SXSW cancels feminist gaming panels over violent threats

[Supersonic 49,376]

South by Southwest Interactive announced Monday it had cancelled two panels at the Austin-based media festival related to gaming and online harassment after receiving “numerous threats of on-site violence.”

Members of the “Level Up: Overcoming Harassment in Games” panel said they had received emails on Monday notifying them that SXSW had cancelled the discussions after receiving threats.

While the Level Up panel was not specifically about Gamergate, a movement known for harassment of women in the online gaming community, it was filled with women panelists who had previously been targets of harassment, including Randi Lee Harper, Caroline Sinders, and Katherine Cross.

The other canceled panel, “SavePoint: A Discussion on the Gaming Community,” included Perry Jones, Mercedes Carrera, Nick Robalik, and Lynn Walsh, who had been previously involved with the Gamergate movement.

Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/sxsw-cancels-gaming-panels-over-numerous-threats-of-on-site#.fnMbN4Dm1

 

[Didymus 34,380]

The gamer community can be so scary omg.

[Didymus 34,380]

"canceling a panel on harassment bc of harassment is a great way for them to validate harassment as a tactic for getting what you want."

One of the tweets about this.. painfully accurate.

[ARTPOPdidntflop 3,987]

"canceling a panel on harassment bc of harassment is a great way for them to validate harassment as a tactic for getting what you want."

One of the tweets about this.. painfully accurate.

it wasn't just harassment, they were threatened with terrorist attacks

[Didymus 34,380]

it wasn't just harassment, they were threatened with terrorist attacks

There's not a single reference to terrorism in the information available about this. The threat was on-site violence.

It's in this thread title for no reason.

[ARTPOPdidntflop 3,987]

There's not a single reference to terrorism in the information available about this. The threat was on-site violence.

It's in this thread title for no reason.

On site violence would be considered an act of terrorism. I doubt they're threatening to yell verbal abuse or throw their fists. 'On site violence' suggests something more sinister

[clefable 296]

the people organising these threats are probably all disgusting neck-beard 4chaners 

[Didymus 34,380]

On site violence would be considered an act of terrorism. I doubt they're threatening to yell verbal abuse or throw their fists. 'On site violence' suggests something more sinister

If you seriously think that "acts of terrorism" and "on-site violence" evoke the same mental images Both the article and SXSW chose the term "on-site violence" to describe the threats and therefore it's probably accurate.

I mean, terrorism isn't even used to describe school shootings.

[UrethraFranklin 434]

It absolutely disgusts me that a group that benefits humanity is being threatened like this. Instances like this make me want to support taking away anonymity online and make these psychopaths accountable.

[Sunny 12,753]

This is a mess

 

[Supersonic 49,376]

If you seriously think that "acts of terrorism" and "on-site violence" evoke the same mental images Both the article and SXSW chose the term "on-site violence" to describe the threats and therefore it's probably accurate.

I mean, terrorism isn't even used to describe school shootings.

Unfortunately, because it should be.

To me, this is nothing less than an act of terrorism, so I might as well describe it as that. What's so different from ISIS threatening to kill people who disagree with their opinions compared to misogynists threatening to kill people who disagree with their world-views. Both want to promote a violent agenda of hatred and aim to forcefully silence everyone else who speaks their mind with fear.

[Didymus 34,380]

Unfortunately, because it should be.

To me, this is nothing less than an act of terrorism, so I might as well describe it as that. What's so different from ISIS threatening to kill people who disagree with their opinions compared to misogynists threatening to kill people who disagree with their world-views. Both want to promote a violent agenda of hatred and aim to forcefully silence everyone else who speaks their mind with fear.

Well, the main motive is to spread fear through violence, I don't see that reflected here or in school shootings for that matter. The main view, anyway, is that terrorism is politically charged.

I get where you're coming from, but you can't deny that a lot of people who will read that thread title will think of something very different from what is meant in the article.

[Luiz 4,253]

dude so many little nerds on xbox have threatened my life that i just cant believe SXSW actually bought into the threats but ok   you never know i guess, better safe than sorry

 

terrorists win again 

[Kayla 7,595]

If you seriously think that "acts of terrorism" and "on-site violence" evoke the same mental images Both the article and SXSW chose the term "on-site violence" to describe the threats and therefore it's probably accurate.

I mean, terrorism isn't even used to describe school shootings.

I think they chose that wording because of the mental images each word evokes, but I also think you technically could count this as "terrorism," albeit not on the same scale of flying planes into buildings. 

The FBI defines terrorism as: "Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." 

I think it could be argued that people causing harm to a feminist panel are using violence against persons to intimidate in furtherance of social objectives.  

Regardless, for the sake of reflecting the article I am going to change the thread title to say "violent threats." It's understandable if someone would call them "terrorist threats," and it's understandable if someone would say it's not real "terrorism." 

[Didymus 34,380]

I think they chose that wording because of the mental images each word evokes, but I also think you technically could count this as "terrorism," albeit not on the same scale of flying planes into buildings. 

The FBI defines terrorism as: "Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." 

I think it could be argued that people causing harm to a feminist panel are using violence against persons to intimidate in furtherance of social objectives.  

Regardless, for the sake of reflecting the article I am going to change the thread title to say "violent threats." It's understandable if someone would call them "terrorist threats," and it's understandable if someone would say it's not real "terrorism." 

Fully agree

I'm only protesting because I know what mental images arise when someone says the word terrorism. When I saw the title I instantly thought of violence in the name of Islam, since hardly anyone has ever used the word in a non-Islamic context for the last decade. Which is why I think we're better off using words that describe the situation for what it is, away from culturally loaded sentiments.