This is what it has come to


Anita Sarkeesian is going to speak at Utah State, and they’ve been sent a death threat.

email-threat

Marc Lepine, hero to men. I don’t think so.

Games are so very, very important to these wretches, aren’t they?


New development: Sarkeesian has canceled the talk. The reason? Utah allows people to carry guns into such events, and the university refused to prohibit firearms in the auditorium.

Fucking yahoos with their precious guns.

Comments

  1. Jeff S says

    That is terrorism, and there can be no reason to assume this is anything but a credible threat.
    Hopefully they track down whomever sent that and put him in jail for a very long time.

  2. beardymcviking says

    Fucking sickening.

    I don’t know… I hope Anita’s talk can go ahead, but I totally understand if USU caves for fear of it’s students. Damn. Does this count as (threats of) terrorism yet?

  3. gijoel says

    I suspect it’s another blowhard threat, but all it takes is one idiot to double down on their stupid. Seriously, the authorities need to start cracking down on this shit. This is terrorism. Prosecute a few of these arseholes, and maybe the rest of them will have a good long think before they make threats like these.

  4. says

    Here’s my Million Dollar Challenge entry: I predict the current responses will be…
    1) It’s just a troll, why are you taking it seriously?
    2) There’s no proof he’s associated with #GamerGate or 4Chan or MRAs or anything!
    3) Anita Sarkeesian did it herself to drum up sympathy/attention!

    And if the asshole follows through on his threats:
    1) He’s just an outlier! There’s no proof that gamer culture had anything to do with this!
    2) MENTAL ILLNESS MENTAL ILLNESS MENTAL ILLNESS!
    3) It’s not about misogyny, it’s about how much his life sucked! Because of women!
    4) It’s not about misogyny, he killed men too!
    5) Did I mention mental illness?

    How many Eliot Rodgers do we need before we recognize a pattern? How far does this bullshit need to go before the assholes who are supposedly all about fighting corruption actually call some of this out?

    I hope the college doesn’t cave. I’m sure Anita probably won’t. She’s incredibly brave, but she shouldn’t have to be.

    And here I thought women being threatened with death by bombing for speaking in public was strictly a Muslim problem /sarcasm.

  5. Saad says

    gijoel, #5,

    Seriously, that’s what I want to see more than anything else right now. A few of these pieces of shit getting arrested and penalized to the full extent of the law.

    I hate that this is happening to such a great public figure and that it’s taking a toll on anyone else she is involved with. What a tough situation Utah State has been put in!

  6. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    It looks like the gamesters are getting real desperate. AS may not be able to get the FBI to investigate, but a university who can enlist senators and congresspeople to investigate the threat? Pitiful decision at best by the dudebro….

  7. oualawouzou says

    Marc Lepine was a murderous psycho. I don’t visit the slymepit or any other similar venues. Please tell me this threat does not reflect a commonly (or even semi-commonly) held opinion. Please.

  8. NitricAcid says

    Pathetic. He wants to kill people to protest someone complaining about computer games?

    I hope he gets arrested quickly.

    @#9 I know Marc Lepine is not a hero to all men, but I do remember seeing graffiti at my university that read, “Good shooting, Marc!”

  9. gmacs says

    No, dominance is important to them. If they really cared about gaming, they would allow criticism to come in, which would cause the medium to diversify and grow. I suspect they just want to be kings of a little niche.

  10. sobe says

    I still annualy commemorate December 6th, the day Lepine shot and killed 14 women at l’école Polytechnique. I remember exactly where I was that day when I first heard the news. I remember the shock, the horror and thinking “it could have been me, it could have been any of us”. I remember these students’ names.

    This is no brave hero.

    I admire Anita Sarkeesian for her work, but also for her fortitude. I hope she remains safe.

  11. says

    “feminists have ruined my life”??? Oh, really?

    Poor schmuck probably doesn’t realize how traceable emails are nowadays. I hope the university’s security team have good contacts at FBI.

  12. Numenaster says

    “Feminists have ruined my life.” Says the person claiming to be a student at a public university. Just being able to go to college puts you in a favored minority in the US, dude. (I feel fairly comfortable hypothesizing that the letter writer is a dude).

  13. Usernames! ☞ ♭ says

    Prosecute a few of these arseholes, and maybe the rest of them will have a good long think before they make threats like these.
    — gijoel (#5)

    I doubt it. No criminal expects to be caught, else Texas would be homicide-free.

    “Feminists have ruined my life and I will have my revenge…” Ahh, the bleating of the privileged loser, crying out for attention. I hope he is caught and convicted of a felony, so at least he won’t be able to legally own firearms anymore.

    I also hope the university has a spine and refuses to be terrorized, but my cynicism is rising a bit high at this point.

  14. says

    I went to the original article linked to by Skepchick. The comments didn’t take long to go “BUT EXTREMIST FEMINISM!” That reminds me so much of those ages-old “extremist atheism” complaints, equating writing blogs and making videos with hateful violent behavior. Personal anecdote time: One of the reasons why I started getting more interested in feminism is how uncannily similar the pushback against it is to the one against atheism.

  15. Uncle Ebeneezer says

    Sickening….

    Hope Anita is safe and does whatever she feels is best for her own well-being.

  16. Christopher says

    I hope they find the fucker that sent this and prosecute them to the full extent of the law

    http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_05_010703.htm

    76-5-107.3. Threat of terrorism — Penalty.

    (1) A person commits a threat of terrorism if the person threatens to commit any offense involving bodily injury, death, or substantial property damage, and:

    (a) (i) threatens the use of a weapon of mass destruction, as defined in Section 76-10-401; or

    (ii) threatens the use of a hoax weapon of mass destruction, as defined in Section 76-10-401; or

    (b) acts with intent to:

    (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence or affect the conduct of a government or a unit of government;

    (ii) prevent or interrupt the occupation of a building or a portion of the building, a place to which the public has access, or a facility or vehicle of public transportation operated by a common carrier; or

    (iii) cause an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies to take action due to the person’s conduct posing a serious and substantial risk to the general public.

    (2) (a) A violation of Subsection (1)(a) or (1)(b)(i) is a second degree felony.

    (b) A violation of Subsection (1)(b)(ii) is a third degree felony.

    (c) A violation of Subsection (1)(b)(iii) is a class B misdemeanor.

    (3) It is not a defense under this section that the person did not attempt to carry out or was incapable of carrying out the threat.

    (4) A threat under this section may be express or implied.

    (5) A person who commits an offense under this section is subject to punishment for that offense, in addition to any other offense committed, including the carrying out of the threatened act.

    (6) In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a court shall order any person convicted of any violation of this section to reimburse any federal, state, or local unit of government, or any private business, organization, individual, or entity for all expenses and losses incurred in responding to the violation, unless the court states on the record the reasons why the reimbursement would be inappropriate.

    Since the fucker’s threats include pipe bombs and not just firearms, they get a second degree felony.

    http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_10_040100.htm

    (6) (a) “Weapon of mass destruction” means:

    (i) any item or instrumentality that is designed or intended to cause widespread death or serious bodily injury to multiple victims;

    Now let’s add up how much they should be punished:

    http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_03_020300.htm
    http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_03_030100.htm

    1(a)(i) — pipe bomb threat — Second degree felony: 1-15 years & $10,000
    1(b)(i) — coerceing the conduct of a government organization (Utah state) — Second degree felony: 1-15 years & $10,000
    1(b)(ii) — keeping people away from the building — Third degree felony: 1-5 years & $5,000
    1(b)(iii) — making the cops look into this threat — 1-6 months & $1,000

    Ideally, this fucker should be put in prison for 35 years and fined $26,000.

    Do it Utah.

    Maybe that will make these MRA trolls shut the fuck up.

  17. sw says

    I may not agree with everything Anita says, but this kind of action is terrorism, and I hope they find the guy and throw the book at him. Death threats are never OK.

  18. says

    oualawouzou @9:

    Marc Lepine was a murderous psycho. I don’t visit the slymepit or any other similar venues. Please tell me this threat does not reflect a commonly (or even semi-commonly) held opinion. Please.

    I can’t speak for anywhere else, but that is not an opinion held by the commentariat at Pharyngula, and I daresay, the whole of FtB.

  19. says

    If this isn’t making terroristic threats, I don’t know what is. And yet, where are the SWAT teams with flashbangs and assault rifles? Where are the MRAPs and the snipers and the FBI sting operations and the sweeping search and arrest powers that we’ve been assured are needed to fight terrorism at home? What’s that? The perpetrator isn’t brown or foreign? The target is a woman? He’s not even some pinko or environmentalist or anything? He’s an upstanding American White Man? Why then it can’t be terrorism; it’s just boyish high spirits. Fucking hell.

  20. Eric O says

    I know on an intellectual level that some people receive death threats all the time but I realize that I’ve never read a detailed threat like this before. Holy shit, that’s disturbing.

    Hope they catch the guy. Whether it’s a sincere threat or not, this is the definition of terrorism as Jeff S pointed out.

  21. HappyNat says

    oualawouzou @9

    I don’t visit the slymepit or any other similar venues. Please tell me this threat does not reflect a commonly (or even semi-commonly) held opinion. Please.

    Threats of terrorism, not so much. But the outright misogyny and contempt for any woman who speaks up feeds into this extremist behavior. What does a person like Elliot Rodger think when he sees women be degraded or viewed only as a conquest? It’s the same with people who cover up for rapists and/or blame the victim. They might not be rapists but they give cover and comfort to those that are.

  22. Pete Newell says

    14 names far more worthy of memory than that of a murderer:
    Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
    Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
    Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
    Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
    Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
    Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
    Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department
    Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
    Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
    Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
    Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
    Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
    Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
    Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student

  23. says

    I may not agree with everything Anita says

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

  24. Pete Newell says

    You’re welcome. Thank James Nicoll. He posts that list every December 6th, pointedly not naming the man who should by all rights be lost to history.

  25. Monsanto says

    That poor guy. His life has been ruined by women seeking equality! Never let it be said that my heart doesn’t go out for people who are only trying to increase their advantage.

  26. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    Tabby Lavalamp

    I may not agree with everything Anita says

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    I was wondering the same damn thing. I find those comments highly irritating. I starting trying to think of when I’ve said it but then I realized the privileged assclams I disagree with don’t receive death threats while oppressed people do like gaters with Quinn and their simple teasing of the Dorito King. Maybe that’s why. Maybe it’s because I haven’t read a criticism of Anita’s that actually addressed what she says and isn’t sexist. Maybe because most people don’t see or care about the sexism in gaming and agree with Anita’s harassers so pointing out how they still consider her wrong is fucking grating when that’s so goddamn minor and besides the point. Maybe because it comes off like “Well, I don’t even want to appear like I agree with her even when denouncing death threats because that’d just be awful.”

