Archive for the ‘political correctness’ Category

It’s from the Duffelblog, a comedy/parody military news site, so it is a made up story, but it’s also pretty much true.  For those who missed the setup, read here about Sgt Maj LeHew discussing the failures of trying to put women into combat roles.  Basically they found out that water is wet, despite trying their damnedest to find the opposite under political pressure.

QUANTICO, Va. — Sgt. Maj. Justin LeHew was notified this week that he will receive an other than honorable discharge from the Marine Corps, sources report, after LeHew recently ruined his career by releasing negative study results instead of destroying them.

LeHew, the Sergeant Major of Marine Corps Training and Education Command, made the career ending move last month, by publicly releasing the methodology and results of a study that found gender-integrated infantry units performed worse than all male ones.

In his publicly-visible Facebook post, LeHew said Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus was “way off base” in his comments on women in the infantry, also adding that he was “unfair to women who participated in the study.” Since his remarks, LeHew has been “unavailable for comment,” reportedly chained in the basement of the Commandant’s home, sources say.

“His mistake was announcing facts,” Lt. Gen. Paul K. Van Riper (Ret.) said. “When faced with facts contrary to what the military and Congress wants, the facts must be changed. It’s standard procedure.”

Van Riper was speaking from experience. In 2002 he was the opposing general in the 2002 Millennium Challenge, where he led an inferior foe to victory against American forces. The exercise was started over with rule changes to ensure Van Riper could not win again.

The Millenium Challenge is worth reading about at their link.  While the quotes attributed to Van Riper are made up for humor purposes in the story… the story of the Millenium Challenge is not.

Not all negative results are supressed. A study found that despite an Army Optimism Program, 52 percent of soldiers had low morale. The Army took quick action to solve this problem by lowering the threshold of what it considered an unhappy soldier. Now only 9 percent of soldiers have low morale.

That would be funnier were it not for being basically what’s been done with (as one example) employment numbers by the Obama administration.  Redefine someone who’s unemployed as “no longer participating in the labor force” and then you don’t count them as unemployed.


WASHINGTON — The Marine Corps is expected to ask that women not be allowed to compete for several front-line combat jobs, inflaming tensions between Navy and Marine leaders, U.S. officials say.

The tentative decision has ignited a debate over whether Navy Secretary Ray Mabus can veto any Marine Corps proposal to prohibit women from serving in certain infantry and reconnaissance positions. And it puts Gen. Joseph Dunford, the Marine Corps commandant who takes over soon as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at odds with the other three military services, who are expected to open all of their combat jobs to women.  …

Putting the social justice to the warrior.

Mabus on Monday made his position clear.

I’m not going to ask for an exemption for the Marines, and it’s not going to make them any less fighting effective,” he said, adding that the Navy SEALs also will not seek any waivers. “I think they will be a stronger force because a more diverse force is a stronger force. And it will not make them any less lethal.

It’s going to make the Marines less effective, and it’s going to make the Marine Corps a weaker force because diversity is not strength.  And it will make the Marine Corps less lethal to the enemy, but more lethal to itself.

In fact, the Marine Corps even did studies and found male units outperformed female units.  I hear next up they’re going to do a study in LeJeune to see if water is wet and then one in 29 Palms to see if the sun makes things hot in summer.

…the report also pointed to the 25-year-old report by a presidential commission on women in the armed forces that concluded: “Risking the lives of a military unit in combat to provide career opportunities or accommodate the personal desires or interests of an individual, or group of individuals, is more than bad military judgment. It is morally wrong.”

Mabus, however, told the City Club of Cleveland that while the Marines did a long study of the matter, it relied on averages — such as the average woman can’t carry as much or perform as quickly as a man.

“The other way to look at it is we’re not looking for average,” said Mabus. “There were women that met this standard, and a lot of the things there that women fell a little short in can be remedied by two things: training and leadership.”

I’ve said this for years now – this is about the cocktail party circuit and the DC circuit for these kinds of social justice progressives and their sycophants.  Mabus is not going to ever be in danger from harm because a BAM who can’t carry Fred is going to leave him bleeding in a street in Ramadi.

