This week I wanted to open our discussion of race and gaming by explicating out a few important binary terms. This is my response to Factual Feminist’s response to Sarkeesian’s video, in which I flush out a bit of what is covered in Jonathan Mann’s response to the response to Sarkeesian’s video. Here goes.
Factual Feminist – Are Gams Sexist?
Auto-Tune Rebuttal
First, it is important to recognize a distinction between causation and correlation. In her response, Factual Feminist points to a study that concludes there is no causal relationship between video games and violence. It is true that there is no definitive consensus as to whether video games cause violent behavior. As far as I know (and I don’t claim definitive knowledge), while most studies suggest there is a causal link many studies that claim it does as there are claims it does not, there are others that suggest there isn’t (though the methodology on some of these are questionable at best). But, for the purposes of argument, let’s admit that one has proven any causal relationship between playing violent video games (or watching violent movies or playing “cowboys and indians / cops and robbers / knights and dragons”) and committing acts of violence.
Even if there is no causal link, this does not mean there is not a strong correlation. In quantitative and qualitative research, correlation speaks to how likely something is to be associated with something else. If you find pancakes, there is a .97 correlation chance that you will find syrup (hey, some people like chocolate chips and/or whip cream). And it should not be surprising that the correlation between violent video games and violence is very, very high.
What do we make of this? Why, if the correlation is so strong, isn’t there a causal argument? Because it is impossible to determine whether you are drawn to violent video games because you are violent or are made violent by exposure to games. It is something of a chicken and the egg scenario. There is also, of course, the fact that the overwhelming majority of people exposed to violent media won’t transform into serial killers or school shooters. Put quickly: since Columbine, video games have made a great scapegoat whenever there is a public tragedy. If we just blame it on games and bad parenting, then we don’t have to confront either 1) the dark horror in human nature that drives us to kill or 2) the political and material conditions that provide easy access to firearms.
1 and 2 are meant to be provocative. And they introduce the second binary I want to work through before we begin talking about race: essentialism or materialism. This morning, I found the following article on my facebook feed: “The Best States for Raising Black Children Have One Disturbing Thing in Common.” The article created an index for raising all children and featured graphs that displayed the best and worst states according to the index.
When you look at the data, you will probably instantly invent a rationale for what you are seeing. I would argue that this rationale will likely fall across one of two poles:
- Essentialist
- In an essentialist argument, you would argue that there is something essential to black people (whether natural or cultural, nature or nurture) that produces these economic conditions. These conditions are caused by their essence.
- Materialist
- In an materialist argument, you would argue that these economic conditions are the result of the institutional, political, cultural, and racial forces surrounding black people. These conditions are caused by the world around them.
To recall Thursday’s discussion: part of my job is training you to recognize and dissect arguments, to evaluate evidence, and to recognize logical fallacies. That’s rhetoric. Part of my job is also training you what will get you fired, and what you cannot, in our contemporary cultural context, say without causing a shit storm. So let me be clear in indicating that what I say next is not an expression of my personal convictions (which I would rather not expose) but rather a warning regarding our current cultural context: making any kind of essentialist argument in our contemporary culture is quite likely to get you fired.