    I don’t know. I just wish I didn’t have to be reminded of how much opposition to feminism there’s left to fight when death threats cease (if they ever do) with the “mild moderates”. Ugh. Just, ugh.
    ==================
    Pete Newell

    You’re welcome. Thank James Nicoll. He posts that list every December 6th, pointedly not naming the man who should by all rights be lost to history.

    Thank you both. That’s wonderful.

  27. Athywren says

    Well, this proves it quite conclusively. Feminism is wrong and misogyny isn’t a thing in the least.
    Seriously, do people like this think we’ll stop noticing the problems in society if they can just shoot the right people? And how the fuck has feminism ruined anybody’s life? Oh no! Women can vote, and work, and even though probably nothing will happen to you, it’s technically illegal to rape them! And now they’re just going too far in thinking they’re allowed to talk – in PUBLIC – about how we’re still not treating them like real people!
    Fucking pathetic, whiny little shits.

    I really try not to hate people, to not see even the worst people as evil, but, fuck it, these guys make it impossible.

  28. whynotthedeer says

    Funny, all of a sudden the freethinking liberals find that terrorists must be caught and put in jail for a long time, now that a Feminist Heroine is threatened. Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden? Everyone is a liberal until mugged …

  29. Anthony K says

    Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden?

    Kindly point to a comment asking for indefinite detention for the perpetrator, or fuck right off. No one has time for your strawliberals, you fucking dolt.

  30. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden? Everyone is a liberal until mugged …

    Typical non-sequitur from a True Believer™.
    You are dismissed.

  31. Christopher says

    Funny, all of a sudden the freethinking liberals find that terrorists must be caught and put in jail for a long time, now that a Feminist Heroine is threatened. Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden? Everyone is a liberal until mugged …

    Hey fucknut, the little terrorist wannabe would be locked up in a Utah jail not gitmo and I think you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who would agree with you that terrorist threats like this should be legal.

  32. Pete Newell says

    whynotthedeer (or whoever):

    Right. Because someone else’s shock and outrage at a terrible thing isn’t valid unless it includes shock and outrage at your specific terrible thing; in fact it’s evidence of hypocrisy. And you’re here opportunistically accusing people of cherry-picking issues to denounce, with no indication that you care about the issue under discussion here except as an excuse to launch your canned accusation, and with no visible signs of recognizing the irony.

    Fuck off. This is getting boring.

  33. Athywren says

    @36
    What the fuck are you gibbering about?
    Who here has called for waterboarding? Citations or GTFO.
    Who here is against terrorism being a crime? Citations or GTFO.

  34. whynotthedeer says

    Oh no, nobody is calling for indefinite detention, just detention “for a long time”. Look above, there’s your good liberal buddy…

  35. Christopher says

    Learn to read dumbshit.

    “for a long time” = 35.5 years in prison and $26,000 fine.

    Works for me.

    Hell even the minimum sentence of 3.08 years in prison and a $26,000 fine would be reasonable, though the DA should only give that via a plea deal that bans the fucker from the internet for life.

  36. jodyp says

    3 years is a pretty long time if you’re on the inside. But for the person on the outside, who the threat was aimed at, it doesn’t feel so long.

  37. Christopher says

    Yeah, the minimum sentence should only apply if the fucker is just a neckbeard basement dweller, doesn’t have any guns or pipe bombs, and doesn’t live near by.
    If he has the means and opportunity like he claims, then lock him away for three and a half decades for sure.

  38. says

    @whynotthedeer #36: I’m very liberal. I think Guantanamo Bay should be shut down. I also think that terrorists should be tried and, if found guilty, punished appropriately. My problem with Gitmo is that many (if not all) of the people there, who have been labeled as terrorists and the like, have skipped that crucial “trial” step.

    I think this letter-writing asshole should be tried and punished too. As it stands, there’s more evidence against him than against people who’ve been jailed for years at Gitmo. But I’m going to guess, based on probability, that he’s lily-white, so he’s unlikely to end up in a Cuban detention facility.

  39. Christopher says

    Actually, if they do find that he actually has a pipe bomb, then he is liable for another first degree felony which adds another 5 years to life in prison plus another ten grand.

  40. Hj Hornbeck says

    Uh, people? I was about to jump on the anti-GamerGate bandwagon, until I read this in an article:

    In order to determine the degree of risk the letter posed, police ran the information they had through the FBI cyber terrorism task force and a number of other statewide database analysis information centers.

    ”They determined the threat seems to be consistent with ones (Sarkeesian) has received at other places around the nation,” he told the Standard-Examiner. “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”

    These predate GamerGate. Terrorism threats are just the typical cost of being a public feminist, apparently.

  41. says

    whynotthedeer @36:

    Funny, all of a sudden the freethinking liberals find that terrorists must be caught and put in jail for a long time, now that a Feminist Heroine is threatened. Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden? Everyone is a liberal until mugged …

    You don’t read much…aw forget it.
    You’re right. We’re wrong.
    Happy?
    Door. Ass. Bye.

  42. anteprepro says

    A dumbass right-wing troll barging in to smear libruls and defend misogynistic terrorism, in the holy name of Video games? Truly a surprising occurrence.

  43. Gregory Greenwood says

    I wish I could say that behaviour like this shocks me, but it is rapidly becoming par for the course. This is the true face of the gamerbros and their precious ‘movement’, once you strip away the obfustications about supposed ‘integrity in gaming journlaism’ – they are motivated by a desire for dominance within their niche (as mentioned upthread) and a hatred of women so strong that they will go so far as to employ terrorist tactics. I hope all those who ally themselves to things like gamergate take a good, long look at this letter and what it reveals about the mindset of the author, and then reconsider their affiliation (though that would require a level of social conscience and self awareness I fear that few of them possess).

    As for the author, there is no way to know whether he actually intends to carry out his threat or not, and even if he has no intent to go through with it, he is trading on the fear that he might be another violent misogynist to try to use threats of violence to silence Anita and women like her and intimidate anyone who wishes to listen to what they have to say. Attempting to effect social and/or political change – or the maintenance of an unjust and oppressive system of privilege – through violence or the threat of violence is pretty much the textbook definition or terrorism, and this arsehat is every bit as much a terrorist as Timothy McVeigh or anyone else who would employ these tactics, and should be treated a such. I hope he is swiftly caught, tried and placed where he cannot harm anyone.

    —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

    Pete Newell @ 26;

    Well said.

  44. screechymonkey says

    From the news article:

    USU officials have consulted with federal, local and state law enforcement and determined it’s safe to allow Anita Sarkeesian to give her presentation, said spokesman Tim Vitale.

    In order to determine the degree of risk the letter posed, police ran the information they had through the FBI cyber terrorism task force and a number of other statewide database analysis information centers.

    ”They determined the threat seems to be consistent with ones (Sarkeesian) has received at other places around the nation,” he told the Standard-Examiner. “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”

    On the one hand, I’m glad to hear they’re not cancelling the event. But thinking about that last paragraph makes me sick.

  45. jodyp says

    Holy shit Kotaku. “There is no mention of Gamergate in the threatening letter”???

    Yeah, they’re just the ones riling the dudebros up. Completely blameless, those scions of integrity.

  46. anteprepro says

    Tony: Sad, but I don’t blame her. It really does show us how far this has gone. Silencing women with threats of violence. Incoherent outrage over petty bullshit. And they call feminists extremists during all this.

    They are the gaming equivalent to fundamentalists. Dogmatic, ignorant, privileged and desperate to maintain that privilege and control. Willing to stifle and silence by any means necessary. They want everyone to be like them or at least be quiet, and they aren’t willing to use mere reason or compromise or anything so simple to reach their goals. They want their enemies to burn and will make sure that fact is always painfully obvious to everyone. Because intimidation is just as fun for them.

  47. jrfdeux, mode d'emploi says

    Jesus unholy fuck this makes me sick and angry at the same time. I really don’t know how to live in this world.

  48. jodyp says

    She asked them about it and all the university had to say was that they weren’t going to disallow concealed weapons.

    Great jabbering jesus, Utah.

  49. anteprepro says

    jodyp:

    She asked them about it and all the university had to say was that they weren’t going to disallow concealed weapons.
    Great jabbering jesus, Utah.

    Fuck. Them.

    Holy fucking shit.

    She shouldn’t just not go, she should encourage everyone to put that hell-hole on their blacklists.

  50. Azkyroth Drinked the Grammar Too :) says

    I don’t visit the slymepit or any other similar venues. Please tell me this threat does not reflect a commonly (or even semi-commonly) held opinion. Please.

    The slymepit and misogynists generally thinks these shitbags have their hearts in the right place, but go a little overboard. The shitbags think “everyone FEELS like I do…but I’m the one who’s gonna DO something about it!”

  51. Hj Hornbeck says

    Sarkeesian @Twitter

    Let’s be real for a second. #gamergate is the new name for a group that has been harassing me for 2 years. All the same users are involved.

    Huh. I take it back, then, we can lay this at the feet of GamerGate.

  52. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    What a fuckwitted policy, letting concealed into a talk with threats of a mass shooting. Those are some stupid administrators without courage.

  53. vaiyt says

    Oh no, nobody is calling for indefinite detention, just detention “for a long time”.

    Gitmo was a facility specifically made for detention without trial and to practice torture on the prisoners. Wanting people to be prosecuted and arrested according to the law is not the same thing.

  54. numerobis says

    Does the gun-nut law have any exemptions for times when someone has made an explicit threat? Probably not…

  55. vaiyt says

    I take it back, then, we can lay this at the feet of GamerGate.

    Of course we can. ZQ helpfully documented the dawning of the bullshit, and it consists on the same assholes who were already upset that women dared to care about video games in their own terms.

  56. Azkyroth Drinked the Grammar Too :) says

    ….and the slymepitters and other misogynists, for the most part, are happy to let them think that.

  57. Al Dente says

    I’m surprised that when the university said they’d allow armed people to attend her speech that they didn’t offer to paint a target on her chest.

  58. Menyambal says

    How does a male student shooting up the place show what feminism has done? How can a man in college have had his life ruined by feminism?

    How can a woman cancelling a talk make a case for men?

  59. says

    Fuck. I feel dirty. I decided to blog about this bomb threat and went looking through Google for an image of Anita Sarkeesian to add to the post, and I came across some of the most vile, degrading images I’ve ever seen. People took images of her and photoshopped them to make it look like she was beaten. God it was horrid.

  60. anteprepro says

    Tony:

    People took images of her and photoshopped them to make it look like she was beaten. God it was horrid.

    Sounds like Anita’s “critics”, alright. Fucking fuck.

