Current Comment

Not Just a Game

The label “social justice warrior” is not considered a compliment in the world of serious gaming. It is an insult hurled by video game enthusiasts at those who challenge the sexism, violence and exclusion that mark their virtual realities. And as the gaming industry, which has traditionally catered to young white males, becomes increasingly diverse, more people are doing just that. 

Anita Sarkeesian is one of them. In her online video series “Tropes vs. Women,” Ms. Sarkeesian criticizes the harmful and stereotypical ways women are portrayed in many games: woman as damsel in distress, as sexual plaything, as passive victim of male aggression. On Oct. 13, the day before the pop culture critic was set to give a talk at Utah State University, the administration received an email threatening “the deadliest shooting in American history.” “Feminists have ruined my life,” the anonymous sender wrote, “and I will have my revenge.” After the police, citing Utah’s concealed carry gun laws, said they could not provide metal detectors or do pat-downs at the event, Ms. Sarkeesian canceled the speech.


This was not an isolated incident. Women routinely face graphic threats of murder and rape on Twitter and online gaming message boards. For decades the developers and players of video games have denied charges that the gratuitous killing in games could flow over into real-world violence. But when women live in fear of retribution for expressing their views, or leave their homes because their lives have been threatened—as at least three women, including Ms. Sarkeesian, have had to do since August—violence has already been done. If, as many insist, these harassers represent a small but vocal minority, it is incumbent upon responsible gamers to drown out such hateful speech and to create communities—and games—that respect women.

Family on Hold

As many people struggle to balance work and family life, some Silicon Valley companies are offering female employees a new option: hold off on having kids. Starting in January, Apple will offer female employees up to $20,000 toward the cost of freezing their eggs. Facebook offers female employees a similar benefit. The trend is deeply troubling. In “Dignitas Personae,” a 2008 document on reproductive technologies, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated, “cryopreservation of oocytes for the purpose of being used in artificial procreation is to be considered morally unacceptable.”

But secular critics also are concerned about the implications of such policies. Some have wondered whether egg-freezing policies might implicitly pressure women to prioritize work over possible family life and their own personal lives. Others have worried that increased attention to egg freezing may mean companies will devote fewer resources to maternity leave and child care.

The demand for egg freezing has increased in recent years, but the procedure and storage of eggs is costly—approximately $10,000 for a round of treatments—and the results remain unpredictable. And the procedure does not address the root of the tension between work and family that many female employees face. While some companies provide employee “perks”—like free lunches and on-site gyms—employers should also view family time as central to employee happiness. If we are to build a meaningful culture of life, the church must encourage employers to offer sufficient emotional, spiritual and financial support to young professionals who hope to build their families and spend time with them—today.

Fueling Feud

In a recent television appearance, President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine announced, “Ukraine will have gas, Ukraine will have heating.” Unfortunately, he may have spoken too soon, as a European-brokered deal to provide heating fuel for the winter months fell through because of Russian doubts about Ukraine’s ability to pay its bills. Talks are expected to resume shortly in hopes of overcoming the impasse. This comes at the end of a worrisome year that saw Ukraine’s sovereignty violated by the political and military machinations of Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin.  

Russia cut off the gas supply to Ukraine in June over unpaid bills and a pricing dispute. Some saw the move as another way of punishing Ukraine for turning toward the West. Under a preliminary agreement reached on Oct. 19, Russia would have provided natural gas to Ukraine through next March at a cost of $385 per thousand cubic meters. The deal was reportedly accompanied by progress toward settlement of the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine. But Russia backed away from the agreement days later, questioning Ukraine’s ability to pay down its already $5 billion debt and make good on future payments.

Europeans are especially worried that if a deal is not reached soon, Russia will block gas supplies not only to Ukraine, but also to the E.U. member countries as well in retaliation for the sanctions that were imposed on Russia at the beginning of the crisis. How this plays out will depend on Mr. Putin’s ultimate intentions—which are very much in doubt.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Leonard Villa
2 years 11 months ago
"Some have wondered whether egg-freezing policies might implicitly pressure women to prioritize work over possible family life and their own personal lives." Where have the "some" been? This prioritizing has been a cardinal principle of secular feminism (Steinem,Friedan et aliae) for decades with the downplaying or denigration of motherhood and family so this "egg policy" of a major corporation is not surprising. Secular feminism is not about women or their dignity or vocation. It's about ideology hence it has morphed to gender ideology and is kin to a whole host of frankly gnostic ideas which regard the body as a malleable machine not sharing in human dignity. Karl Stern actually predicted all this in his magisterial book :"The Flight From Woman."
2 years 11 months ago
The emphasis here is on the 'woman's prioritization' of work over family. But what of the prioritization of the woman as a free and independent human being and not a subject of her employer? This is not essentially different from the issue of employers getting in the middle of an employee's selection of their own medical and health care service provider. Employers should not be interfering in such a personal decision because it renders the worker a serf subject of the employer. This 'offer' is precisely the same type of meddling in the private familial affairs of employees again, rendering the worker a serf subject of the employer as if the employer were a feudal lord. What is wrong with our catechesis that these kinds of issues are not addressed and people know what is at risk here? Is the Church so detached from the reality of the everyday that they cannot relate to the vulnerability of human beings? Is it only the 'egg' that is to be protected by Church teaching, but not the human person, not the woman as a free person?


Don't miss the best from America

Sign up for our Newsletter to get the Jesuit perspective on news, faith and culture.

The latest from america

Pope Francis issues public correction to Cardinal Robert Sarah on who has final say over liturgical translations.
Gerard O'ConnellOctober 22, 2017
It is astonishing to think that God would choose to enter the world this way: as a fragile newborn who could not even hold up his own head without help.
Ginny Kubitz MoyerOctober 20, 2017
Protestors rally to support Temporary Protected Status near the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Sept. 26. (CNS photo/Tyler Orsburn)
Around 200,000 Salvadorans and 57,000 Hondurans have been residing in the United States for more than 15 years under Temporary Protected Status. But that status is set to expire in early 2018.
J.D. Long-GarcíaOctober 20, 2017
At the heart of Anne Frank’s life and witness is a hopeful faith in humanity.
Leo J. O'Donovan, S.J.October 20, 2017