Here is an interesting email I got from a reader who wonders if a substantial number of geeks are on strike:
Hello Drs. Reynolds & Smith,
I’ve noticed a similarity in the two greatest debacles for the militant feminism/War on Women crowd. In both the “shirt storm” and “gamer gate”attacks, it is geeks (and their friends/sympathizers/defenders) that have pushed back against this noxious crowd. In contrast, government, corporations, most of the media, universities, etc. have either enabled
or been quick to fold to these attacks.
I’m not certain what this means. Possibly it is that a substantial percentage of geeks (of which I’m a proud member) have gone on strike, resent these intrusions, and don’t have the social conditioning to make nice.
This idea seems to fit into both of your wheelhouses. Possibly one of you think there is something there and can develop the idea further.
I actually explored some of this “geeks on strike” theme in my book in a section on gamers where I interviewed game designer Vox Day, who put up information on the demographics of his blog readers (full of gamers) and how they felt about marriage.The non-alphas in the poll seemed to have access to far fewer women than the alphas. From the book:
However, the non-Alphas tell a different story. For those men who are not Alphas, there are many fewer women available to them. If 24 percent of the men are sharing 76 percent of the women, the sexual prospects are poor for the 76 percent of men who are sharing the other 24 percent of women. Perhaps of those 76 percent, some are the virgins who are the most anti-marriage or are less marriage-minded because they have fewer women to choose from or feel socially rejected. It would be interesting to see if the men who are more in the Beta and lower classifications are playing more video games. Vox Day had this to say about the younger gamers that he has had contact with:
I probably have a unique perspective on it due to my connections to the young guys in the gaming industry. It’s bizarre how some of them are in their twenties, have graduated from good schools, and have simply zero interest in women. They just have literally nothing in common with them and no interest in them.
The “strike” theory is generally correct, I think. The problem is that games and porn are entertaining, inexpensive, easily accessible, and reliable. Women can be entertaining, but they’re expensive, inaccessible for most men, and from the male perspective, shockingly unreliable. I would say that porn has raised the bar somewhat—it’s bound to be seriously annoying when Little Miss Real Life won’t give head when Jane Pornstar is twice as hot and is cheerfully performing all sorts of acrobatic stunts. And if you think about it, is a real woman who is average and only wants to have missionary-style sex once a week, minus a week for her period, actually any better than a wide variety of gorgeous porn stars catering to every bizarre fetish the Japanese can imagine and available on demand? It’s not quite so clear once you put it in those terms. The biggest communication problem is that most women see “relationship” as a positive thing. Most men see it as an ambiguous thing. So, when the selling point of Little Miss Real Life over Jane Pornstar is “relationship,” you can see where it’s not going to be very appealing. I don’t think there’s much of a “fuck you” element, though. The guys who think that way tend to be the players, particularly the Sigma players. A lot of the guys who opt out aren’t particularly angry at women, they just don’t see much point to pursuing involvement with them.
Perhaps what the reader is observing in Gamergate and Shirtgate is that the geeks involved not only don’t have the social conditioning to “make nice,” but that they have less to lose than conformists such as the media or feminists who need other women and men to join their worldview.