Training and leadership do not make up for millenia of biology.  The only leadership and training he’s going to put forth are either specialty programs to advance women at the expense of better qualified men (which is a waste of resources and ability) or that the leadership and training in question means the people who are allowing women to fail and that the standard will be adjusted by making sure more women pass.

The recent “grunt life” story also highlights a lot of the failures that it doesn’t take a psychic to forsee:

Lance Cpl. Chris Augello arrived at the integrated task force believing that women should get a shot at service in the infantry as long as they could meet existing standards. It was a perspective that made him different from most male Marines, he said, and he’d argued with his unit members for hours on the point.

When Augello checked out of the task force months later, however, he submitted a 13-page essay to unit officials explaining exactly why the experience had made him change his mind.

Another reservist from Delta Company, 4th LAR, Augello, 23, said he volunteered for the task force for personal reasons — namely, a chance to accrue the six consecutive months of active duty that would qualify him to take advantage of the post-9/11 GI Bill.

He was assigned to the light armored vehicle platoon once he got to Camp Lejeune. Over time, he said, discipline broke down because some noncommissioned officers were hesitant to hurt the feelings of more junior female Marines with orders or correction. Romantic relationships and friendships between male and female unit members also became a distraction, he said.

“The female variable in this social experiment has wrought a fundamental change in the way male NCOs think, act and lead,” Augello wrote in the 13-page paper he presented to Marine leaders, which he shared with Marine Corps Times. “A change that is sadly for the worse, not the better.”  …

… the lance corporal said he became frustrated during group assessments, such as an exercise in which platoon members had to work together to haul a dummy weighing nearly 200 pounds out of the vehicle turret and to a designated recovery spot dozens of yards away. When partnered with the platoon’s female Marines, he said he frequently had to compensate for their smaller frames and lack of upper body strength by hauling more of the load.

“I told myself, ‘I don’t know how much longer my back will have after doing this,'” he recalled.

During one assessment, Augello said he found himself paired with the smallest male Marine in the platoon — one who was physically shorter and slighter than a number of the unit’s female Marines. But the Marine’s build and musculature made a significant difference, he said.

“I didn’t feel a lot of stress on my back because he was able to actually help me,” he said. “His upper body strength made the difference at the end of the day.”

He’s carrying the extra weight.

Amazingly, they even include an image and caption of a female Marine who needs help lifting shells.

29 palms arty bam needs help

What’s funnier yet is she’s mentioned in a positive light in this story, despite being the slowest in the team.

I’ve said this about armor and artillery units before.  There’s a lot more moving of big, ugly, heavy objects and more manual labor than women are up to.  Yes, there may be a handful who can hack it (at least for a while), but the wear and tear and strain is not the same on women, and the effect of having someone incapable of the job who is in the job just means the capable male Marine has to haul more weight.

On top of that, in-theater, combat arms units are frequently thrown into other roles.  What springs to mind first is that my battalion in the mid-2000s ended up sending units to Afghanistan that promptly abandoned their AAVs and were simply “amgrunts” for the duration of their tours.  Not their specialty but it’s what they had to do anyway.  Infantry units don’t just march and shoot – they spend a lot of their time doing hard manual labor like constructing fortifications that last anywhere from overnight to months to years.  Arty guys and tankers get tasked with plenty of things outside their MOS as well.  Any line unit is no stranger to the phrase “working party up”.  The multitude of roles that can be assigned any combat unit are only limited by the vicissitudes of war.  Having people who are only marginally physically capable in their primary role engaged in an activity (war) that will probably put them in additional strenuous roles is a recipe for failure.

Brown, the lance corporal who was one of only two female Marines to complete the infantry assessment, said she is certain she has found her calling as a grunt. She loved the experience, she said, from grueling humps to sweaty field operations and rough-edged, coarse camaraderie with other infantrymen. She attributed her success in the physical challenges in part to her background in sports, including a competitive soccer career that began when she was 6 years old.

