Penny Arcade and 'The Mike Problem'

[JackSlack]

There's another good article on the whole thing, too.

Pull quotes.

Women in our community are abused, ostracized and ignored far too often. Female cosplayers are leered at if they're lucky, groped (or worse) if they're not. Women get sneered at when they try to play games, or peppered endlessly with inappropriate comments. A woman who proclaims her love for anything geeky is accused of being a "fake geek" (whatever the fuck that even means), instead of enjoying the instant camaraderie of fellow fans that is the supposed hallmark of geek culture. All this shit happens constantly, and no one says a word.

And the next time some panelist, no matter how well respected he is or how much you like his art, says some misogynistic, hateful bullshit on stage, don't just sigh and feel awkward -- stand up and tell him what a piece of shit he is, then walk the fuck out. If we did this, the fear and loathing of women in our community would quickly become seen as the unacceptable anachronism it is and men would at least think twice about acting that way. If we don't, well ... we're going to continue to be plagued by all these fucking dickwolves.

[Kapol]

But I do think it grants legitimacy to Penny Arcade, and thus Mike, and I do think Mike aids the narrative quite a bit.

You see, the problem I see with this is that Penny Arcade isn't going away. I also highly doubt Child's Play will ever go away. I mentioned that not giving to them doesn't really take anything away from Mike or PA, and I stand by that. Even if Child's Play did go away, PA would still be the company who helped sick kids around the world while it was going on. There's no way around the fact that they've already benefited from Child's Play and will continue to do so no matter how well or poorly it does. So not giving money to Child's Play doesn't really hurt them in my opinion. It might make Mike rethink things. But given all that's happened, I doubt it.

I also keep to the point that there's no charity that does something quite like Child's Play that I know of. Frankly, I don't care if Child's Play gives gamers a better name or not. That's not why I like it as a charity. It's a small benefit, yes. But it isn't the goal in of itself for me. It's the concept of giving games to children who can really benefit from them that I get behind.

As for the fight being done, I disagree entirely. There are still plenty of people out there, in the media or otherwise, who think of or portray gaming in general as a negative thing. People who think that games make murderers out of children. Just because gaming has won one major victory doesn't mean that the reason that Child's Play was started isn't still out there. What Mike said about starting Child's Play is still true.

Edited in 'for me' after the part about the goal about Child's Play.

[Duckay]

I can attest to that being at least partly true. It was only just over a year ago that I was "taught" in workplace training that video games were responsible for at least one dramatic school shooting. I know that a year is a considerable amount of time, but I don't think it's long enough to change things that entirely.

As for other charities that do similar things to Child's Play, I admit that I don't know of any who do quite the same thing (provide games to children in hospitals). That said, I also note that Child's Play is only affiliated with two hospitals in my country, and only one in my state, so me looking locally might not be the best source for that information.

[JackSlack]

You see, the problem I see with this is that Penny Arcade isn't going away.

Oh, this is beyond dispute. Of course it will. Entropy's very thorough.

OK, less snidely. Look, one of these days, yes, Penny Arcade will vanish. The question is when, and yes, it could be a lot faster than you think. Will it be? Probably not. For the moment, I don't see the chance for the whole house of cards to tumble. But to quote one school of philosophy, Penny Arcade "is only for now". The only question is how long 'now' is.

PA would still be the company who helped sick kids around the world while it was going on. There's no way around the fact that they've already benefited from Child's Play and will continue to do so no matter how well or poorly it does. So not giving money to Child's Play doesn't really hurt them in my opinion. It might make Mike rethink things. But given all that's happened, I doubt it.

I don't think anything at this point will make Mike rethink things. He's shown no interest in understanding the complaints against him, and I see no reason to believe he'll change anytime soon. But could it still send a message? Absolutely.

Imagine that LRR decided to announce that after this year, Desert Bus would continue, but the money would be redirected to other charities. (I don't believe they'll announce this, but I admit it was a little fantasy of mine today.) Would this resonate? Hell yes, it would. It would be a repudiation, and force them to acknowledge that words have consequences. Would it affect his future behaviour? Probably. He'd be watching his words more closely, that's for sure.