  61. says

    jodyp @64:

    She asked them about it and all the university had to say was that they weren’t going to disallow concealed weapons.
    Great jabbering jesus, Utah.

    Jesus fuck. I guess they think the only thing that can stop a misogynist with a gun is someone else with a gun?

    ****

    frog @67:
    Thanks for noting that. I left a message for them.

  62. Pete Newell says

    CatieCat #44: Too right he is. Nice to hear another voice from home.

    WRT to Anita Sarkeezian and USU, respectively, what a hell of a choice to have to make, and Christ what a bunch of asshole. Gun culture in America trimphs agian – although without any blood this time. Yeehaw.

    I’m gonna assume – because I’m cynical – that this means they won’t be hunting the little asshole down and prosecuting him, so they won’t have to navigate the political minefield of whether this kind of threat – that’s only against women, after all – could possibly be terrorism when it’s perpetrated by a gen-u-ine Amurrican. To be sure, if this little fiasco costs them enough money and bad press, that could change. Recent history suggests not, unless he turns out to be from an ethnic or religious group that already has a built-in demonized narrative handy.

    Welp, time for whisky.

  63. says

    Maybe, in the wake of Sarkeesian cancelling her appearance, somewhere in a dark corner of the internet there’ll be a little celebration cheering that they’ve successfully silenced her… and that will leave sufficient evidence for the criminal investigation to connect the threat to the poster, and lead to a successful prosecution.

    However unlikely that may be, I find myself casting about for whatever silver linings I can find these days.

  64. says

    I hope that Sarkeesian is able to record her talk and put it up on the internet. More of us would be able to see it, then, and she can start off by explaining about the death threat. It’s lose/lose for the asshole who made that threat; what’s he gonna do threaten to kill everyone who watches a video on youtube? What fucking media savoire-faire is this.

  65. ck says

    Tabby Lavalamp wrote:

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    I believe I said it once after hearing reports that a homophobic pastor received death threats over an invitation to speak. In that case, I did feel that I should distance myself from him, while also speaking out against the threat. In regards to this particular threat, I have no reservations in denouncing it without trying to distance myself from Anita Sarkeesian. I do sincerely hope they find the little asshole who sent this.

  66. says

    Tabby Lavalamp @28:

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    I’m with you.
    I’ve seen that comment a few times in threads about Anita Sarkeesian too.

  67. says

    @ #3 Anne, Lurking Feminist Harpy & Support Staff

    All of my initial responses were unprintable.

    FWIW, this was my initial reaction:
    But, huh? You mean, wait, what? Who did what to you? When? Wronged how?!

    Angry. Little. Man boy.

    @ 72 nuerobis

    Does the gun-nut law have any exemptions for times when someone has made an explicit threat? Probably not…

    To the best of my understanding, the gun-nut position is that if everyone brought a gun everywhere we would all be safe because if someone tried to take a shot at her then Sarkeesian (who, in this alternate reality, would be armed herself) and the other people would be able to shoot back. This is supposed to act as a “deterrent.” The expression “an armed society is a polite society” is one of their mantras. It’s really the turtles-all-the-way-down of public safety policies — magical thinking at its finest.

  68. says

    this means they won’t be hunting the little asshole down and prosecuting him

    Hugely unlikely. That’s a very clearly worded threat and shows several of the warning signs that would indicate more than just random crankiness. Whoever sent that crafted it deliberately to look like a serious threat, by putting in several key indicators of intent – the FBI’ll take it seriously. Backtracking something like that can take a while. If the guy who sent it (I am assuming it’s a guy, OK?) was careful, and used something like TOR, there may still be giveaways that would allow it to be backtracked (e.x.: whoever sent that probably did internet queries about the montreal massacre within 1hr of hitting ‘send’; that will be in google’s logs). That’s without getting the “metadata” collection in Utah involved … which could well happen, and the FBI would then have to do a parallel construction to avoid having to admit the methods. I’d rate it as about 50/50 that they’ll catch the sender within 3-4 months. Shorter, if the sender was dumb enough to brag about it.

  69. Ichthyic says

    There’s no proof he’s associated with #GamerGate or 4Chan or MRAs or anything!

    On facebook, this seems to be the winning response by teh gamerz atm.

  70. says

    There’s no proof he’s associated with #GamerGate or 4Chan or MRAs or anything!

    All the more reason to catch him. Because then there’ll be a scramble to rewrite some established positions.

  71. What a Maroon, oblivious says

    Can I ask out of my gender? I mean, I’m fine with being a man and all, but some of my fellow men….

    To the best of my understanding, the gun-nut position is that if everyone brought a gun everywhere we would all be safe because if someone tried to take a shot at her then Sarkeesian (who, in this alternate reality, would be armed herself) and the other people would be able to shoot back. This is supposed to act as a “deterrent.” The expression “an armed society is a polite society” is one of their mantras. It’s really the turtles-all-the-way-down of public safety policies — magical thinking at its finest.

    See, guns don’t just deter, they actually deflect bullets.

    But only if you’re one of the good guys.

    I don’t go in much for heroes, but if I did, Anita Sarkeesian would be near the top of my list. I really have to admire people like her who keep on despite the danger and the constant shit being flung.

  72. says

    Reading that left me feeling hollow and very sick. I don’t blame Ms. Sarkeesian for canceling, I wouldn’t want to take the chance either, especially with the university having no problem with allowing weapons (that’s pure WTF), and I wish like hell this wasn’t being treated as “normal for this woman”. This isn’t a case of “normal for this woman”, it’s getting to be ‘normal’ for any woman who speaks up for any reason at all.

    Christ, absolutely terrifying.

  73. Ichthyic says

    I came across some of the most vile, degrading images I’ve ever seen. People took images of her and photoshopped them to make it look like she was beaten.

    Uh, tony?

    it’s worse than that.

    those images came from this game:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/07/06/internet-trolls-online-beat-up-anita-sarkeesian-game_n_1653473.html

    yes, they felt it somehow necessary to make beating up a woman they disagree with… into a game.

    I just… it’s beyond me.

  74. says

    Just out of curiosity I pushed the threat screenshot through an ocr, rendering it into text then checked it against a plagiarism detector (comparing it with loads of other papers and writings for key paragraphs, etc) Came up dry. But that’s just the freeware off the web. I’m assuming that whoever is investigating the threat has better stuff than I’ve got here. Good hunting!

  75. Jacob Schmidt says

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    Something I’ve noticed is that denouncing poor behaviour of a group is often taken as support for the “antagonist” group.

    “Harrassing muslims isn’t acceptable.”
    “Oh, but muslims killing christians is totally ok? Yeah, right, you’re such a hypocrite.”

    I see it so often that I do want to distance myself, just to avoid it. I try not to, though; denouncing death threats shouldn’t involve political manoeuvring.

  76. says

    Marcus Ranum @ 87:

    Hugely unlikely. That’s a very clearly worded threat and shows several of the warning signs that would indicate more than just random crankiness.

    Given this, by the authorities, I doubt they’re going to be scouring about for whoever wrote that threat:

    USU officials have consulted with federal, local and state law enforcement and determined it’s safe to allow Anita Sarkeesian to give her presentation, said spokesman Tim Vitale.

    In order to determine the degree of risk the letter posed, police ran the information they had through the FBI cyber terrorism task force and a number of other statewide database analysis information centers.

    ”They determined the threat seems to be consistent with ones (Sarkeesian) has received at other places around the nation,” he told the Standard-Examiner. “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”

    That reads like a write-off to me.

  77. Ichthyic says

    Free speech has now been held hostage to “gun rights”.

    Thanks Obama!

    er,

    Thanks Utah!

  78. anteprepro says

    God, the HuffPo article has a slideshow of comments about the “game” and it is almost all slimy apologists.

  79. Ichthyic says

    That reads like a write-off to me.

    it reads like she was right to cancel. It reads like OSU should be very low on the list of universities anyone should want to attend.

    It reads like another page in the ever more rapidly rising tide of fascism in the US.

  80. says

    Iyeska:
    That reads like a write-off to me.

    OMG yes. Fucking lazy fucking fucks.

    So there are several things that ought to red flag that threat: awareness of time and place, clear statement of intent, clear statement of having the wherewithal, organized and coherent (doesn’t read like it was written by someone who was high or drunk) and an indicator that the threatener researched the target. When you’re doing a threat assessment, those are indicators that someone has gone to at least a planning stage – even pretending to be at the planning stage requires doing some planning. That’s absolutely not something that should be blown off.

    Add item #278,282,918 to the list of “reasons Marcus does not respect the FBI”

  81. Ichthyic says

    Maybe because most people don’t see or care about the sexism in gaming and agree with Anita’s harassers so pointing out how they still consider her wrong is fucking grating when that’s so goddamn minor and besides the point. Maybe because it comes off like “Well, I don’t even want to appear like I agree with her even when denouncing death threats because that’d just be awful.”

    then again, maybe some of them are afraid the death-threat water cannon will get turned on them as well.

  82. says

    Sarkeesian is a Canadian-American feminist, media critic and blogger who was scheduled to speak on the portrayal of women in video games on Oct. 15, at Utah State in the Taggart Student Center. All university business will be conducted as scheduled tomorrow. [emphasis added]

    I hope not. I’m trying to imagine a similar situation at, say, a French university in the 1930s concerning a threat against a Jewish speaker. I think this calls for a response from the university administration and community. On the other hand, this person sounds very dangerous and the threat isn’t just to Sarkeesian, so I would hope the response wouldn’t put anyone in danger, especially students. Some creativity is in order.

  83. says

    If the university does in fact cave to this blatant act of terrorism, I’d suggest (I would hope that) Sarkeesian film her talk ASAP, straight down the barrel of her video camera, and upload it everywhere. This delusional little creep *might* be able to prevent a woman talking to a live audience, but if he thinks that’ll be the end of it he’s sadly mistaken.

    Now, true to Streisand, I doubt I’d have even known about this public appearance if this bellowing manchild hadn’t brought it to my attention by threatening to murder its attendees. Now I’m not only aware, I can’t wait to hear what Sarkeesian was going to say. Well done, little terrorist, you’ve increased Sarkeesian’s audience better than she could have herself.

    Finally, I know I shouldn’t be but I am once again astounded that a woman who’s most famous for calmly highlighting common (like, so common that you’d have to be delusional or incredibly obtuse or Phil Mason not to recognise them) narrative tropes in fucking video games, of all things, can attract such mind-warping hatred. I’m frequently told that men are stronger, more resilient and that women should grow thicker skins in response to abuse or just ignore the trolls – but an unhinged threat of mass murder in response to a woman speaking in public is the mark of a profoundly weak and pitifully weak-minded individual.