That sports background was probably helpful.  What’s not helpful is that in the field and outside of a controlled test environment, she’ll hold up every bit as well as Captain Katie Petronio did.  Biology doesn’t care.

And SgtMaj LeHew pointed out the obvious – though it’s probably best to just read his words on this:

Ok, been silent long enough on this. I have been a part of this process from the beginning and I am just going to put it out there. The Secretary of the Navy is way off base on this and to say the things he is saying is is flat out counter to the interests of national security and is unfair to the women who participated in this study.

We selected our best women for this test unit, selected our most mature female leaders as well. The men (me included) were the most progressive and open minded that you could get. The commander of this unit was a seasoned and successful infantryman. The XO of this unit was as good as they get, so good the USMC made her the CO of the Officer candidate school.

I just selected the SgtMaj of the unit to head up our senior enlisted academy at Camp Lejeune, NC. No one went in to this with the mentality that we did not want this to succeed. No Marine, regardless of gender would do that. With our limited manpower we cannot afford to not train eveyone to the best of their abilities.

This was as stacked as a unit could get with the best Marines to give it a 100 percent success rate as we possibly could. End result? The best women in The GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below in most all cases to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study.

They are slower on all accounts in almost every technical and tactical aspect and physically weaker in every aspect across the range of military operations. SECNAV has stated that he has made his mind up even before the release of these results and that the USMC test unit will not change his mind on anything.

Listen up folks. Your senior leadership of this country does not want to see America overwhelmingly succeed on the battlefield, it wants to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to persue whatever they want regardless of the outcome on national security. The infantry is not Ranger School. That is just a school like any other school and is not a feeder specifically to the infantry.

Anyone can go to that school that meets the prereqs, just like airborne school. Kudos to the two women who graduated. They are badasses in their own right. In regards to the infantry….there is no trophy for second place. You perform or die.

Make no mistake. In this realm, you want your fastest, most fit, most physical and most lethal person you can possibly put on the battlefield to overwhelm the enemy’s ability to counter what you are throwing at them and in every test case, that person has turned out to be a man. There is nothing gender biased about this, it is what it is.

You will never see a female Quarterback in the NFL, there will never be a female center on any NHL team and you will never see a female batting in the number 4 spot for the New York Yankees. It is what it is. As a country we preach equality.

But to place these mandates on the military before thiscountry has even considered making females register, just like males, for the selective service is in all aspects out of touch with reality.Equality and equal opportunity start before you raise your right hand and swear and oath to this country.

Yes, we are an all volunteer force at the moment. Should this country however need to mobilize rapidly again to face the threats of the world like our grandfathers did, it will once again look to the military age males of this country to fill the ranks because last I checked, we did not require women to register for the selective service. Until that happens, we should not even be wasting our time even thinking about opening up the infantry to women.

To my female Marine friends out there, I love you to death, you are the best of the best and you have my continued admiration for what you do and to the Marines of the GCEITF….you are tops in my book for taking up the challenge…regardless what the SECNAV says about you not being the best that we could have put in that unit because you were….on all accounts.

And for those of you who don’t know Sgt Maj LeHew, his Navy Cross citation:

Citation: For extraordinary heroism as Amphibious Assault Platoon Sergeant, Company A, 1st Battalion, 2d Marines, Task Force Tarawa, I Marine Expeditionary Force in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM on 23 and 24 March 2003. As Regimental Combat Team 2 attacked north towards An Nasiriyah, Iraq, lead elements of the Battalion came under heavy enemy fire. When the beleaguered United States Army 507th Maintenance Company convoy was spotted in the distance, Gunnery Sergeant Lehew and his crew were dispatched to rescue the soldiers. Under constant enemy fire, he led the rescue team to the soldiers. With total disregard for his own welfare, he assisted the evacuation effort of four soldiers, two of whom were critically wounded. While still receiving enemy fire, he climbed back into his vehicle and immediately began suppressing enemy infantry. During the subsequent company attack on the eastern bridge over the Euphrates River, Gunnery Sergeant Lehew continuously exposed himself to withering enemy fire during the three-hour urban firefight. His courageous battlefield presence inspired his Marines to fight a determined foe and allowed him to position his platoon’s heavy machine guns to repel numerous waves of attackers. In the midst of the battle, an Amphibious Assault Vehicle was destroyed, killing or wounding all its occupants. Gunnery Sergeant Lehew immediately moved to recover the nine Marines. He again exposed himself to a barrage of fire as he worked for nearly an hour recovering casualties from the wreckage. By his outstanding display of decisive leadership, unlimited courage in the face of heavy enemy fire, and utmost devotion to duty, Gunnery Sergeant Lehew reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service.

