ethics violations that took place, offering no apology or remorse, and instead deflecting the criticism with accusations of “misogyny” and “sexism”

While we can condemn actual harassment that has taken place, we must immediately take back the narrative and focus i back onto what us and neutrals on the sidelines can plainly see:  The corruption and the lack of ethics in gaming journalism.   These attempts to insist that “harassment” diminishes our call for ethics in gaming journalism must be dismissed because they are actually irrational when you employ a tad bit of logic.

Note the exchange below:

His Response:

Let’s think about that for a moment.  Logic 101 dictates that it does not matter WHO advocates an ideology.  What matters specifically is the validity of that ideology, regardless of who actually advocates it.  Either the ideology is valid or invalid. Note that his tactic here is essentially another form of “Guilt By Association” or rather “Wrong By Association.”  

I’m going to break Godwin’s Law here, but not in the way you think.  Take into account Hitler’s and the Nazi’s emphatic support for environmentalism – the kind often endorsed by many liberals. Does that mean that “environmentalism” is automatically wrong because the Nazis and Hitler endorsed it?  No, it doesn’t.  Who espouses the ideas of radical environmentalism is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the ideology has merit or not.

Okay, Next:

Logic 101 again tells us that “truth” and what is “right” or “wrong” can not be accurately nor should be determined by a majority.  Might should not make right.  A majority of “Public” figures supported slavery leading up the Civil War.  Did that make it right?  A majority of “Public” figures opposed the Civil Rights movement during its struggle. Were they automatically correct being the majority?  You get the point.

I think it’s safe to say he missed the point. Entirely.  This doesn’t speak badly about him but rather shows what influence the assumptions of our worldviews have on how we perceive issues as well as others.

Ultimately everyone is GamerGate is responsible for themselves.

This is important to point out considering how many of us do not hold the same views on issues ranging from politics to culture.  I am one of the staunchest proponents of gun rights out there, I think Climate Change is nonsense, and I advocate making ALL drugs legal.

I can guarantee many GamerGate supporters disagree with at least one of those three positions of mine.  So should I denounce my fellow GamerGaters for not subscribing to EXACTLY the same opinions as my own? Nah, I’ll let the SJWs do that as they eat each other which we have seen them do so often.

The Importance of “Objectivity”

Let’s be honest; absolute objectivity is impossible.

Objectivity in journalism terms  these days is often understood to include journalistic concepts like “disclosure”,  telling both sides of the story, ect.  Any “decent” opinion column – that’s about as rare as a comet these days – will argue a position on an issue without completely misrepresenting the opposing side’s viewpoints and will refrain from creating strawmen.

As the internet becomes more and more of an echo-chamber, the definition of objectivity has changed much in the way the definition of trolling has.  If you disagree with someone, you are immediately accused of trolling after you have been accused of being “biased”.

To give you a very simple example, the definition of Objectivity has changed in as much the same way “Democracy” has.  People say America is a “Democracy.”  No, America is more of a Republic with Democratic elements. A pure Democracy is literally where 51% of the people determine the laws.   (Essentially 51% of the people in a “Democracy” could decide they don’t like Asian’s anymore and ban them from driving and it would be “the law”)

In fact, most news outlets and press publications don’t exactly bother to hide their biases. What this entails is knowing that Breitbart leans to the right and The Washington Post to the left.  They don’t attempt to hide it, so readers are aware of it, something that is important.

When it comes to many gaming journalists, they have gone through great lengths to disguise their biases, while still directly letting them influence their reviews of games and effecting which ones they promote.  Objectivity, in the sense of being completely 100% impartial, isn’t necessary or possible to avoid “corruption” in gaming journalism.   Those biases however can’t be left undisclosed if they will be allowed to effect the reviews and the rating scores given to game.

Some journalists have unfortunately allowed their biases to distract them – Bayonetta 2 for example – from reviewing the aspects of a game that matter – content, level design, plot, characters, gameplay, graphics, ect – and instead dismiss games based on whether they like them or not – which some people actually think is fine!  This brings up an important point when you consider the kinds of bonuses that developers can receive for good scores and how personal worldview bias can actually be used to penalize developers for making certain games. In fact, Kotaku ironically pointed this out in an article, “Metacritic Matters: How Review Scores Hurt Video Games.”  It looks like they have perfected this observation into a unique form of cultural warfare.

Eacaraxe – whose blog on gaming and media I highly recommend, expanded upon this line of though in a series of posts, specifically concerning the case of Bayonetta 2:

“Are certain critics, if they are docking points simply for finding the game’s content distasteful, trying to punish game developers and their publishers by denying them review-based bonuses? If so, is this emblematic of an effort on the part of critics to influence what games are produced and how they produced, contrary to critics’ claims? Is this a valid, or ethical, form of protest against content deemed objectionable by critics and those who produce it?”

This is certainly obvious in the case of the recent controversial game, “Hatred”.  Whether a journalist approves or disproves of a game is irrelevant. Their duty is instead rather to inform their readers about the game and include such unnecessary details like plot, character, gameplay, ect.  At least the creators of Hatred are honest and fully upfront with what their game is about, something many journalists are not and refuse to be.   Will however future reviewers allow this to effect their games and also effect the kind of perception that the public – particular the corporate sector?.

Kotaku’s Social Justice influenced reviews aren’t going to be objective and we know that.  We do however expect them to disclose relationships about the games they are reviewing, promoting, and giving attention to.  There is an expectation that they would acknowledge the conflict of interests between either (1) the publication and the story (2) the journalists involved in the story.

Instead of doing just that, they couldn’t be bothered to disclose the glaring conflict of interests at hand between Quinn and journalists like Nathan Grayson.  Disclosing a conflict of interest is Journalism 101. If you take ANY media journalism classes, it is one of the first things you will learn.

Think about anti GamerGate folks like Ian Miles Cheong that can boast that they don’t give a fuck about ethics in gaming journalism, to which no one in the the anti GamerGate coalition seems to object.  The long and documented lack of journalistic ethics still doesn’t appall them in the slightest. This is a point we must continue to ram home.   We can do this as we gather even more evidence that shows and will show just how bad the state of ethics in gaming journalism has become and that the corrupt gaming press still “doesn’t give a fuck”.