    Truly, the person who made this threat is little better than the Taliban thugs who shot Malala – not only that but the ideology behind it is just as intellectually bankrupt and just as deeply-rooted in a toxic culture supported and informed by mythology and wishful-thinking.

  84. says

    Iyeska:
    “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”

    It took a few minutes for the meaning of that to sink in. And now my head is all asplodey.

  85. Ichthyic says

    Imma gonna go weep for a minute.

    sorry :(

    this shit needs to be rooted out though; all of it, now, before it becomes even worse! People need to know exactly how far this shit is going, and that it needs to be taken seriously before it gets even more out of hand than it is already.

  86. Ichthyic says

    If the university does in fact cave to this blatant act of terrorism

    you missed it, Hank. they already did. speech was canceled because they refused to provide basically any security, or take the threat seriously.

  87. gussnarp says

    @Ichthyic:

    Free speech has now been held hostage to “gun rights”.

    QFT, unfortunately. That really nails it. Fuck.

  88. says

    I just tweeted:(@mjranum)
    I pledge to watch any video Anita Sarkeesian ever makes.
    And to help fund them if I can.
    (link to a news story about the cancelled talk)

    I was probably going to watch them anyway, but excuse me I’ve got to go drop some more cash on her ‘donate’ button on FeministFrequency.com Because, it’s the only way I can scream a big “FUCK YOOOOOOO” at the anonymous coward.

  89. says

    @107 Ichthyic: Yup, I saw she’d cancelled just now (because I did my usual thing of commenting, then reading the comments).

    It’s a goddamn shame, but as some said upthread, if Sarkeesian tapes her talk and uploads it everywhere, at the very least the yawping dumbfuck who threatened her will have failed to silence her and might even increase her audience. The failure will be compounded if he didn’t cover his e-tracks and the feds nab him.

    Now I’m waiting for the douche-o-tron to activate and start generating apologetics of the sort also mentioned upthread: “It wasn’t #whinergate/MRA/4chan! It was false flag! It was for the clicks!”

  90. mirele says

    Sarkeesian cancelled her talk at USU.

    Not because of the terror threat.

    But because USU was going to allow people to allow concealed firearms at her talk.

    http://www.standard.net/Police/2014/10/14/Feminist-speaker-cancels-appearance-at-USU-after-terror-threat.html

    If I was Sarkeesian, I would have done the same thing. It’s intolerable to suggest that being able to conceal carry into a situation where a death threat has been issued is a “right.” I couldn’t even imagine getting up and talking and not knowing if someone had a secret gun and was going to engage in a “Montreal-style” massacre (as the death threat stated).

  91. says

    Iyeska @91

    Reading that left me feeling hollow and very sick. I don’t blame Ms. Sarkeesian for canceling, I wouldn’t want to take the chance either, especially with the university having no problem with allowing weapons

    Hollow is a great description of how I feel reading about this crap, too. And yes, though I think she has stood up to threats before, this time, the threats were against more than just her and very specific, and it seems the police were really off-base by not controlling concealed weapons.

    I hope they can find this person.

  92. says

    It has been a really frustrating day, especially as I was sitting at the computer using my game dev Twitter account for much of the day watching what has been going on. Tonight there has been a ton of activity on the #stopgamergate2014 hashtag, which has felt nice, I think this has really angered a lot of people, but unless it keeps up I fear tomorrow will be another day of wondering what other horrible thing will happen.

    I have no idea what is really going on in the heads of USU admin, but I fear their hands are rather tied on the security issue, at least when it comes to concealed firearms. I had never looked up Utah law before so maybe someone more familiar with it can correct me, but it appears they really cannot do anything to stop people from carrying concealed firearms.
    From http://www.armedcampuses.org/utah/

    While the Utah State Board of Regents generally has the power to enact regulations governing the conduct of university and college students, faculty, and employees, Utah law expressly reserves to the Utah State Legislature the authority to regulate firearms at higher education institutions. Therefore, while the Utah State Board of Regents maintains limited authority to regulate firearms in the areas listed below, it may not otherwise authorize higher education institutions to restrict the lawful possession or carrying of firearms. See Utah Code Ann. § 53B-3-103(2)
    Specifically, the State Board of Regents may authorize a higher education institution to:
    Allow dormitory residents to request only roommates who are not licensed to carry a concealed firearm; or

    Ensure enforcement of rules pertaining to private hearing rooms that have been designated as “secure areas”, meaning that there are restrictions on the transportation of firearms and ammunition into the hearing rooms. See Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-8-311.1 and 53B-3-103

  93. gussnarp says

    I found this interesting:

    “Sarkeesian was informed that, in accordance with the State of Utah law regarding the carrying of firearms, if a person has a valid concealed firearm permit and is carrying a weapon, they are permitted to have it at the venue,” reads a statement on the university’s website.

    I wonder what that law really means and how it would hold up. If the President were speaking in that venue, no one would be allowed in with a weapon, period. Are they just forced to turn down the opportunity to have Ms. Sarkeesian or the President speak at their venue, ever? Would they find a way around the law for the President, but not for Ms. Sarkeesian?

    As Ichthyic said, gun rights beat free speech rights. A sad day for America, truly.

  94. Holms says

    So the next time an MRA breathlessly proclaims something like ‘but but Peezus said all MRA are psycho killers! How dare he!’ we now have a data point noting that, actually, there are MRA arseholes freely associating with the name.

    Also, anyone that still thinks this is about games journalism at this point is a fucking moron.

  95. Ichthyic says

    but it appears they really cannot do anything to stop people from carrying concealed firearms.

    bah.

    if there was ever a time for civil disobedience, universities in states that allow concealed (or open) carry have the MANDATE to do so.

    Universities are supposed to be strongholds of free speech. To allow free speech to be quashed by the threat of gun violence is anathema to the mission of ANY university.

    USU, and all universities that have and are allowing this to happen, should be ashamed.

    Things in the US are worse now than they were during the civil rights movements in the 60s, as far as free speech is concerned!

    …and they didn’t even have to call in the national guard to quell those uppity students.

    fucking sad is what it is.

  96. says

    Allow dormitory residents to request only roommates who are not licensed to carry a concealed firearm; or

    Fuck that noise. I slept in every class I attended, so that makes a lot of those rooms “dorms” … And maybe a couple of sleep-ins in the cafeteria and library and presto, magic dorm-dust.

    Utah’s got some messed up priorities: it’s hard to get a beer but it sounds like you can get a shot pretty much anywhere. In Utah, it’s against the law to have sex if you’re unmarried, but your class could be full of college students with guns. Just typing “college students with guns” makes me nervous. Because I was one, once upon a time, and I know now how stupid I was.

  97. Ichthyic says

    Utah’s got some messed up priorities

    a great many people would agree. and that agreement would stretch back into history quite a long way.

  98. jrfdeux, mode d'emploi says

    Marcus #119

    Utah’s got some messed up priorities: it’s hard to get a beer but it sounds like you can get a shot pretty much anywhere.

    That’s just so beyond the pale I can’t even. We can send a 17-year old* kid to war and have them put rounds into other human beings, but drink and vote and rent a car? Nosirree, those are GROWN UP activities.

    *With parental consent.

  99. Hj Hornbeck says

    ajb47 @116:
    Good thing you posted a link to that update, because it now contains a second:

    femfreq @Twitter:

    Multiple specific threats made stating intent to kill me & feminists at USU. For the record one threat did claim affiliation with #gamergate

    Worse than initially reported, then. Wow.

  100. sianwilliams says

    I’m glad that I was able to see Anita give a talk in person last weekend. And by that I mean I’m glad that I was able to see her talk despite a bomb threat, but only after being searched before walking into the room because Washington state isn’t as mind-numbingly stupid as Utah seems to be.

  101. says

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvzDwvMmUTM

    By one of my favorite feminist singers, Australian Judy Small:

    A man behind her in the line, he started getting steamed,
    He said, “It wasn’t because he was a man, this guy was crazy, mad, obscene,”
    “Yes, that’s true,” the woman replied, “but women go crazy too,
    And I’ve never heard of a woman shooting fourteen men, have you?”

    And so I wonder why, as I try to make sense of this,
    Why is it always men who resort to the gun, the sword, and the fist?
    Why does gunman sound so familiar, while gunwoman doesn’t quite ring true?
    What is it about men that makes them do the things they do?

  102. Lyn M: G.R.O.S.T. (ADM) -- Membership pending says

    I like the idea of donating in support of Anita. Speaking out on her behalf, too.
    Can’t say I ever foresaw anyone would stand for justice on a barracade labeled “video games”.

  103. omnicrom says

    It’s technically correct the letter makes no reference to #GamerGate, which means this person could simply be one of the vast teeming hordes of entitled misogynistic scumbags which #GamerGate draws its population from. This is not an improvement, either for civil society in general or for the misbegotten people who wave the flag of #GamerGate in particular.

    Hearing how common these types of terrorist threats are makes me once again wonder if the flow of this shit will ever begin to slow down, let alone stop.

  104. Steve Caldwell says

    It appears that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to silence speech that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment. I’m sure that was the intent of the Founding Fathers.[end sarcasm]

  105. Moggie says

    A few days ago, Anita tweeted: “today marks the 3rd time I’ve gone on stage after specific death and bomb threats were issued to an event where I’m scheduled to speak”. The difference is that those events had adequate security.

  106. says

    Cancelling in the face of threats is disappointing but she has the right to protect herself…
    but I was also thinking, after the initial disappointment, that beyond protecting herself, it was the responsible thing to do, because the university and police reaction meant that the attendees would also be at risk… so cancelling was the only responsible thing to do in the face of the proper authorities’ abdication of their OWN responsibilities towards public safety.

    They were not only refusing to protect her, they were refusing to protect anyone who attended.
    They are refusing to protect a visiting speaker, but also their own students and staff.

    People need to get fired.

  107. Moggie says

    I hope students and staff at USU don’t let this drop. If you take that death threat at face value — and how can they afford not to? — they will all continue to be at risk, even with the talk cancelled. They have in their midst an armed man who fantasises about becoming famous by committing mass murder. Who knows what will set him off? They can’t afford to think they can forget about him now that the talk isn’t going ahead.

  108. says

    Ok, pardon me, I just stated the obvious.

    I hadn’t read the threat… I didn’t have the stomach for it, so I assumed it only named her as the target. I just read it and of course it directly threatens all attendees, etc., which makes my preceding comment pointlessly obvious.

    I cannot possibly disagree more strongly with those who are assuming the authorities are investigating, however.
    They specifically stated that they are not providing security because she is routinely threatened to this degree (as if that’s not horrifying enough), and in doing so they completely and I assume deliberately ignore the overt threats to everyone else who is present.