Would that be my ideal outcome? Of course not. I'd rather have the scales fall from Mike's eyes and get all the good of Penny Arcade (and it is there, as I keep pointing out) with none of the bad. But if you, like me, now perceive the bad as outweighing the good, it's a better outcome than not.

I also keep to the point that there's no charity that does something quite like Child's Play that I know of. Frankly, I don't care if Child's Play gives gamers a better name or not. That's not why I like it as a charity. It's a small benefit, yes. But it isn't the goal in of itself. It's the concept of giving games to children who can really benefit from them that I get behind.

Fine, but that doesn't make other charities not worthwhile.

As for the fight being done, I disagree entirely. There are still plenty of people out there, in the media or otherwise, who think of or portray gaming in general as a negative thing. People who think that games make murderers out of children. Just because gaming has won one major victory doesn't mean that the reason that Child's Play was started isn't still out there. What Mike said about starting Child's Play is still true.

The fight continues, definitely. But I would certainly argue the fight is now mostly outside America. There's a greater fight for me here in Australia (home of the regular game ban!) than there is in the states, where you now have a firm constitutional protection on games. It's still bubbling up (there was significant 'blame the game' going on with the most recent shooting I linked to earlier) but it's miles more measured than it used to be.

I stand by what I said: The fight now is more about bigotry than violence. And Mike is inflaming that, not helping it.

Continuing my news roundup, let's take a look at comments from the Strip Searchers.

Maki has tweeted on the subject.

The comic is its own thing. I'm over the inappropriate response to the response. But the roaring crowd when it was brought up at PAX? Ugh. ... If that was you hooting in the front, stay the hell away from me.

Erika's had a chained set of tweets.

Everything they did in response to their critics (aside from pulling the shirt) has made me feel sick to my stomach ... They are good people, but they fucked up in a way that hurt me personally. I believe they can learn better. ... It's not a black and white issue. I like so much of what they do and them personally, one thing doesn't erase that. ... My colossal fuck ups do not eclipse everything else good I've done and created and I extend that to them as well. ... Do whatever feels right for you. There's no Correct Answer.

And has also tweeted about the apology.

I appreciate Mike Krahulik's apology today ... I felt sick & scared when the audience cheered for Dickwolves at PAX

She approvingly linked to Rachel Edidin's post on the subject and ends on a personal note with a pair of tweets:

Please trust that I have talked about this subject to death in real life and please respect that I don't want to do again online ... I'm just putting this up so people don't speculate how I feel about all this. My feelings are that it's complicated.

(On a personal note, of everyone, her reaction is the one which has me the closest to rethinking my position. Erika's a voice I trust here, and despite her close association with Penny Arcade, she has little to gain out of continuing to support. She could rebuke with little cost to herself. That she is not doing so speaks well of Mike.)

Lexxy has blogged about it, and she links to MC Frontalot's lengthy Google+ discussion of the events.

(And personal note again, flipside of Erika Moen here. Frontalot has a lot to lose by rebuking Mike, and his comments here, while very eloquent, do not move me considerably, and I think he's far too forgiving here.)

Nick Trujillo's choosing to not engage.

the discussion is important, but I don't think I have anything of value to add. So I'll just sit and learn

I think that's it so far.

[Pikachaos]

https://plus.google.com/+MCFrontalot/posts/94KfgrA75JH

I could write a novel about how I feel, or I can let MC frontalot tell you how I feel.

I think most of you who know me know which side I'm "on", but that's not my concern now.
Pax is my love, Pax is my home, Pax is my family. Nothing in this ballpark that happens will turn me away, but will only cause me to step in further and work harder to make sure there are people to instill confidence and safety into the community. I won't give up on it easily, and will work to help make this community better.

Don't think of this as a convention of adults who you can leave behind with their own choice to stay with mind set or leave it. This is a con filled with children, with teens, with people who have spent MOST of their lives going to PAX. They won't know to leave, or can't leave the only place they feel welcome in the world. And I think the kinds of people who would leave on principal against rape culture need to STAY and keep the community a great and safe one for the people who stay.

[King Kool]

Perfectly said, Pika.

[Kapol]

Oh, this is beyond dispute. Of course it will. Entropy's very thorough.

