I recently read an article in the New York Times that, as a part of the geek community, upset me. The article, written by Michael Cieply and Brooks Barnes, uses the stance that geeks consume violence-ridden media and we turned out okay, so there just can’t possibly be a correlation between it and behavior. I find the logic of this piece not only fundamentally flawed and ultimately crap journalism, but an insult to the geek community at large.
You are probably saying to yourself,
“Well they are right, aren’t they? We are good little girls and boys and we
watch stuff blowing up all the time.” That’s not the point. The authors, in
their infinite wisdom and presumed good intentions, do us a disservice while
using the backdrop of the San Diego Comic Con. Also, the stance taken that we
are an exception amongst society is a misnomer; in fact, it has become quite
apparent over recent years that we are becoming a majority.
In the article, we are depicted as a
group that is very well mannered and nice. Well, aren't we being obvious. Of course there is no
elaboration as to why or other adjectives added to this assessment, most likely
omitted to service the prose of the article. Even more disparaging is that we are
singled out not for who we are - a diverse community of intelligent and
sophisticated individuals - or what we represent, but as an example to push an
editorial agenda. There are reasons for our civility; ones that the authors
neglect to go into in order to satisfy a stance.
First and foremost, we are a passionate
and creative community. We may disagree with one another and have the
occasional troll, but we are like minded individuals. We are diverse,
coming from all walks of life and look to experience new things from various
cultures. At the end of the day, we understand that we do not want to be
embroiled in conflict; that is what we have comics, TV and movies for.
But make no mistake; we are also legion
when it is necessary. If we disagree with something, whether it is a Marvel
editorial change or gay marriage, we do voice our opinion in unison. There are
things we need to rectify within our own ranks (misogyny being at the top of
that list), but we always make our voices heard when we feel slighted. More so
than society gives us credit for.
SDCC is a time where we celebrate our
culture and community as geeks. We do not celebrate violence at the convention.
We celebrate our love for these properties. Some of us are more creative and up
front about it than others (like cosplayers), but that’s the reason why we congregate like
this. We do not care about the contents of a story unless it is produced well
and it is riveting (Doctor Who is a
big example of this.) We never asked the studios to be at SDCC and bring movies
like The Expendables 3 or the Twilight series; they hitched a ride on
the crazy train of their own free will long ago. So insinuating we go to SDCC
or any other convention to project our love of MDK (Murder Death Kill for
anyone who was born in the 90's or later) is an insult to our community. In
fact, the authors completely missed the point of these conventions.
The authors also attempt to mention us
and Elliot O. Rodgers (the Santa Monica assailant), Adam Lanza (Sandy Hook
shooter) and James Holmes (Aurora mass killer) in the same breath to prove a
point. We take no responsibility for them. In fact, despite The New York Times writing an article regarding a major factor in these incidents - unlike other US
"news" outlets - Cieply and Barnes refuse to acknowledge it. It is the
one detail that not only clearly sets them apart from us, but many in society
in general. In all three instances (much like the kids in Columbine and others who
perform these acts) the perpetrators were psychologically unbalanced. You have
one who had Asperger’s (Lanza), one who was clinically depressed (Rodgers) and
a third who is clearly a sociopath (Holmes.) All three disengaged from society
for any number of reasons, their reality becoming so warped they felt their actions
were not only justified but actually a good idea. Society does not care about
those who have mental illness; it is considered a dirty secret no one wants to
talk about. Such an unwanted topic in fact, that when these tragic events occur
we start pointing fingers in the wrong directions. The news outlets
automatically go into the hypocritical arguments of "This is the fault of
<insert either media or guns>!" Not the fact that when people get to
a certain low point they withdraw themselves from society and have no one to
talk to without fear of being locked up. No, our society never reacts the
way they should in these scenarios. We are quick to blame others than reflect
on the causes or solutions to the problem. News agencies only perpetuate the
behavior further with sensationalistic pieces like the one Cieply and Barnes
wrote.
The geek community is the only one that
I know who responds to such topics correctly. We care about what happens to our
society in general, because we understand that if affects all of us as a whole.
We do not wear blinders until a tragedy occurs. It was our community that had
the right dialogs and responses after Sandy Hook. It was us who denounced James
Holmes’ gruesome attack at the movie theater in Colorado. We are always talking
about issues such as how society should be equal and strive to get others
involved both within and outside of our community.
Cieply and Barnes questioned how we can
be around such violence and not be affected. I have questions for them. Don’t
worry, they are very simple.
Where were you when our community took
to social media to not only renounce the tragic act at Sandy Hook, but had a
real conversation about how mental illness was the cause? When
50,000 gamers took a pledge to not play FPS’s for 24 hours in response to
the Sandy Hook shootings? Or when the studies that came out before and after Sandy
Hook which illustrate how video games are actually good for people by helping
their eye/hand coordination, cognitive reasoning and decision making skills?
Where are you when girls and women are
harassed or treated objectively at conventions? Where
were you when a 17 year-old female SDCC attendee was found bloodied and
unconscious on July 27th, possibly a result of an assault? Or
when it was discussed on a Kevin Smith podcast that Cartoon
Network does not care about having females watching DC/Warner Bros. Animation
shows?
Where are you in the discussion of the
lack of people of color developing projects for a mass audience that are not
racially stereotyped? That there are many non-white creatives out there who
have great story ideas but are unable to break through into a general audience?
That a recent study suggests that Hollywood movies
do not reflect the diversity of the US?
Where were you when DC refused to allow
Batwoman, a lesbian character, to
marry her same sex partner? While we’re at it, where was the larger article
when
the gay Marvel character Northstar married his boyfriend? Why would you
care at all, when you normally leave such news items to outlets that are
apparently beneath you?
Ah, that’s right; editorial agenda. You
are filling the need of your advertisers, the same studios that spent millions
pushing their products on us at SDCC.
Do the geek community a favor New York
Times, and stick to journalism. If you really cared about what we think, then
cover items or concepts that concern us like racial, gender and sexual
equality. Don’t come to these here parts unless you want to write a real
article about our community.