Give ‘im one!

This stuff all went crazy in the last couple weeks, culminating with the Confederate flag in front of the Confederate memorial in front of the South Carolina capitol being taken down.

Of course, before that happened, the Confederate flag and any flags related to the Confederacy were taken down… at Fort Sumter.

The flags of the Confederacy that flew high over Fort Sumter, the site where the first shots of the Civil War were fired, have been taken down from the historic site.

The decision to remove the flags came from a directive by National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis in Washington, D.C. which reads: “Confederate flags shall not be flown in units of the National Park system and related sites with the exception of specific circumstances where the flags provide historic context. … All superintendents and program managers should evaluate how Confederate flags are used … and remove the flags where appropriate.” “Shall not be flown” is the only text that appears in bold in the letter.

The site of the Civil War’s first battle is clearly a “historic” one, but according to a Fort Sumter spokesperson, it doesn’t qualify as a place where “flags provide historical context,” local WMBF News reported.

Keep in mind again that’s where the war between the states started.

Meanwhile, in Memphis, suggestions were made to dig up confederate soldier corpses and presumably drag them down the street on fire before hanging them from bridge supports.  New Orleans radicals just want to tear down all the memorials in New Orleans and get rid of the fleur-de-lis.

Flag makers aren’t going to make Confederate flags anymore.

Golfer, idiot and coward Bubba Watson has stated he’s going to paint over the original Dukes of Hazzard General Lee car’s flag.

And people are calling the police when they see Confederate flags for sale.

A shopper perusing the merchandise at the Redwood Country Flea Market was so offended by a vendor selling Confederate and Nazi historical memorabilia, the person actually called 911.

Wallingford, Connecticut police were dispatched to the flea market to investigate.

The police chief William Wright tells News 8 “the reason no one was arrested was because the items were being sold on private property” — not to mention no laws were broken.

The caller demanding the police crush someone for the sake of their hurt feelings and burn some items they don’t like whimpers that they were “shaking and almost vomiting”.  And the natural result of someone who’s offended by memorabilia from a police state that ruled based on whims of tyrant’s feelings is to… call the police and demand they enforce a law based on whims of their own feelings.

“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
– George Orwell, 1984

Jazz Shaw at HotAir had this (and much more) to say at the end of the flag (and flagpole) tearing-down.

The flag flew on battlefields, it’s true. And there have been some hateful folk in more recent generations who chose to adopt it to their cause. But there were many others at various times who found a different meaning. There are families who pass down memories of not only the war, but of the crushing treatment the South received in the post–Reconstruction era and the postbellum South during the late nineteenth century. Traveling in time well beyond that, many of today’s families still feel the frequent reminders of the defeat. They understand that “The South” is still the safe harbor for comedians on stage and at the local bar… the butt of the last offensive jokes which can be told without fear of censorship. The stupid, southern rednecks who listen to unpopular music, go to NASCAR races, gig frogs, wrestle gators or whatever other stereotype you wish to apply. They speak more slowly. They have funny accents. And you can treat them like lesser people without fear of the SJW coming down on your heads. They’re just southerners… they don’t know any better.

And Jonah Goldberg pointed out that in contrast to the left’s vitriol against all things Southern, Charleston responded with dignity.

