Many In The Comic Book And Cosplay Community Are Now Boycotting Supanova

Many In The Comic Book And Cosplay Community Are Now Boycotting Supanova

In the wake of Supanova’s announcement that Adam Baldwin would be attending Supanova — and organiser Daniel Zachariou’s statement explaining the decision — a number of high-profile artists and cosplayers have officially announced they will not be attending the show in protest. The Ledger Awards, a non-profit organisation designed to reward the best work done by Australian comic book artists, has announced it is dissolving its sponsorship relationship with Supanova following the decision.

Last year Supanova was a major sponsor of The Ledger Awards. The team posted the following on their Facebook page:

The Ledger Awards Organising Committee would like to advise that last year’s Platinum Sponsor, Supanova, will not be returning for this year’s awards. We thank them for their support and participation in last year’s awards. We are seeking new sponsors at the Gold, Silver and Bronze level to financially support this event and to join several of last year’s sponsors in acknowledging excellence in Australian comics.

We confirmed with Gary Chaloner, a member of the Ledger Awards committee, that the decision was a result of Baldwin’s attendance at Supanova. He confirmed the team decided to return sponsorship funds from Supanova as a result of this issue.

“Hopefully our actions speak for themselves,” he told Kotaku, “but the Organising Committee have to make decisions that best reflect the aims and values of the Awards and what they represent.”

Daniel Zachariou, the event director of Supanova, confirmed The Ledger Awards refused sponsorship funds.

“The same amount of not-insignificant sponsorship money was provided this year as last but then returned,” he told Kotaku. “We disagree that the two are connected in any meaningful way that should undermine our relationship. That’s their call to make however.”

A number of previous Supanova supporters have informed Kotaku they would no longer be attending the event, with most individuals asking not to be named because of their fear of online harassment, from either supporters of Baldwin or Gamergate. One refused to speak publicly for fear their family would be targeted.

“I am fearful for my safety,” said one cosplayer, who asked to remain anonymous. “Having first-hand experiences with stalkers, and a history of assault from strangers at conventions, including at Sydney Supanova last year, the potential for just one angry “Baldwin supporter” to follow through on a threat or physical or sexual violence is tangible.”

Stand-up comic and feminist activist Kirsty Mac was among the first to withdraw her support in the wake of the Adam Baldwin decision, writing an editorial piece for Daily Life. Kirsty also received a significant amount of harassment post-publication. She says many are abandoning Supanova in the wake of Supanova’s decision.

“Thousands of people are boycotting,” she told Kotaku. “Women, men and particularly people with children.”

Eve Beauregard, a popular cosplayer, is among those boycotting the show. She says Supanova was a fundamental part of her introduction to cosplay, which makes the decision to bring Adam Baldwin to the event all the more disappointing.

“Supanova was my first pop culture event,” she told Kotaku, “and it’s the one that sparked so much of my love for the geeky communities I’m a part of now.”

Eve has been attending Supanova since she was 13 years old.

“The reason I love these events is that they are a safe haven where people are free to express their passion for the things they love. That’s what geek culture has always been about for me — inclusion, fun and safety. By hosting a guest who actively seeks to divide our community, Supanova is sending a message I simply cannot align myself with.”

Eve had previously turned down media requests to discuss her reasons for boycotting Supanova, particularly since so many of her friends had suffered harassment after speaking out.

“Countless people have been threatened, harassed and targeted in the name of the movement which Adam Baldwin is the celebrity face of, many simply for voicing an opposing view,”she said. “To ask your attendees to publicly speak out against GamerGate is to ask them to make targets of themselves. This quickly became apparent as several community members were doxxed for speaking about why they disagreed with having Baldwin as a guest.”

According to Eve, safety is the real issue. Many community members simply don’t feel safe attending Supanova.

“From my perspective, the moment a guest or their supporters makes a considerable portion of your attendees feel unsafe, you have a very cut-and- dried decision to make. You either remove that guest from your event or you send a very public message that you’re comfortable with your attendees fearing for their personal safety and in turn not attending out of fear.”

Speaking to Kotaku, Daniel Zachariou expressed disappointment at the boycotts.

“Its clear that Gamergate brings out a highly emotional response in all too many people including some that we’ve helped build up, protected, worked with and promoted extensively through the years and who are now seeing us in a very negative light,” he said.

Zachariou defended his decision to allow Adam Baldwin to attend, stating that Baldwin had already previously attended a Supanova event (“Adam was previously our guest and as strident in his opinions then as he is now”). He also made mention of the fact that he had “no knowledge of Gamergate” when Baldwin was originally booked and Supanova has a contract that they’re “legally beholden to”.

“The argument that we’re being exclusive by being inclusive is vacuous and exactly the opposite of the historical mentality of the creative communities represented at Supanova,” added Zachariou.

According to Zachariou, many members of the Supanova team have also suffered harassment in the wake of the Adam Baldwin decision.