    The message is clear – they do not give a flying fuck if feminists or anyone who associates with or is interested in listening to them are threatened with death. Terrorist threats against feminists and their audiences are not worth responding to, not worth the time for a couple of guards at the door, not worth the protection of free speech (as others have stated).

    As if it weren’t clear enough beforehand… the government has chosen a side. The wrong one.

  109. Hj Hornbeck says

    Two more tweets before I conk out:

    femfreq:

    To be clear: I didn’t cancel my USU talk because of terrorist threats, I canceled because I didn’t feel the security measures were adequate.

    Joss Whedon:

    TERRORISM ISN’T BLOWING THINGS UP. IT’S USING THE FEAR OF VIOLENCE TO COW US AND CONTROL OUR ACTIONS. http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/14/697

    Wish I had half the courage of Sarkeesian. And I think it’s safe to say this story is gonna dominate the headlines tomorrow…

  110. laurentweppe says

    Where are the protests against Gitmo and anti-terrorist legislation all of a sudden?

    Kindly point to a comment asking for indefinite detention for the perpetrator, or fuck right off. No one has time for your strawliberals, you fucking dolt.

    Kindly point to a comment asking for indefinite detention without trial and torture for the sake of extorting forced confessions for the alleged perpetrator: Gitmo is all about lawlessly detaining people including many who never were terrorists or Al Qaeda affiliates and who remain imprisoned because the US military establishment refuses to admit its own callousness and incompetence.

    And let’s be blunt here, the reason whynotthedeer complains is because he suspects the guy sending terrorist threats this time shares an ethnic/cultural/social social background with him and favor authoritarian policies only insofar as they don’t target people like himself: this is a would-be aristocrat reasoning: for him the Law exists only to keep the plebs in their place and protect him from them.

    ***

    They are the gaming equivalent to fundamentalists. Dogmatic, ignorant, privileged and desperate to maintain that privilege and control.

    Oh, but they are not ignorant: stating egregious, mind-numbingly, stupid, easily debunked claims is a defense mechanism: when your goal is to enforce a social hierarchy that benefits yourself at the expense of everyone else, looking like the village idiot provokes a lot less anger -and therefore limit the risk of retaliation- than candidly stating your endgame.

    ***

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    It’s the consequence of attempts by the nerdy dudebros to deny any and all nuance and turn debate into tribal warfare: “You disagree with the threats and murderous fantasies? Then you’re on the Radical Extreme Feminist She-Devil‘s side and agree with everything she said and since you agree with everything she said it shows that you’re nothing but a parroting toady of the Radical Extreme Feminist She-Devil and this clearly Proves that we’re way more intelligent than you so shut the fuck up and let your intellectual betters alone to talk among themselves“: remember that the basic, instinctive, hardwired behavior is to avert conflict, so non-sociopathic people will -at least at first- intuitively react by saying “But I assure you, I don’t agree with everything she says

  111. Ichthyic says

    Where are all the Freeze Peach warriors now, eh?

    I’m sure they’re all shocked into silence by this…

    no, I can’t keep a straight face and say that.

  112. Ichthyic says

    and who remain imprisoned because the US military establishment refuses to admit its own callousness and incompetence.

    some STILL without EVER being formally charged, or allowed to see a lawyer, or contact anyone.

    …13 years later.

  113. Ichthyic says

    FWIW, I actually had to unfriend a KIWI today because they were a gamergater and decided to spew on my FB page on this issue!

    that kinda shocked me.

    evidently dudebromisogynistgamerfucks are a global phenomenon.

  114. se habla espol says

    A very small crumb of good news in this: when KUTV (a Salt Lake City TV station) covered this story last night, they had a graphic in which the word “terrorist” was prominent — and it was referring to the threat and the creep making it, not to Ms Sarkeesian.
    They also stated that county, state, and federal folks are still investigating. Yes, I know not to fully believe TV (or other) newscritters.

  115. David Marjanović says

    New development: Sarkeesian has canceled the talk. The reason? Utah allows people to carry guns into such events, and the university refused to prohibit firearms in the auditorium.

    This is what really blows my mind.

  116. Saad says

    CNN article

    Sarkeesian asked whether the school will forbid guns from the speech or do pat-downs. The school said it couldn’t.

    State law allows the carrying of guns in public places, it said.

    [. . .]

    So, Sarkeesian says, she had no choice but to cancel.

    See, guys? Guns kept her safe.

    Fuck this society.

  117. Saad says

    I don’t know how you guys deal with this kind of stuff. It’s not even 8 am and I’m just starting my day at work. What a shitty fucking depressing day it’s going to be.

    Some misogynist, criminal, low-life asshole just ruined the chance of social progress by a great activist simply by writing a few shitty sentences. I’m sure Sarkeesian had a great well thought out speech planned and it all went to shit by someone who is probably not even 1% of the person she is.

    Evil won. Good lost before it even got a chance to be heard.

    I’m pissed and really sad at the same time.

  118. says

    Where are the terrorism laws now?

    3 Poems:

    words self-healing

    not a birthing debt
    paid in full at puberty
    woman of your dreams

    love is always
    first prize material
    without award

    unbidden love
    placating self esteem
    back to the source

  119. Moggie says

    A commenter over at Skepchick posted a copy of the message the USU administration sent around, after Sarkeesian cancelled. This included:

    Following a disturbing email received late Monday evening, Utah State University police and administrators have been working throughout the day to assess any level of risk to students or to a speaker scheduled to visit. USU police, in conjunction with several teams of state and federal law enforcement experts, determined that there was no threat to students, staff or the speaker, so no alert was issued. The safety of our students and visitors is always the university’s first priority. At no time was there any imminent threat. The investigation is continuing.

    Don’t you feel safer already? Even though their investigation isn’t complete, they just know that there was no danger from all those people allowed to carry guns into the venue.

  120. Gorogh, Lounging Peacromancer says

    Pathetic and horrifying. Hope the aftermath gets publicized really well if they catch him. In fact, one should maybe petition some public figure to bring this to attention to a far larger audience than Anita’s talk was originally intendend for (and even beyond the audience of interested parties like this blog community).

    As a side note, and please correct me if this is a deficient opinion: Is it really a prudent idea to disseminate information of how law enforcement might go about looking for the person issuing the threat? I am specifically thinking of your posts #87 and following, Marcus Ranum, like how to research your references or which softwares to use. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy this sort of information immensely and thank you for it, but it’s just that I’m not sure if it would be more pragmatic to keep it to yourself. The reason being: The more disseminated it gets, the more likely it is that people normally too ignorant or impulsive to research such methods before issuing a threat might know them by default.

    Of course, knowing about it also helps you to see if law enforcement falls short by not employing a method clearly at their disposal… but I’m not sure that outweighs the potential for informing people about it that really shouldn’t know.

  121. says

    Saad @144, Sarkeesian is still alive, she still has the words in her head and written down somewhere, she can speak them at another venue any time (hopefully one with a better sense of security for its guests). It’s unfortunate news, but it’s not the end.

  122. says

    I’m crossing Utah off the list of place I want to visit, ever, and frankly, I have my doubts about even traveling through or flying over the state.

    NelC @148, you are right, but still, it’s discouraging to be reminded of how bad things still are in some parts of the US.

  123. tsig says

    From reading the law quoted above it looks like the university could have declared the place she was to speak a secure area and then banned guns from that area but they chose not to do this and hid their ass under cover of law.

  124. Saad says

    NelC, #148

    Yes, that’s the right outlook to have. It’s just that violence gives the bad people SUCH a huge advantage in being able to close off conversations. It’s like knocking all the chess pieces over when you realize the opponent is making a good move. That’s the part that’s really, really discouraging. It’s like they always have at their disposal a button which they can press effortlessly to make people like Sarkeesian back off no matter how great of an argument she had ready to present and how many countless days she had spent on putting it all together.

  125. Steven says

    Why the hell do I keep seeing this in comment sections? I’m trying to remember the last time I wanted to make it clear that I had disagreements with someone before I denounced the threats against them.

    I don’t understand why you have a problem with this. Don’t you think it’s important to show that it isn’t only those who support her 100% on everything she says that are horrified by these kinds of threats?

  126. says

    I don’t understand why you have a problem with this. Don’t you think it’s important to show that it isn’t only those who support her 100% on everything she says that are horrified by these kinds of threats?

    They never word it “I don’t even agree with her on many things but even I can see that…”
    They always word it as “I don’t agree with her on many things, but…”

    Do you get the distinction?
    The first, the one you never see, would indeed be a way of showing that it isn’t only those who support her 100% that are horrified.

    The second is not. The second is a way of saying “I’m horrified but please let me say that without risking my name being tarnished by being seen as some sort of…” etc.

  127. Steven says

    They never word it “I don’t even agree with her on many things but even I can see that…”
    They always word it as “I don’t agree with her on many things, but…”

    Do you get the distinction?
    The first, the one you never see, would indeed be a way of showing that it isn’t only those who support her 100% that are horrified.

    The second is not. The second is a way of saying “I’m horrified but please let me say that without risking my name being tarnished by being seen as some sort of…” etc.

    I see. That is a good distinction.

  128. says

    An appalling thought just occurred to me.

    We’ve seen how vicious lunatics can come from any walk of life.

    I have to wonder how many cops are, at least peripherally, involved in “gamergate” and the general harassment of feminists. Not necessarily with the threats (Though that wouldn’t surprise me), but with reading, commenting, and so on.

    Based on how they so often “respond” to things like rape and sexual assault, I can’t help but see that same dynamic in this case.

    Maybe everybody already got there before me, but the notion of the police we call for help agreeing, in principle at least, with the people making the threats is seriously scary.

  129. chimera says

    It would be good to DO something about this, depending on how it evolves. If only petitioning the competent authorities (who are they?) to actually try and find the terrorist. Would be good to keep this thread open for a long time so we can update and follow developments (like the Ferguson thread). Other ideas: contacting news media and encouraging them to give it coverage. Does anyone here know how to do that? I often email and twitter agencies and journalists but it’s like pissing into the wind. Let’s do something, let’s organize.

  130. laurentweppe says

    So: black man with a toy sword=shoot to kill. White woman threatened with mass murder=enh what can you do?

    Well, the guy who threatened Sarkeesian and the people willing to listen to her may be white and even, gasp hailing from a well connected family: we can’t ask law enforcement to treat patricians’ sons like they treat the plebs, no siree.

  131. says

    “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”
    I seem to remember that it was rather normal for Abraham Lincoln, Gandhi and Martin Luther King to get death threats too. “Normal” doesn’t mean “harmless.”
    And this is over games. Not over who gets a gold mine, or who gets exiled with the clothes they stand up in. Games.