OK, less snidely. Look, one of these days, yes, Penny Arcade will vanish. The question is when, and yes, it could be a lot faster than you think. Will it be? Probably not. For the moment, I don't see the chance for the whole house of cards to tumble. But to quote one school of philosophy, Penny Arcade "is only for now". The only question is how long 'now' is.

Well, if you want to be fully technical, we'll all be gone one day. But I don't think that Penny Arcade as a company is going away in the immediate future. I'm not even convinced that Mike, Jerry, and even Khoo leaving will be the end of the company as a whole. But that's speculation.

Would that be my ideal outcome? Of course not. I'd rather have the scales fall from Mike's eyes and get all the good of Penny Arcade (and it is there, as I keep pointing out) with none of the bad. But if you, like me, now perceive the bad as outweighing the good, it's a better outcome than not.

Honestly, I don't agree with you there. I think Mike's an asshole, yes. But there are good people still working inside Penny Arcade. There's still a lot of good that Child's Play does. There's a lot of great people that they work with to let series like Strip Search, Checkpoint, and Extra Credits keep happening. There's a lot of good that still goes on at PAX despite the bad stuff. I don't feel that the words of one idiot, even if he's the head of the company, or a group of jerks is enough to undo all of those things for me.

Fine, but that doesn't make other charities not worthwhile.

True. But it is relevant when it's a specific cause that's important to a lot of people, myself included.

The fight continues, definitely. But I would certainly argue the fight is now mostly outside America. There's a greater fight for me here in Australia (home of the regular game ban!) than there is in the states, where you now have a firm constitutional protection on games. It's still bubbling up (there was significant 'blame the game' going on with the most recent shooting I linked to earlier) but it's miles more measured than it used to be.

I stand by what I said: The fight now is more about bigotry than violence. And Mike is inflaming that, not helping it.

You see, I agree and disagree there. I agree because that all of the sexism and bigotry in the gaming community is a bigger deal than the outside influence of the media and misguided people. It's worth focusing on and trying to deal with more at this point. I disagree that the sexism and bigotry is now 'the' fight though.

There are really two fights going on now. We have the external fight, where gaming in general is denounced for causing violence and similar ideals. Then we have the internal fight against bigotry and sexism. The problem is that neither fight can be won.

The external fight is against peoples' prejudices against a new medium and seeing it as an easy target when tragedy strike. This is still a problem in the US. It might be true that they can't censor games as much in the US. But there's still people willing to use it as a scapegoat, making it seem like a poor hobby overall.

The internal fight is against the people who can't and won't accept that gaming is becoming a much broader hobby with each year. It is more an issue that's not only a problem with gaming, but also indicative of a problem with society as a whole. The issue about gender and bigotry in the gaming community is also one I feel that the 'external' forces don't care about as much since it doesn't involve them. And by external, I mean news sites and the 'Joe Everyman' who isn't a 'gamer.'

Gaming culture in a bad period in terms of evolution. It's getting more and more popular with each year. This is a good thing to many. But it goes back to the problem where people blame games for these horrible things. It's change. And change isn't accepted quickly or easily by many.

I think that the worse of the people, like the people who cheered and people like Mike, are in the minority. They're also the loudest sadly. And that's a problem that we as a community need to deal with. Sadly, I feel it's a simple part of progressing towards maturity in the long run. the fact that Mike, who helped start all of these things that many people love, is part of this minority makes me sad. It also makes me angry that it causes strife like this. But I honestly believe these people are in the minority overall... even if it gets hard to remember that sometimes.

Honestly, at this point, I feel like it's best to agree to disagree. I know I won't be able to change your mind. And, frankly, I'm not even sure if I'm right here. I'm just going by what I feel and what little I do know. That's why I don't like getting into these sort of disputes... I always feel like I'm the one who knows the least and should just shut up.

[Kapol]

*snip*

Thanks Pika, that made me feel a bit better for some reason.

[phlip]

To those who are resolving to keep going to PAX, but do your utmost to ensure it reaches to its ideal of being welcoming and inclusive... I may not be among you, but I salute you for it. Do keep on fighting the good fight. But go in eyes-open that you're trying to make PAX a good place despite Mike (and, to a lesser extend, Jerry and Robert), not with them. And I truly do hope you succeed.