“Lots of folks expected us to do something strange and break out in a riot. Well, they just don’t know us,” the Reverend Norvel Goff told the packed, multiracial congregation of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., on Sunday. It was the first service since the horrific slaughter of nine innocent souls by a racist fanatic.

Less shocking, but almost as uplifting, was the conduct of the broader Charleston community, which has been unified and dignified, despite the expectations of some in the media — and the accused gunman, who had singled out Charleston because of its success at racial integration.

Not a lot of talk about the people who were hurt, the people who were killed, or how the community was harmed and how the community has responded, just SJWs exploiting a tragedy to push social change and do a little cultural cleansing of a group they feel they need to eradicate.

Both HotAir and Twitchy have really good links and info on the crazy reaction.  The short short version is that eBay, Amazon, etsy and Walmart have all pulled any and all merchandise with the Confederate Flag on it in some kind of crazed knee-jerk response to a murderer having some interest in the flag.

I’m not from the Old South, so I’m not particularly attached to the flag.  It holds no personal meaning for me, but it is a historical symbol.  Some folks are attached to it for personal reasons – like Byron Thomas, whose ancestors fought for the south and despite having been slaves, were compensated by the state.  It’s not part of my heritage, but it is still part of American heritage.

When I was stationed in NC for a while, I visited some Civil War sites, talked with some reenactors, and frankly they’re the only ones I see getting hurt in this.  They do living history and play dress-up, and now they’re suddenly terrorist racists or something.

It is telling to see handwringing by both leftists and the big city right worrying about “a creepy underground market” and driving a symbol underground to make it a martyr’s mark or something, where they’re all worried not that their spastic eradication and witch hunt is insane, but that there might still be some hardcore hate-driven hate-hate people who bond around a flag.  Because of course they don’t know any reenactors, and only know what their bubble tells them about that flag.

The folks ostensibly on the right asking “why do these places still sell Nazi and Communist memorabilia” are hopefully trying to point out a double standard, but risk getting even more things banned.  Frankly, if someone wants a bust of Stalin (20,000,000 murders to his credit) or a copy of Mao’s little red book (65,000,000 murders), it’s telling of the owner, whether they’re a historian, history buff, or Communist.  And if you want to dress like a Nazi, maybe you’re an apt pupil, or maybe you’re part of a theater company doing a version of The Producers, or you’re a WWII reenactor (yes, they exist).

The character of a person is not changed by obliterating a flag from existence.  But the character of the people demanding eradication is often made quite clear.

Stephen Miller hits on the real lesson to take from this (via Twitchy):

conf flag stephen millerIn three days it went from “let’s take down the flag in historic capitals because we don’t really need it there anymore” to “burn it all”.

ban all the things

Slippery slope?  Nope, just the left getting people to agree with them and do their bidding.  If it does not conform, it must be obliterated.

Also, the Confederate Battle Flag belongs on the General Lee… which is being stripped of the flag.

As a MOPAR guy, that’s offensive.  It’s also yet another reminder that the objective of the left is to utterly obliterate anything they disagree with.  It must all be destroyed.

Update: And now Google’s going to do its part to delete the Confederate flag from existence.

From the Washington Times:

“The pressure is on the services from the White House’s politically correct crowd vis-a-vis Obama’s Pentagon appointees, who will force the services to accept degraded standards,” said Robert Maginnis, a retired Army officer and author of the book “Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women Into Combat.”

In January 2013, then-Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Gen. Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs chairman, appeared in the Pentagon press room to make a historic announcement. They had lifted the rule that prevented women from serving in direct ground combat, such as infantry, special operations, artillery and armor.

The cancellation began a far-reaching process by each military branch to evaluate female candidates and the standards they must meet. The giant study is scheduled to end in January, when Defense Secretary Ashton Carter will decide which, if not all, occupations will be opened. If a service — the Marine Corps, for example — decides infantry should remain closed, it must prove why its standards cannot be lowered.

Gen. Dempsey laid down the law this way: “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?”