  132. drst says

    sheila @ 161 – a woman in the UK was doxxed and threatened with rape for suggesting that the government keep a woman on their currency. She started a petition to get a non-royal woman on currency somewhere and the govt put Jane Austen on a 10 pound note for the new cycle. She was getting 50 rape and death threats an hour. http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/07/29/caroline_criado_perez_is_harassed_because_she_petitioned_to_have_jane_austen.html

    The guy responsible for the worst of it was jailed, as were two other people, thankfully: http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/228779/internet-troll-gets-jail-time-for-tweeting-rape-threats-in-protest-of-jane-austen-banknotes/

    “Putting Jane Austen on a bank note” deserves rape and death threats, as does commenting on games, making games, having sex, etc. Existing while female and having an opinion is clearly deserving of rape and death threats for these people. Nothing is beneath them.

  133. chimera says

    Question to those who know, how does this compare to violence against feminists in other time periods? More, less, different?

  134. numerobis says

    I see huge throngs of people (some of them my friends!) who deny it’s a big problem, or who victim-blame, or who claim they’re making up false-flag blah blah, etc. More such comments than I suspect can be explained by a small clique.

    But how many people are actually making the threats — is that at least a small number of people we could feasibly round up?

  135. Kevin Kehres says

    Well, I will never be invited to speak at a Utah college — but I’m going on record as saying “thanks, but no thanks” just the same.

    In this particular instance, I’m quite sure the threat was meaningless and that the person who made them was frankly lying about his (yes, it was a dude) capabilities and intention. That’s the way it is with cowards #braveheroes. However, that doesn’t mean some other dude with actual capabilities might not be looking to make a name for himself.

  136. Dunc says

    In this particular instance, I’m quite sure the threat was meaningless and that the person who made them was frankly lying about his (yes, it was a dude) capabilities and intention.

    Yeah, that’s what everybody always thinks until the lead starts flying.

  137. says

    a woman in the UK was doxxed and threatened with rape for suggesting that the government keep a woman on their currency. She started a petition to get a non-royal woman on currency somewhere and the govt put Jane Austen on a 10 pound note for the new cycle. She was getting 50 rape and death threats an hour.

    Yikes! Jane Austen on a bank note?!?! That set enough idiots’ hair on fire for 50 rape threats an hour?! With all the hideous crap happening all over the world some sizable number of people decide that a 19th century author’s picture on money constitutes some sort of existential crisis. Really?! Real-life eclipses satire yet again.

    At least someone received some jail-time but I noticed that one of the persons threatened is an MP. I guess you have to be a government official to have threats taken seriously?

    Oh, and on a somewhat tangential point regarding a comparison between Obama and Sarkeesian and security measures: Federal law “takes precedence over” state law when the two conflict. That’s why a U.S. President would have security measures in place anywhere in the country he visited. Now if it were the Governor of Utah receiving death threats, that would be a better comparison with Sarkeesian’s experience.

  138. says

    It’s not a definitive tell, but the phrase “bear witness” is used by mormons all the time. It’s likely that some fellow student who is also a mormon knows this guy, attends the same ward.

  139. nomadiq says

    I think its time for anyone who gives talks/lectures etc at universities who’s state laws allow open carry and who’s police force will not enforce a no gun policy at a public talk to be boycotted for all future talks. Especially when it has been requested after a threat of violence.

    I’m a nobody, but I do give the occasional talk/lecture at universities. I WONT be giving one at USU ever until they reverse this policy.

  140. says

    Curt Oda is one of the Utah legislators responsible for this situation in which speakers at a Utah University are not safe. Oda is a Republican and a mormon.

    […] Rep. Curt Oda, an avid gun-rights advocate said, “I think she’s overreacting.”

    Oda noted the university had tweaked security procedures and lined up additional staff in advance of Sarkeesian’s speech.

    Backpacks would not have been allowed into the Taggert Student Center Auditorium, but Sarkeesian said the university declined to pat down students or post metal detectors at the doors.

    Oda said those measures are unnecessary. The vast majority of concealed weapon permit carriers are trustworthy.

    There’s always gonna be bad guys,” he said. “Why put the good guys at a disadvantage?”

    The Clearfield Republican has pressed to allow gun owners to carry their weapons openly on Utah’s college campuses. At interim meetings on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Oda said he wanted to stress that nothing in Utah law prohibits open carrying on campuses right now. […]”

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58524629-78/sarkeesian-university-video-speech.html.csp

    From the comments:

    The cancellation of this speaker, and the reason we’ll never have a major national political figure speaking on public property in the State again, is on the Utah State Legislature.

    Unrestricted concealed-carry laws are ludicrous, and this is a consequence of those laws. Speakers have the right to a safe environment in which to speak, including (where appropriate), bans on weapons.

  141. Gorogh, Lounging Peacromancer says

    “There’s always gonna be bad guys,” he said. “Why put the good guys at a disadvantage?”

    Wow that is easily the most stupid argument I have heard for anything for quite a while really. I am sure he is fighting bravely against security checks at airports, as well? Or, say, fire drills, personal hygiene and… ah nevermind.

  142. says

    Kevin @166:

    In this particular instance, I’m quite sure the threat was meaningless and that the person who made them was frankly lying about his (yes, it was a dude) capabilities and intention.

    Wishful thinking much?
    How on Earth can you be “quite sure”? Especially given that Sarkeesian has gotten threats like this before.
    Given the world we live in-one where violence against women happens all the fucking time all over the globe…where men feel entitled to women’s bodies and when they don’t get the attention they desire, they turn in misogynistic assholes-how you can reach the conclusion, based on *no evidence* that this was a meaningless threat?

  143. w00dview says

    Really sick and tired of this shit. I cannot believe there are dimwits who think feminists are a bunch of brutal freedom hating authoritarians when misogynist terrorists like this ass pimple are making threats to silence her. I also bet the slymepitters and other misogynist assholes will still victim blame the shit out of Anita and make all sorts of excuses for the scumbag but cry about OMG!! CENSORSHIP!! when they are banned from a forum for being a bigoted shitstain. It is absurd how one woman criticising an aspect of gaming in a calm manner has generated this bile and thuggery. Fuck MRAS, fuck GamerGate and fuck every manchild who will try and belittle the harrassment woman face online merely for having an opinion. I have got a pretty nasty cold and was already in a shitty mood, reading about this has definitely not helped things.

  144. Ichthyic says

    Oda said those measures are unnecessary. The vast majority of concealed weapon permit carriers are trustworthy.

    yeah, good guys, like the retired sheriff in florida who shot someone for texting during the previews for a movie.

  145. Ichthyic says

    I cannot believe there are dimwits who think feminists are a bunch of brutal freedom hating authoritarians

    well, clearly it’s another case of projection by the right. projecting IS, after all, the most utilized tool in their tiny toolbox.

    quickly followed by denial.

  146. Ichthyic says

    I’m quite sure the threat was meaningless

    Hey, Kevin?

    The Department of Homeland Security just called with a job offer for you.

  147. pickwick says

    Holy hell. @ Utah generally, @ the state legislator quoted above, and @ the feds if they don’t take this seriously, go fuck yourselves.

    Following Marcus Ranum to Sarkeesian’s “donate” button.

  148. says

    This is a followup to comment #174, in which Republican legislator and mormon doofus, Curt Oda, made some really stupid remarks.

    A commenter on the Salt Lake Tribune site pointed out:

    General Conference has metal detectors and security and nary an utterance from the Christian Right as to the “violation” of their 2nd Amendment rights… BUT… a feminist comes along and all of a sudden the police and the school are entirely unwilling to make any accommodations to secure her safety for fear of violating the rights of CCW holders.

    General Conference is the twice-yearly meeting that mormons hold in Salt Lake City, and that they broadcast all over the world. The October GC recently wrapped up … safely. No gunshots were fired.

    That’s a telling comparison. Mormon leaders do not allow guns at General Conference, not even if church members have a concealed carry permit. The Utah legislature is made up of more than 80% true believing, active mormons. They make laws for a population that is about 60% mormon. They protect themselves, but not Anita Sarkeesian. She faces very specific threats of gun and bomb violence, but authorities not only insist on allowing guns at Sarkeesian’s speech, but they cite state laws to excuse that irrational act. That’s not right.

    The University could have declared the venue a “secure zone” and then used metal detectors to screen attendees for guns.

  149. says

    Dunderheads weigh in on the Salt Lake Tribune website:

    So the Utah State Legislature managed to keep this jabbering idiot from spouting off…
    —————
    NO DOUBT ONE OF HER MINIONS POSTED IT TO GET SOME PUBLICITY. AN EASY ENOUGH STUNT FOR SOMEONE WITH SO LITTLE RELEVANCE.

  150. vaiyt says

    AN EASY ENOUGH STUNT FOR SOMEONE WITH SO LITTLE RELEVANCE.

    AND YET WE CAN’T STOP RAGING ABOUT IT. OVER. AND OVER. AND OVER. AND OVER…

  151. Hj Hornbeck says

    Huh.

    femfreq @Twitter:

    USU acted irresponsibly. They did not even inform me of the threat. I learned about it via news stories on Twitter after I landed in Utah.

    Now I feel bad for giving the administrators a pass over gun laws.

  152. says

    Ichthyic 187, I love you too.

    Hj Hornbeck @189, quoting the Twitter feed:

    USU acted irresponsibly. They did not even inform me of the threat. I learned about it via news stories on Twitter after I landed in Utah.

    Holy crap. USU was going to let her walk into the lecture hall without knowing that some presumably local doofus had threatened her life?! I am not a frequent user of exclamation marks, but, jaw drop!, that seems actionable.

  153. says

    More synaptic sludge from doofuses posting comments on the Salt Lake Tribune website:

    She is just petulant because the state won’t change its laws to suit her neurosis. All the better. If she is afraid of the world as it is, she needs to remain inside that epistemological realm with which she is most comfortable
    ——————-
    As if a vetted concealed carry permit holder would actually present a danger.
    This woman and all who think like her are irrational. They believe that gun + human = automatic criminal.

    I don’t think the administrators get a pass because of the Utah gun laws. Mormons leaders don’t observe those laws inside their own office and conference buildings. Obviously, there are some workarounds. USU administrators could have declared the lecture hall where Sarkeesian was scheduled to speak a “secure zone,” right?

  154. says

    Guns are okay in the lobby of the Capitol building in Salt Lake City. Guns are not okay at mormon General Conference meetings. Gun are okay in university lecture halls. I am sensing some lack of consistency here.

  155. toska says

    but it appears they really cannot do anything to stop people from carrying concealed firearms.