[JackSlack]

To those who are resolving to keep going to PAX, but do your utmost to ensure it reaches to its ideal of being welcoming and inclusive... I may not be among you, but I salute you for it. Do keep on fighting the good fight. But go in eyes-open that you're trying to make PAX a good place despite Mike (and, to a lesser extend, Jerry and Robert), not with them. And I truly do hope you succeed.

Seconded.

Edit: Heh. Giggling at this comment I missed in response to Front-A-Lot's essay.

"Mike's apologies are getting better. He's getting a lot of practice."

[korvys]

To those who are resolving to keep going to PAX, but do your utmost to ensure it reaches to its ideal of being welcoming and inclusive... I may not be among you, but I salute you for it. Do keep on fighting the good fight. But go in eyes-open that you're trying to make PAX a good place despite Mike (and, to a lesser extend, Jerry and Robert), not with them. And I truly do hope you succeed.

This is a good sentiment whether you believe Mike's apology was genuine or not. PAX (or any other con/event/etc) isn't just something you attend. You are a part of it, and you will be part of the experience everyone else there has. Be mindful of it.

[Lord Hosk]

Frontalot has a lot to lose by rebuking Mike, and his comments here, while very eloquent, do not move me considerably, and I think he's far too forgiving here.)

I know I am really nitpicking by pulling this one statement out but I have read every word that has been posted in this thread, I have read every article, tweet, and blog post that has been linked and this type of comment appears a lot on both the pro pax and anti-pax side of the argument, so I am not specifically pointing to this more of using this as a example.

You are saying that Frontalot wrote that not because he believed it, but because PAX is a money train for him. You did the same thing by saying this about Mike.

He's getting better at PR, a little. But no, this is our big point of contention. He doesn't seem sincere.

If you disagree with their stance they must only have made the statements for false reasons, they must be trying to make a profit or protect themselves, they cant genuinely feel what they are saying.

I know that nothing exists in a vacuum and as Lexxy said

I completely respect the fact that for some of you, your patience is far beyond spent.

but I grew up in a house where my mother sets her impressions of people and refuses to change them. I am more than 30 years old and to this day calls me a liar on any and all subjects because when I was a child I lied to her about stuff. My mother has told me to my face that I must have done something wrong or pissed someone off to get kicked out of the army. She does not believe that I was discharged as a result of my injuries, because to her, I am a liar. That I walk with a cane, that I can show her my scars and my discharge papers, that I take fistfuls of pills every day and burst into uncontrolled sobbing at random times does not matter because when I was six or five or whenever I lied to her and therefore every word out of my mouth from that point onward has been a lie.

That is the same feeling I get from those types of statements. Mike is a evil person because he has done bad things in the past, he must not have meant his apology or his explanation of his statement. Frontalot must not mean what he wrote, they are just doing it because they will lose too much if they don't say those things.

That set in stone attitude is a problem. I respect most of what you have said JackSlack I really do, I disagree with a lot of it but I respect your stance and I understand your position because you wrote about it and explained yourself. But that automatic dismissal is crap and it really hurts me when anyone does that.

I dont want to keep going over this same stuff, today has been a really bad day for me, last night there was disagreement about what mike intended, and I had my doubts, I thought I had judged his comments correctly but I held the possibility that I could be wrong. Then he came out and said EXACTLY what I had been trying to explain, and I thought "wow, ok I judged it right people can start to move on now, he is trying, hes no there yet, but he is clearly trying" and yet instead of that the conversation spun to a complete dismissal of his statement that his past performance is more important than anything he is currently saying even though when taken as a whole his past performance has shown that todays statement was probably his sincere feelings and that he is making strides to be a better person by acknowledging his faults.

[JackSlack]

Hosk:

Understood, but you're also asking for the flipside of this: That we trust Mike when he says he means this.

You're saying that he's improving, because we can see the evolution of his comments. Fair enough... but Ditto and I aren't wrong when we say we also cannot see a plan to prevent this kind of shit happening in the future, either.

Fair point on the Front-a-Lot piece, though. A simpler, and better point to make would have been this: I think he's right on the substance of all of it, and I have no major bone to pick with his summation of events. He's right on the need for forgiveness. All true. But I personally am simply not prepared to forgive Mike. Not at this time. It's too much trust burned.

