The social justice warriors of the anti-gamergate mob have spent much of the last year exploiting any hint of victim status they could for attention and financial gain, from simply being offended over things they could avoid to the pain of other people’s still-unfolding tragedies. Each time, it has been in the name of championing women against patriarchal oppression. The message has been that the world is such an oppressive place to women that we need these Paladins of the Sacred Order of Special Victims to protect us by speaking for us, even over us if we happen to disagree.
Since the beginning, the social justice narrative on #gamergate has consisted of the same thing; a combination of demonizing gamergaters as misogynists whose only issue is vague but nefarious opposition to women in gaming, while promoting themselves as women’s defenders. They’ve relied on defamation to avoid discussing the real issues of the industry and media corruption, as well as their own use of bullying, to try to force their political ideology on a culturally and politically diverse community. Rebuffed, these professional victims use cries of harassment and misogyny as platforms on which to e-beg.
No threatoid has been too small to be their pulpit, no story too incredible to provide a backdrop for damseling. In the quest to make their female victim narrative universal, the mentality that excuses the group’s financial demands by proclaiming their fear of words on the internet and exploiting even strangers’ experiences cannot abide any contradiction. It does not matter when the accused are innocent, the turmoil achieves nothing, and the media blitz damages the public’s trust. The more subcultures slip through their fingers, the more desperately these Myth Lords try to tighten their grip. Female victim worship must be a religion, and those who reject the hysteria, heretics. Most of all, when a rape accusation is made, their ideology calls for unquestioning, enthusiastic support. To refrain is apostasy; to refuse, blasphemy.
So when news of the brutal rape of Cytherea was brought to the attention of the Cult of the Professionally Offended, Defenders of Women, it should have inspired the same protective, supportive response they demand of everyone else. Upon learning that her ordeal left her temporarily unable to work what did these supposed 21st century Paladins do? Upon what social justice crusade did they embark?
Well, nothing, at first. When alerted to this perfect opportunity to put her money where her mouth is, Anita Sarkeesian did absolutely nothing. She didn’t even have the decency to respond. The lack of interest wouldn’t be so notable had the Duchess of Damseling not responded a few months ago to the Marysville Pilchuck High School shooting before the incident had even fully run its course. Someone so up on the latest exploitable news, as she seems to be, does not get a pass on missing information that was messaged directly to her.
The messenger, Mercedes Carrera, was understandably disgusted by the insincerity of ignoring the plight of a victim currently unable to return to work because of her experience. Hypocritical as the Silence of the Sham was, it pales in comparison to the social justice response to this criticism. Thank you, Arthur Chu, for show the world what real ‘social justice’ compassion looks like.
Yeah, you read that right. The mentality of social justice leads to the same types who rallied like idiots behind multiple stories in the last year that were later proved false, who damsel for dollars over emails and phone calls, refusing to help an actual victim, not because of anything to do with her, but because a third party raising money for her is on the wrong side of the political fence. The innocent victim of a brutal stranger rape deserves to be denied compassion and support not because anyone doubts her word, not because she herself has done anything untoward, but because Mercedes Carrera “touched” her victim status and without even using the tag, that apparently gave it #gamergate “cooties”. Chu and other aGGros mischaracterized the effort by claiming the charity was her own, and by putting their own self-importance on display.
God forbid anyone’s compassion should ever stretch beyond the boundaries of their political outlook to include a person whose situation fits their narrative even if her life does not. I mean, it’s sure as hell not like social justice ideologues have ever criticized anyone else for failing that standard, right?
Is that really all it takes to break through the façade of false consideration to the ugly truth about the social justice mentality? Is Gamergate some kind of zombie virus with the power to infect even intangible concepts like sympathy? “Sorry lady. We can’t help you. You’ve been infected with GG virus.”
When gamergaters began responding to the callous attitudes of Sarkeesian and Chu, some of Chu’s SJW friends realized what an embarrassing image his words created.
It took that embarrassment and peer pressure for the vehement aGGro to show any compassion for a rape victim who had been cared about by the wrong colleague. Not moral superiority, or even a semblance of moral fiber. Not the presence of genuine consideration, or even an attempt to preserve the façade. Just naked, seething hatred for his fellow human being in the face of even the suggestion of connection to a group he despises.
Poor Chu, victim of your own ideological standards. How terrible that you felt guilt-tripped into showing compassion for an unapproved rape victim. It must take deep trauma to lead you to call the exercise of sympathy and compassion a weapon.
The social justice mentality is with each passing day looking more and more like a form of mental illness. It’s not just mental gymnastics anymore. They’ve pulled mental muscles and torn logic ligaments and are now just permanently twisted into thought patterns rational people can’t even identify with. How else does an attempt to censure people one considers wrong-thinking lead to displaying the highest level of hypocrisy; marginalizing the very people one claims to defend?
If you like what you read here, please consider becoming Hannah Wallen’s patron. The Brigade runs on donations by readers like you.
- What has psychology forgotten about boys since the ’60s? | HBR Talk 279 - September 28, 2023
- Does this 1960s case study expose modern psychology’s flaws? | HBR Talk 278 - September 21, 2023
- Two things experienced by over 1/3 of Kenyan men | HBR Talk 277 - September 14, 2023