If women can’t meet a selection or training standard, it couldn’t be because the training and selection associated with the job is supposed to weed out those incapable in the field, it must be that the training and selection is too difficult and doesn’t need to be that high.

A few weeks back, I was reading about some ODA SF guys talking about how the selection and training was the easy part of their jobs.

SOI is not the same as being a career infantryman and MCT and schools are not the same as being armor or artillerymen.

There are jobs that require strength and endurance that women, due to biology, do not have.  It’s not a measure of character of the individuals involved, it’s not a judgement on their worth as Americans, it’s just a matter of biology and whether or not they can do a job.

If they can’t, but some politician in DC tells them they can, they still can’t.  The mass of a roadwheel, 155 shell, or mortar baseplate do not change due to an edict from DC.  It only means that the men in the job who can hack it will have that much more load to bear because if they leave the poor girl to carry her own pack, she’ll collapse and then they’ll be heartless reactionary misogynists who only hate women in the army because politics or something.

mountain infantry

As usual, nothing good will come of this.

gamergate in 5 minutes

For reference, this is what those “gamers are dead” articles looked like – all from the same day:


There’s also a pretty good recap at Breitbart here.

How or why would there be 14 articles published decrying gamers as horrible, wretched, misogynistic, angry misanthropes?  Well, that’s explained by the newest revelation.

Remember JournoList?  That secret leftist group of reporters who decided how to set a narrative across the media in order to favor Barack Obama and leftist causes by collaborating behind the scenes?

Well in the video game world, there’s GameJournoPros – another mailing list that seems to be mostly left-leaning “journalists” – just this time the social justice warrior variety who exist in video game journalism to bludgeon you with their club of moral superiority.

Despite the #NotYourShield folks of all stripes, colors, creeds, orientations and varieties saying “hey, video gamers aren’t just straight white males, so stop demonizing all gamers in my name as a _____”, the game “journalist” SJWs continue their assault, violently rejecting any calls for transparency, objectivity, and an end to the incestuous corruption of developers and journalists colluding with each other.


Broadly speaking, gamers don’t want to hear some social commentary on how “E3 is full of white male protagonists again and you’re racist because of it”, nor do they want to hear about how Princess Peach’s very existence is sexist or how Birdo is insensitive to cross-gendered reptiles.

Casual gamers find it obnoxious, preachy, and irritating, and more serious gamers find it… obnoxious, preachy, and irritating.  And now that game “journalists” behavior is being shown to be a collaborative effort for personal gain (as well as financial gain), it’s pretty gone quite a bit beyond that.

In the gaming world, if a game offends you, you don’t buy it.  It’s that simple.  The market will correct itself.  If you like good games and don’t really care that Cloud Strife’s haircut is offensive to the folically challenged, then you certainly don’t need someone going out of their way to scream about it and networking with their fellow game “journalists” to get the game shut down.

You certainly don’t need some games “journalist” using their connections and networks and going out of their way to make sure a game doesn’t get produced, doesn’t get distributed and doesn’t get sold because they find it offensive, or because they want to spike a game in favor of their developer friend’s game – and they’ll use their social justice/political correct angle to get that other game spiked.

Discussing the topic and demanding a reform of games journalism has resulted in predictable responses – including those 14 stories above.

But it’s a matter of course – they’re social justice activists who use the “you’re a racist/sexist/homophobe” as a way to demand that you shut up.

As I’ve noted before, the whole GamerGate issue is a microcosm of society where the leftist social justice warrior types have taken it as their personal mission to force everyone to knuckle under to their demands.  It’s pretty similar to what we see in politics and broader culture every time some leftist social justice activist claims some mantle of the oppressed and demands special treatment for it – while simultaneously never doing anything for the oppressed party (because then they’d lose that specialness to make demands).  We’re currently seeing the same thing happen to the NFL, where a handful of dirtbag players (and possibly team organizations that covered for them) have prompted activist groups to target the entire NFL, going so far as to make demands that have in at least one case specifically hurt (financially) the people they claim to want to help.  It’s all part of a broader cultural push, but that’s for another post.