As I've said earlier in the piece, if Mike wants to really show us he's trying to improve, then I want to see some concrete steps. Announce that Penny Arcade are registering for a REACH course. Explain what books he's reading and what issues he's trying to improve his understanding on. At a bare minimum, give some indication that he understands the issues and valid critiques of the original strip, the response strip, and the merchandise issue. He's done none of this.

People can change, it's true. I have. At twenty, I was a homophobic, right-wing bigot. I'm by no means perfect now.

But for the moment, I simply do not trust Mike.

[Lord Hosk]

First let me say again, just on the off chance it was missed. I was not pointing to Jackslacks comments and saying "YOU SIR" if you read everything about this, and there is a lot, you will see comments similar to his, and WAY WORSE on both sides dismissing the other sides arguments and BS, and I admit I sort of did that by saying that people who were upset about this current statement as not being genuinely upset about this but continuing the fury they had from previous events.

Jack you and I take this from different perspectives and im fine with that.

I take a look at the long series of f* ups and I see them getting less and less dramatic over the years and say: "This is a arch of change."
I dont think I am presuming to much to say, You look at that and say "this is a arch of continuous F* ups from someone who doesnt want to change"

I think we just disagree with where it is headed and where it is now.

Thats all I have to say. I need to try to sleep. goodnight and thank you all for the civility in this thread, there are some VIAL people out there saying horrible things and I am glad to see none of it here.

[JackSlack]

And with all the heavy stuff out of the way, the idea of actually not going to PAX next year is finally hitting me.

So many friends! Who will be unseen! Board games! STUFF TO DO.

Damn you Mike! Why? WHY?

[CommanderKeen]

First off, despite the kickbacks going to PA from PAX, for all intents and purposes they are separate entities and J/M/R have all been quoted that they want PAX to happen if they're involved with it or not. They've also said they're looking at around 4-5 PAX's every year, which means PA needs to be involved in a creative capacity for the next 3-6 years depending how fast they wish to expand.

It's also worth noting that PA hires Reed Exhibitions to run PAX and a good chunk of enforcers are paid. Yes, PA is heavily involved with programming and creative direction, operationally they have little contact. And if Khoo is heavily involved, he's not exactly the god we think he is on a project management level.

Perhaps I'm good at putting things in boxes to separate issues, but there will come a day when the PA attendance at a PAX will be minimal. Personally, this is a non-issue for me, but I can understand why it is an issue for some and can respect any decision they make in regards to PAX and PA.

What I take umbrage with is the guilt by association. Yes. I went to PAX Prime and according to some, that makes a rape apologist. That's absurd and the bullying is as bad those on the other side. Social groups have been torn up over the issue and that needs to stop. I've met some great people at PAX, much like I've met some great people in Scouts, despite the various scandals the organization as had in the past couple of years.

[Duckay]

Anyone who actually says that any PAX attendees are by definition rape apologists is being hyperbolic at least, if not worse. I think we can all agree on that.

[CommanderKeen]

The worst part is that people actually believe that just as much as they think Mike endorses rape.

[Elomin Sha]

I was wondering when someone was going to trot out that old derailing favourite.

Old trot is very real trot. I brought it up not because it was to derail (assuming that was rude).

If I take part in a rally for one political issue that moves me tomorrow, am I obligated or in some way a bad person if I don't then spend every day for the rest of the month campaigning for all the other issues that I think are important?

No. There are many hours in a day to support different matters do what you feel is right.

I already don't drink Coke. But that doesn't matter, Elomin. Don't be a silly goose. Just because there are other bad things doesn't mean smaller bad things aren't worth fixing. "Well, the whole universe is going to suffer a heat death eventually anyway, so is this really worth talking about?" is a dumb thing to say.

Did I say smaller things shouldn't be fixed? You are putting words in my mouth, silly gosling, which again I find rude. Duckay was closer to the intention of my post. For all this rousing people are doing for a good subject is this going to be just the typical flash in the pan or will this lead people to be as proactive and support other causes or this time next month people will have forgotten and will start re-adding deleted bookmarks. I don't know, I can't read people's minds.

