So it’s been a week since I pointed out that Christina Hoff Sommers logic in her ‘games aren’t sexist’ movie is, like, really, really logically flawed.’ She responded by… I’m not making this up… attacking my spelling. She also intimated I smeared her while, at the same time, misrepresenting my point enough that a whole bunch of people thought I was calling gamers Nazis and Klansmen. Which was a nifty bit of gold-medal caliber trolling.
But hey, my original argument was a tad emotional and a little abbreviated because, er, I was trying to squeeze in a few Milo slams, but really because the article was more about how this was evidence that SOME people were attempting to hijack #gamergate in order to shut down certain voices in the games industry that are already underrepresented. And, er, she sure isn’t doing anything to disprove THAT point, but whatever.
So I responded the next day with a more focused and cohesive takedown of why her argument is really unworthy of the term ‘logic’. Her response was… ignore it and just bash me about spelling again when talking about a completely unrelated article.
— Christina H. Sommers (@CHSommers) September 22, 2014
Hey, it’s a slanted article that doesn’t try to challenge her broken logic at all! Of course she likes it! It continues to support her narrative that she’s REALLY a feminist, it’s just a coincidence that she’s leading a lynch mob against other feminists! And by the way,just my two cents, but picking on typos is what you do if you have no real argument. Just before that, she also manages to lump my shitty little blog in with… erm… real press.
— Christina H. Sommers (@CHSommers) September 21, 2014
I’m really not sure what she ‘now understands‘ from this article, which has nothing to do with me at all, although I guess I should be flattered that she thinks maybe I’m important enough to be associated with some of the top journalists in the field, who actually have time and paychecks freeing them to do much, much more thorough and high caliber work than I.
I’m guessing she thinks I’m on the Secret Mailing List of Game Journalists, and we all colluded to secretly agree that her movie is friggin’ terrible, makes no actual sense, and kills brain cells faster than Ozark Moonshine. Here’s a hint. I’m a developer. I develop the games that the people on the list complain about. I am, to them, the problem that they go onto that list to solve. But hey, crack research there.
But anyway, I’ve been ignoring her and moving on, because clearly she doesn’t want to engage in the fact that her logic is utterly bogus and by extension, her movie is completely trash. But apparently, I’ve gotten under her skin because she sent this yesterday morning.
— Christina H. Sommers (@CHSommers) September 25, 2014
Yes, the article she links to is…. the first one I linked above. Yes, Christina is trying to create an illusion that I’m still pestering with her in order to rev up the troops, when really I’ve been ignoring her because I really have no interest in engaging with someone who just wants to drive-by Twitter trolling, rather than address the incredibly glaring logical holes in her argument.
Well, hey, it’s been a long time since I’ve gotten this kind of frequent attention from a new woman in my life. Here’s the article. Here’s her rebuttal, with their rebuttal to hers. Here’s what we’ve learned.
- That this feminist (as described by the civil article above) thinks that feminists have ‘silenced women and men alike’. She doesn’t challenge this. Of course she doesn’t. She has a nice gig in being the un-feminist.
- That she got completely wrong basic rape stats, resulting in her ballooning a relatively minor decrease in supposed rapes into an enormous one that doesn’t exist. She doesn’t challenge FAIR’s account.
- That she completely misrepresented the story of why a professor who took down a painting of a nude in a public classroom – she challenged that, but the professor backed FAIR’s account.
- That she claimed that wife-beating was not allowed in English common law, but this is the opposite of known history. Sommers doesn’t challenge this.
- That she got basic stats on anorexia wrong. She challenged this, but FAIR debunked her by… you know… getting stats from people who study eating disorders.
- That she ignored evidence that domestic violence is higher on Super Bowl Sunday. In this part of the article, she misquotes people, misattributes professional relationships, and ignores ombudsmen who challenge sources she used. She doesn’t challenge this.
- That she really wants you to believe that GQ magazine just made up the quote that “There are a lot of homely women in women’s studies. Preaching these anti-male, anti-sex sermons is a way for them to compensate for various heartaches–they’re just mad at the beautiful girls.” There is, in this case, no way to know. On one hand, one assumes that legitimate news organizations don’t do that. On the other, the reporter misplaced the notes so maybe she has a point that he’s clearly not a very good one.
To answer her question in the tweet, I didn’t link to the rebuttal because the article was already long, I was writing with 3 glasses of wine in me, and it’s not like I *needed* her to look worse than the original article did, which this pathetic rebuttal does. Seriously, I have no earthly idea why Christina Hoff Sommers would want to call attention to this article and rebuttal. Because it really doesn’t make her look very good at all. Reading through it leaves the undeniable impression that Sommers cares very little about facts, and only cares very much about bending perceptions towards her cause. But then finally, finally, she actually gave a fact-based, logical explanation why her logic about sexism in games isn’t very, very bad.
I’m kidding. After that, she prompted her growing mob of fans to make fun of a pair of high school girls who DARED to try coding a video game! Haha! Girls who want to code games addressing social issues are funny! That, or a terrifying sign of how feminists indoctrinate our kids, of course.
— Christina H. Sommers (@CHSommers) September 25, 2014
I fully expect for her to spend the next week challenging their grammar.