GamerGate and Chivalry

Posted: September 7, 2014 by ShortTimer in Culture, Media, political correctness, Social Justice

What’s gone on with GamerGate in the last few weeks has been a microcosm of greater culture, and it’s fascinating because it moves so far and so fast.

Let’s begin this with a female indie game developer giving her thoughts on the oppressively PC video game journalism subculture:

Despite (or rather because of) all of the pontificating by left-leaning social justice types in the game industry about oppression, the easiest way for talentless hacks to break into the indie gaming industry is to associate with the sort of hipster liberal types that are getting all the publicity for their oppression. And worse yet, they get in over people with actual skills.  …

Let’s be completely honest: most women don’t play Quake III. Most of those few women like me who actually like first person shooters, grand strategy, space sims, and all those other genres that make up “core” gaming don’t care if they can play as a female protagonist, or if the girls are wearing skimpy outfits, or if you have to rescue the princess. They like the exact same things as men who like those games, and they just want good games, nothing more nothing less. And most of them feel that all this rambling on about representation is distracting from the real issue: big developers and publishers are making shitty games for mass appeal instead of the kind of awesome games we played growing up. When you distract from that to rant about what is literally imaginary misogyny you’re hurting women like me who just want good games.

Now, onto Chivalry, and not that archaic concept of men having different authorities and responsibilities than women, but the game Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.

The GamerGate story has parallels to something that happened a couple years ago to Torn Banner Studios, the small independent company that makes a cathartically violent Chivalry.

There was a very interesting response to Chivalry, and one of the few things I read about it in video game media/reporting (though that’s mostly because I care more if the game’s fun than what some reporter says – and Chivalry is a fun game, though obviously people have different tastes).

A forum member asked for female characters to be included in the game, and the developer said no, because he thought that an already violent game with the addition of female characters would lead to a horrible reaction in the fan community – basically that there would be verbal abuse by hyped-up male players playing a violent game.  He was pretty sure he knew the audience for his kind of game, and saw that as potential trouble.   As written by one of the devs:

This is a tough one, I actually think that adding female characters to a game like this would make it appeal less to females. Which at first sounds strange, but from my experience of the general maturity level of the internet and the unfortunately male dominated FPS market… I don’t think that it would add to the experience for women or men given the actions that would likely occur.

Hopefully that helps you understand why we decided not to go that route… I am totally fine with women fighting, but its the fact that it would probably overall harm the way the community would play the game that has me concerned.

And of course it was picked up by Kotaku as an example of sexism.  Yes, the same horribly biased, social-justice demanding Kotaku that’s been central to GamerGate.  Their article, while short, existed to tell Torn Banner that they were wrong, because sexism or something.  It’s a very short article from two years ago, but one that exists solely to say that a developer is wrong because he won’t put women characters in his game.

Just for reference, this is gameplay from Chivalry (don’t click play if you don’t want to see knights dismembered):

Now, in a game where one teamplay mode has one team literally killing off a village full of defenseless screaming peasants:

Would it really be a good idea to have screaming women involved in that, too?

If women were included, wouldn’t the response be that Chivalry is a game that hates women and literally rends them limb from limb?

Frankly, the developer made a hyperviolent game – one that is wonderfully cathartically fun – and made a decision not to include women in the game because he thought few women would be playing it anyway, and that it would only make things worse for those women who would.  Like the female indie dev said – most women don’t play this kind of “core” game – and if they do, they don’t care about having a female character model, or need to hear a female voice choking on her own blood or watching her head roll down a hill.

We’ve seen in the last few weeks that the point of a lot of video game “journalism” isn’t to rate or review games, it’s to allow smug jackasses to benefit themselves financially and to lord their own moral superiority over the very people they profess to be writing for.  It’s self-congratulatory social justice leftism on a holier-than-thou crusade to tell you, the gamer, that you suck – the same thing we see on a larger scale in society, but less rapid and less visible.

And it’s been going on for a while now.

found on KYM