    Yeah, I don’t buy this. In addition to Lynna’s comment #183, which states that guns aren’t allowed at General Conference, if they had a high profile speaker like the President, a presidential candidate, a foreign leader, etc., we all know they would have found a way to beef up security, and guns or weapons of any kind would NOT be welcomed. Were weapons allowed at the Salt Lake Olympics? Doubt it. Feminist who receives horrific threats to her life, including a threat to massacre the very event you’re hosting? Apparently not worthy of extra precautions. Fuck all of them for their disregard for the safety of Anita Sarkeesian and all of her guests.

    I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that she’s a feminist and UT is a very conservative state. /s

  156. toska says

    HJ @189,
    And an additional “Fuck USU” for not even warning her that her safety had been threatened. How can anyone possibly feel this is ok? I hope there is public outcry to change the way the handle things like this.

  157. says

    It’s funny to see conceal carry fetishists accuse others of being irrational. After all they’re the ones who believe possessing a gun somehow makes you fearless in all situations, capable of instantly determining who’s a bad guy and who isn’t, and able to flawlessly use a firearm so it won’t add to an already bad situation by harming the wrong people. They also believe that there’s a hard line between law abiding citizens and criminals, a line no law abiding citizen will ever cross.

  158. Ichthyic says

    It’s funny to see conceal carry fetishists accuse others of being irrational.

    not if you consider it’s just the usual projection employed as communication by these folks.

    then it makes perfect sense.

    disgusting still, but not at all unexpected.

  159. says

    More wildly disturbing comments from the readers of the Salt Lake Tribune articles:

    A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.
    ——————-
    Who would go see someone give a speech about “Feminism in Video Games” anyways……
    2-3, 5 people max in the audience?
    ——————
    An unfortunate abdication by the speaker when so many have defended the right to free speech and have enacted free speech, even under similar threats. Even her also threatened fellow attendees were seemingly willing to go forward. Perhaps some of them are “feminists” who also have legally obtained CCWs? How serious then are the issues for which she advocates to be taken?
    —————–
    Sarkeesian has a history of claiming bogus threats against her. I wouldn’t take this one seriously without solid evidence.

    As for that last one, I think finding out USU didn’t inform Sarkeesian about the threat, and that she found out about it from other sources after landing in SLC … well, that makes the claim that she made up the threat completely bogus.

    Looks like the bogus part is the myth that Sarkeesian makes up threats.

  160. says

    Well, I received a response to my last email that I sent to USU which was a scathing condemnation of their failure to inform Anita Sarkeesian of the bomb threat. Here’s their response:

    Hi Anthony: This is a disturbing report we continue to hear – a report that is patently untrue. Please consider Googling some later coverage about this Tweet Ms. Sarkeesian sent in which she alleges this. I don’t doubt that she first hear about hte threat on Twitter as she got off of a plane late in the afternoon. BUT – and I have the emails – we began contacting Ms. Sarkeesian assistant (the only person with whom we had been communicating during the entire scheduling process) at 8:18 a.m. That email from us included the threat. Her assistant responded to it. Then, FIVE more email exchanges followed between our police Captain Steve Milne in charge of the investigation and with Ms. Sarkeesian’s assistant. Alll five of those emails were about the threat and all five received resposnes from Ms. Sarkeesian’s assistant. That assistant assured us that he boss would call us (at two cell phone numbers we sent her) as soon as she exited the plane. Which, BTW, she did. Call us, that is. The fact that while she was traveling she did not participate in any of that is unfortunate, as is the fact that she opened her Twitter account before accessing ALL the information we discussed with her assistant.

    Sorry for the rant, but we labored extensively, pro-actively, and definitively to ensure her safety. It is disturbing to hear this sort of misinformation becoming part of the “true” story.

    True thanks for the input. It is important that people comment. Always. And I hope Ive helped.
    Be well. And safe!

  161. Ichthyic says

    Sorry for the rant, but we labored extensively, pro-actively, and definitively to ensure her safety. It is disturbing to hear this sort of misinformation becoming part of the “true” story.

    LOL

    yeah, everything except prevent people from taking guns to a talk where the speaker had multiple death threats.

    not buying what they are selling. nope.

  162. Ichthyic says

    … more projection. obviously.

    seriously, you can explain over 90% of right wing nut job commentary with the simple assumption that it’s all projection.

    9/10.

    yeah, really.

  163. Ichthyic says

    Sarkeesian has a history of claiming bogus threats against her. I wouldn’t take this one seriously without solid evidence.

    “Sarkeesian” should start seriously thinking about suing some of these asswipes for libel.

  164. toska says

    Tony! @200
    Wow. I’m not a person who normally criticizes spelling, grammar, or writing ability in internet forums, as long as the comment is understandable. But I would expect better from an official email from a representative of a university. It was rambly, disorganized, contained frequent typos, and occasionally used all caps for emphasis. It certainly doesn’t reflect well on the university’s professionalism.

    I’m glad someone read your email though. I’m going to send my own email about the situation. Their consideration for the safety of Anita Sarkeesian and her guests is beyond deplorable.

  165. Silentbob says

    @ 201 Ichthyic

    I may have missed something, in which case I apologize, but my understanding is that it is not actually legal for the university to disallow firearms. (Which is all sorts of fucked up, but not the university’s fault.)

  166. says

    toska @206:
    I sent a follow-up email referencing the fact that she didn’t feel the safety measures were adequate enough and why USU didn’t attempt to better ensure she was safe. Wonder if I’ll get a response this time.

  167. Ichthyic says

    may have missed something, in which case I apologize, but my understanding is that it is not actually legal for the university to disallow firearms.

    that’s debatable, since the state HAS made exceptions for other venues, but technically correct.

    but even then, that wasn’t my point.

    surely you understand what civil disobedience is, and when it is best applied? In my view, it’s the mandate of a university to promote free speech, not allow it to be curtailed because of a poor law written by complete idiots.

    In the past, universities HAVE taken stands against poor laws. evidently, a lot of Americans have forgotten that to the point where they can’t even BEGIN to think of questioning authority, and yet, it was a mere generation ago.

    sorry, I hope I’m wrong in your particular case, but if not, I weep for you.

  168. Ichthyic says

    oh, yeah, and you probably did miss some earlier context that would explain why i didn’t elaborate in 201 (because I already had upthread).

  169. Ichthyic says

    @ 209 Ranzoid

    Yeah, that’s what we need. The shootout at the OK Corral. :-/

    yeah, I have to admit to wondering what the logic is behind thinking this would be a good idea.

    a shooter who intended harm would lie, and someone who genuinely thought they wanted to “protect” someone would very likely fail to do so, or cause further injury.

    what on earth would be the upside?

  170. chimera says

    There’s an NYT article about this. Not as good as PZ’s of course or the coverage on Skepchick or your good comments. Still, I’m glad it’s there.

  171. Scr... Archivist says

    Lynna @195,

    Guns are okay in the lobby of the Capitol building in Salt Lake City. Guns are not okay at mormon General Conference meetings. Gun are okay in university lecture halls. I am sensing some lack of consistency here.

    Is the ban at the Mormon General Conference an exception granted by the Utah state legislature? (Since they are the only body allowed to make changes to these laws.) Is that the only religion which has such protection? If so, I wonder if it can be challenged as favoring one religion over another.

    Another way to challenge it, is for a Mormon to attend the conference armed. If he is disarmed or kept out, he can sue for having his “rights” taken away. It would be interesting to see the legislature squirm about this “principle”.

    And as for the guns in the state capitol…. Maybe the building needs to be patrolled by the Black Panthers for a few years, just in case, you know. I wonder how many legislators would start to feel the way the rest of us feel all the time.

  172. vaiyt says

    As if a vetted concealed carry permit holder would actually present a danger.

    Because holding a permit means you’re an impartial robot free of all political and personal grudges.

  173. DaveL says

    In order to determine the degree of risk the letter posed, police ran the information they had through the FBI cyber terrorism task force and a number of other statewide database analysis information centers.

    ”They determined the threat seems to be consistent with ones (Sarkeesian) has received at other places around the nation,” he told the Standard-Examiner. “The threat we received is not out of the norm for (this woman).”

    Then you bloody well put each and every person who issues such a threat in prison until it becomes “out of the norm.”

  174. says

    Comments from mostly local Utah doofuses are still coming in to the Salt Lake Tribune website:

    Go around generating bomb threats and then book speeches at colleges….
    Smarrrtttt…. I guess in some libtards tiny brain….
    —————-
    Maybe she’s got a point. Anyone who would voluntarily listen to this woman pontificate about violence against women in video games would automatically be classified as mentally unstable and a threat to society. They should be isolated and evaluated.
    —————
    She’s a hypocrite because she wants gender equality, but a MAN wouldn’t cave under such ridiculous threats. A man would show up and deliver his message, if it was important enough. Martin Luther King, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan. Just a few names of powerful people who took a bullet for doing what they believed in. You want gender equality? Quit hiding beneath your skirt and step up. Respect comes from action, not talk.
    She needs to “man up”. Get her own gun and stand up to the bully.
    —————-
    Bless that guy. Everyone who saves people from that toxic woman’s “opinions” is a hero.

    http://www.sltrib.com/pages/comments?cid=58521856

    Meanwhile, the SLT has published Anita Sarkeesian explains why she canceled USU lecture”. Emphasis in the excerpt below is mine.

    […] In a phone interview from San Francisco, Anita Sarkeesian said she canceled Wednesday’s lecture not because of three death threats — one of which promised “the deadliest school shooting in American history” — but because firearms would be allowed in spite of the threats.

    “That was it for me,” said Sarkeesian, who has kept multiple speaking engagements in the face of death threats, including one last week at Geek Girl Con in Seattle. “If they allowed weapons into the auditorium, that was too big a risk.”

    She also pledged never to speak at a Utah school until firearms are prohibited on Utah’s campuses and called for other lecturers to join her in boycotting the state.

    USU officials and Sarkeesian on Wednesday revealed new details about the threats. After the mass shooting threat was sent to the school late Monday, a second threat arrived Tuesday. That one, USU spokesman Tim Vitale confirmed, claimed affiliation with the controversial and sometimes violent online video gamers’ movement known as GamerGate.

    […] The hashtag #GamerGate evolved to identify not a controversy, but a loose group of gamers claiming a variety of objectives, from improving the image of gamers to policing games journalism to killing feminists who call for less abusive representations of women in video games. Escalating threats over the past two months have driven multiple female game developers and critics from their homes.

    However, USU police consulted with the FBI’s cyberterrorism task force and behavioral analysis unit and determined that the threats against Sarkeesian would not prevent a safe lecture, even with firearms allowed.