[My pseudonym is Ix]

To be honest, this isn't just Mike's problem; it's a problem in the gaming community, and indeed a problem across our world today. Over a very short space of time, sexual harassment and the freedom of sexuality & gender have become major topics of conversation, and we're just starting to lift the lid on how institutionally misogynist our society has been for a very long time. Now, that is starting to change, and stuff that once would have been normal but decidedly wrong are starting to be called out (hence the massive increase in sexual assault charges), but like all changes it's taking place at different rates in different parts of society; what some groups consider banter, others consider offensive, what some consider flirting, others consider sexual assault, what some consider a joke, others consider inappropriate.

Gaming has this problem, but it has been exacerbated by the fact that it has traditionally (or at least stereotypically) been the preserve of the geeky white male, but the gamer bracket is currently expanding from a mere subset of 'nerds' to include more and more people, particularly of said white male bracket. This lack of gender diversity makes gaming very male-centric and means female issues don't really penetrate into the gaming consciousness on a large scale and that many gamers don't really know how to treat women.

Mike Krahulik's recent controversies are not a cause of this but a symptom, and it's gonna take a while before he and the rest of the gaming world realise that some things aren't OK.

[DissonantNight]

[Message Deleted by User]

[Duckay]

Elomin, I am going to make some assumptions about your meaning here. If I am wrong, please correct me.

It seems like what you're ultimately getting at is that an enormous percentage of us contributing to this discussion have the resources (time, money, energy, etc) to be doing a lot more about the issues that we are talking about than we are. Instead of - or, indeed, in addition to - calling out one individual on the Internet, we could be using our resources to contribute to a great deal of other issues (and probably make a more practical difference doing so than we are here), and yet for whatever reason we are not doing so.

Is that more or less your point, or am I off base?

[JackSlack]

Without chiming in too much at this point (although remembering this HAS put me in a much more charitable mood toward Mike) I would like to walk back one thing I said.

Indeed, Ocean Marketing isn't the ONLY example you list above that "proves that while Mike is a dick, there are far, far GREATER ones out there."

I'd put Ellison and Krahulik on a level. There's a reason I included that one in 'being a dick to people we dislike'. Ellison is very much a total dickhead. I understood this.

OK, this? This was stupid. VERY stupid, and wrong. Mike is way above Harlan Ellison. Y'know why? Because Mike never groped a woman on stage against her will, the way Harlan Ellison did. Yes, I'm prepared, pretty firmly, to put Mike as better.

I'd forgotten about that, and I apologize. Yeah. Mike? Better person than Harlan Ellison.

It's a low bar to clear, but Mike clears it quite handily.

[Elomin Sha]

Elomin, I am going to make some assumptions about your meaning here. If I am wrong, please correct me.

It seems like what you're ultimately getting at is that an enormous percentage of us contributing to this discussion have the resources (time, money, energy, etc) to be doing a lot more about the issues that we are talking about than we are. Instead of - or, indeed, in addition to - calling out one individual on the Internet, we could be using our resources to contribute to a great deal of other issues (and probably make a more practical difference doing so than we are here), and yet for whatever reason we are not doing so.

Is that more or less your point, or am I off base?

Pretty much. I'm not saying that everyone has all the resources to commit. Personal life commitments will get in the way of what you can and cannot do.

I'm analytical in nature so I'm wondering if people are getting swept up on a bandwagon and there has been no critical thinking (coming from me that is strange with 90% of what I say on the forum). After dealing with Mike it could end up that some people will just leave it there and deem their good deed for the day/year is done. There is no 'what's next?'. How will you help the matter further? Passion is great unless it is not focused into action. You can call out one person, but that one person won't make everything go away. It may be a start but what kind of start? Rape is a big matter than one individual so it would be inevitable that you would have to go wider to varying issues that lead back to the original point.

[Trisha Lynn]

Late, but my take seems to rehash a lot of what's been said elsewhere.
[Removed link, but Lord_Hosk already linked me on page 3 or 4]

I remember a time when I was a total asshole to my friends. One person had the guts to call me on it; my response was to hermit-up, get into therapy, and stop binge drinking.

I know I can never get those friends back, but I hope that the things I've learned in therapy will help me keep and retain the new friendships I've made.

I hope the same kind of revelation is coming for Mike Krahulik.