    “Given that she had received many of the same sorts of threats and none of the threats had materialized into anything specific, that was part of the context of the investigation,” Vitale said. “That led us to believe that the threat was not imminent or real.” […]

  175. says

    More from the latest Salt Lake Tribune article (link in #220):

    Sarkeesian said she asked for metal detectors or pat-downs at the entrance of the Taggart Student Center auditorium, but USU police said they could not prevent those in attendance from carrying weapons into the lecture if they had concealed weapons permits. Though she said, “in hindsight, I don’t think I’d feel comfortable with any weapons in the auditorium.” Police instead promised more officers and a backpack check at the doors.

    Sarkeesian said she asked whether police could screen the audience for guns and let them in if they had permits, but Vitale said campus law enforcement officers believed that would have been needlessly invasive for the audience.

    “If we felt it was necessary to do that to protect Miss Sarkeesian, we absolutely would have done that,” Vitale said. “We felt the level of security presence we were putting into this was completely adequate to provide a safe environment.”

    In all of this Utah just looks worse and worse. Vitale should be fired.

  176. Onamission5 says

    needlessly invasive for the audience
    needlessly invasive for the audience

    Unlike, you know, getting shot, which isn’t invasive at all.

    The above statement quoted by Lynna, OM reads for all the world as “We’d rather protect the feelings of an anonymous potential mass murderer than protect the lives of women.”

  177. says

    Following the new article in which Sarkeesian explains why she cancelled, there are lots of comments from dunderheads, but it is encouraging to see comments from reasonable people as well. Here are a few examples:

    Security, metal detection, NO GUNS ALLOWED is always the rule at the mormon conference center. Guess rights only apply when you believe you are the “only true right”.
    ————–
    Utah’s concealed carry permits might as well be passed out as prizes in crackerjacks boxes. Hope she now knows of our lax permitting procedures.
    ————
    I’m a Marine combat veteran, and I would be concerned. But then I’ve seen what guns and bombs do. If it was me as the speaker, not worth risking my life and the life of others. The gun nutz are as stoopid as Oda.
    —————-
    I served in the US Army. I read comments from people who think they can protect others because they are armed. The reality is you must train with others to know how they react and to work as a team.

  178. says

    Regarding the response Tony received from an earlier email, (comment #202), I was appalled by the unprofessional attitude, by the cherry-picking of one aspect of the problem (timing of notifications to Sarkeesian’s assistant), by the spelling and grammar errors, and by the general cluelessness.

    More fodder for firing Vitale. Maybe Tony should send a copy of that email to the Salt Lake Tribune?

  179. Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy says

    This whole “she gets these threats all the time therefor we decided it’s no big deal” thing is just blowing my mind. How often she’s been threatened in the past has exactly zero bearing on whether any particular threat is credible. What the actual fuck.

  180. Saad says

    Seven of Mine, #227

    This whole “she gets these threats all the time therefor we decided it’s no big deal” thing is just blowing my mind.

    It seems to me like they’re saying, “Ohhhh, you know that silly Anita… always getting death threats!”

    Even if this threat was a bluff, it did its job. It accomplished exactly what it wanted. So they’ll do it again and the authorities will downplay it again, thus making it work again. I hope not, but that’s what will happen unless the police or school officials start doing their jobs and making sure they’re providing a safe environment for speakers and the audience. Utah State should be absolutely ashamed of itself.

  181. says

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/concealed-carry-permit-guns-utah

    So much for the myth that persons with concealed carry permits are not a threat.

    According to the state of Utah, I earned the right to carry a concealed handgun on a Saturday morning in a suburban shopping center outside Baltimore. Toward the back, next to a pawnshop and White Trash Matt’s tattoo parlor, is the global headquarters of Dukes Defense World, a mom-and-pop firearms instruction shop certified by the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification to teach nonresidents firearm safety as a prerequisite for obtaining a concealed-carry permit.

    My achievement doesn’t make sense for a number of reasons. One, I don’t live in Utah. I’m a resident of Washington, DC, a city that holds concealed handguns in roughly the same esteem as working escalators. I’ve never shot a gun. And in distinctly un-Utahn fashion, I’m nursing a hangover. Fortunately, none of that matters here. After four hours at Dukes Defense, I have a completed application and a snazzy graduation certificate for my wall. Sixty days after my application is processed, I’ll be able to carry a concealed weapon in no fewer than 32 states. It’s great for road trips.

    Over the last two decades, Utah’s concealed-carry permit has emerged as a de facto national ID for handgun owners. It typifies a new era of arming Americans in public: 40 states now recognize some or all out-of-state permits, and 8 have made it legal in all or some circumstances to carry a concealed handgun without any permit at all. In April, the Senate came just three votes short of passing a measure that would have mandated reciprocity for concealed-carry permits—including the ones Utah so freely hands out—nationwide. […]

  182. says

    From a commenter on another forum:

    Great job on those armed campuses, Utah. So far, a teacher shot a toilet & you’re not allowed to search for terrorist guns at speeches.

    Yes, a teacher did shoot a toilet.

  183. says

    Seven of Mine #27:

    This whole “she gets these threats all the time therefor we decided it’s no big deal” thing is just blowing my mind. How often she’s been threatened in the past has exactly zero bearing on whether any particular threat is credible. What the actual fuck.

    My inclination is to wonder wouldn’t it be *more* likely, given a frequency of past threats, that this severe and detailed threat is a credible one. I mean, if someone is a target of widespread harassment and threats of violence coming from many individual sources, it raises the probability that a single one of those harassers will be the kind to actually resort to physical violence. “The threat was not imminent or real” my ass.

  184. says

    Another point which the commenters on places like Salon (don’t read the comments) are ignoring is that Ms Sarkeesian didn’t cancel the talk just in fear for her own safety. That was a threat of mass murder; her audience and anyone else near the venue was also at risk. She made the right call. The people in charge? Not so much.

    I’ve got to stop reading all these articles. It’s just making me angry and there’s nothing I can do to help,and I’m getting a headache from banging my head against things out of frustration. Anita Sarkeesian is a good and brave person, and she’s one of my heroes even though I am not into video games.

  185. Menyambal says

    It still burns me that the people of Missouri voted down concealed-carry, and a few months later the state legislature passed it anyway. One of the few times this state has voted for sanity, and fuck us all, anyhow.

  186. Nick Gotts says

    Yes, a teacher did shoot a toilet. – Lynna, OM

    Now if the toilet had been armed, that would never have happened.

  187. Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy says

    Ibis3 @ 234

    My inclination is to wonder wouldn’t it be *more* likely, given a frequency of past threats, that this severe and detailed threat is a credible one. I mean, if someone is a target of widespread harassment and threats of violence coming from many individual sources, it raises the probability that a single one of those harassers will be the kind to actually resort to physical violence.

    Well, yeah I would think the probability goes up that someone will turn out to be serious. But that still doesn’t bear on whether a specific threat is credible. For example, knowing that 10% of people are left handed doesn’t tell you anything about whether a specific person is left handed.

  188. Rey Fox says

    One of the few times this state has voted for sanity, and fuck us all, anyhow.

    Same thing happened with the anti-puppy mill bill a few years ago. It’s a gerrymandered mess of political hacks, like pretty much any other state legislature.

  189. says

    Tony @239: Here are a few rightwing protestations from Utah, and yes, the Bill of Rights is mentioned:

    There is nothing divisive about Utah’s firearm laws which are based on the Bill of Rights. Maybe you should be more respectful and thankful otherwise every Prima Donna is gonna demand that others do what they want. Yes…your Majesty. Pathetic little left wing wackos. Yay for Utah, you don’t like it, leave!
    ————–
    You almost understand the issue of gun ownership: When moments count, the police are just minutes away.
    With added restrictions placed on the police these days, CC [Concealed Carry] is the only way to protect yourself. Cops will think thrice before firing their weapon. That’s not good for him or me.
    ————-
    Obama is working hard to hang this threat on some tea party member.

    Someone mentioned earlier that, in an online search, they couldn’t find the phrases used in the threatening letter. Here’s an article from someone who did find those phrases. Excerpt below:

    […] I went through the email – the full text of which I found in this Pastebin – cutting and pasting some of its more memorable phrases into Google to see just where – if anywhere – these phrases showed up online. And I found that quite a few of them are phrases that are used almost nowhere else but in the misogynistic subcultures I write about on this blog – specifically, in the Men’s Rights and “Game” subcultures. […]

    My first discovery was that the author doesn’t only see Marc Lepine, the antifeminist mass murderer responsible for the Montreal Massacre in 1989, as a “a hero to men everywhere for standing up to the toxic influence of feminism.”

    […] When he writes that “[f]eminists have ruined my life,” this is in fact a direct quote from Lepine himself: it’s what he reportedly said before opening fire and gunning down his victims, and a phrase he also included in his own manifesto/suicide note.

    Some of the specific phrasings he uses seem to be almost exclusively used by MRAs . He writes, for example, of the “toxic influence of feminism,” a phrase that only turns up 47 results on Google.

    If you set aside links to news articles about the threats directed at Sarkeesian, two of the top results are links to the artwork used in a promo video for A Voice for Men’s Honey Badger Brigade. The headline? “The toxic influence of feminism in comic.” The topic of the Honey Badger Radio Show being promoted? The “invasion” of geek culture by “social justice warriors” and feminists. The show is a recent one, from this past August. […]

    More links to sources for the phrases used in the threatening letter can be found at the link. “Misandrist harpies” and “feminist poison” or “cultural poison” (as well as other connections of feminism with “poison”) are all covered. “Whore that she is …” is also sourced in this article.

  190. InquiringLaurence says

    Feminists have ruined his life? Oh, okay.

    I wonder why he’s not being called a domestic terrorist for this—then again, misogynistic fundamentalist Christianity never gets called out. Just those little brown Muzzies—after all, the nineteen of them and Khalid Sheik Mohammed represent 1,600,000,000 people, right?

  191. vaiyt says

    Maybe you should be more respectful and thankful otherwise every Prima Donna is gonna demand that others do what they want.

    Like the Prima Donna with guns that managed to get someone he didn’t like to shut up?

  192. toska says

    Seven, #227

    This whole “she gets these threats all the time therefor we decided it’s no big deal” thing is just blowing my mind. How often she’s been threatened in the past has exactly zero bearing on whether any particular threat is credible. What the actual fuck.

    I can’t understand this line of reasoning. Civil rights leaders like MLK received numerous death threats too…. and that’s exactly what ended up killing him, even if not every single threat had a chance of being played out. Anita Sarkeesian and others like her risk their lives every time they keep speaking up for equality. Anita is a goddamn hero, and I hope none of the threats against her are even attempted. I admire her so much for the work she does and the risks she has to take to do it. I just wish the world wasn’t like this.