“Our core team of about twelve has itself felt bullied and harassed,” he said. “To see such emotion in trying to force Gamergate politics into what has up until now been, and which we’re still fighting for, an apolitical and asexual environment based around the mutual love of created and imaginary worlds that’s always been family friendly in that everyone is treated like family, is disheartening and ultimately very sad.”

But Eve Beauregard maintains that Supanova’s organisers handled the Adam Baldwin issue poorly and fundamentally misunderstand concerns people have with his attendance.

“When Daniel Zachariou made the first statement on the Supanova Facebook page, I was disappointed at the approach being taken to gauging the response of the community,” she told Kotaku. “The statement essentially asked people to voice their opinion on the matter publicly, with the aim being that Supanova could then make an informed decision as to whether they should still be hosting Baldwin. It’s possible that this was written with good intentions, however it shows a complete lack of understanding of the reasons attendees were and are concerned about Baldwin’s presence.”

It’s been difficult for Eve to part ways with an event so central to her passion for cosplay. She maintains hope this gap could be bridged in the future.

“Supanova has always been a fun event with some excellent people working to make it a great experience for everyone,” she said. “It’s difficult to express how disappointing it is that this particular decision has been handled so poorly. The bottom line is that Australian pop culture events are growing in size and number now. As a community we’re beginning to have a lot of choice as to which events we want to support. I hope that Daniel Zachariou realises how vital it is to show Supanova values the support this community has given the show for so many years, and can work towards earning that back.”


    • Apparently something about gamergate and doxxing and vaccinations. I’m not entirely sure myself.

      Seems funny that people are boycotting the event because they are letting everyone attend.

      • People are boycotting not just because they disagree with his views but on the basis that they feel that Baldwin will attract a crowd of gamergate supporters who could potentially pose a threat to them, given that many pro-gamergate views come with a fairly sexist/misogynist/violent slant to them.

        I don’t necessarily agree there’s any genuine threat but you can’t stop people feeling threatened, and if they choose to boycott an event that isn’t sligned with their views, well, that’s their call. I hope everyone learns from the experience. This has been a PR nightmare for Supanova, at least among the vocal minority involved in the gamergate debate online. It’ll be interesting to see how they grow and approach these issues in the future.

        • Pretty sure Supanova will just attract a bunch of nerds…. I know this, because I’ll be there.

          • I’m waiting to see if they bring more talent on board. At the moment it is pretty lackluster (Sydney). The Adam Baldwin thing I don’t give a stuff about. He’s free to say what he likes as long as he doesn’t break the law. I don’t agree with him but it won’t affect my enjoyment of the event. People are acting as if he’s going to whip the crowd into a frenzy of misogynistic hatred just by being there…

          • Again, it’s not on you. It’s like when your teacher used to say “If you’re playing and your friend says ‘it’s hurting,’ then stop. It doesn’t matter how much fun you think you’re having, stop.” It’s the same thing. If people feel threatened because of his presence, who are we to say otherwise? For the record, Adam Baldwin should be free to say what he wants, but sponsors are also free to take their business elsewhere if they disagree with his terrible worldviews.

          • please refrain from posting you are causing me great distress, thank you for complying without comment.

          • Cheers for making light of real persons’ concerns. It’s cosplayers we’re talking about, people who already attract creepy oglers and perverts. If they feel that Adam Baldwin’s presence will attract a type of person who makes them feel threatened, to the convention, is that so implausible?

          • We’re not talking playing and physically hurting here, and you know it.

            Adam Baldwin, and similar, are people you DISAGREE with, and claiming that he’s hurting you with his mere presence and perhaps some words that bother your FEELZ, is nothing more than blacklisting.

            What you’re ACTUALLY worried about is that people might show up who don’t care about your particular issues, and will do far worse than shout you down: they’ll IGNORE you. And being ignored causes you great butt-hurt. . .

          • How dare you reply; you’re invalidating his REAL thoughts and feelings; you’re blaming the victim and attacking him too!

            Oh, you thought they weren’t real? Not an excuse; we think these GG idiots are lying and only offended by his politics; but you’re still for silencing Baldwin;’ so clearly silencing you would be within the same area of acceptance.

            Wait, I think i missed the proper liberal SJW moral high ground:
            “It’s only good when WE do it”

            Does that sum up your thoughts; or are they more complex somehow?

          • Yeah but that’s a bit of a black and white analogy.

            According to that then “Supanova is not threatened by his presence” because they are allowing him to stay. Of course they would have weighed up the pros and cons. I think the minority who are legitimately offended by him have a very loud online presence.

            From everything I’ve read about him I’m pretty sure he’ll rock up, do his thing and leave. I don’t think his intentions are to rock up, stir the pot and start rallying the perverts to make inappropriate advances towards women.

          • Of course. Supanova’s well within their rights. I don’t know what sort of contract they signed with his agents and honestly, letting him speak is the best course for all (the amount of drama that would ensue in GG circles if they did bar him would be historic). I applaud them at least for sticking to their guns, now we just need to see if it meaningfully affects their attendance. Personally, I’m not going to Supanova this year for reasons other than Adam Baldwin, (i.e. I’ll be abroad), but missing him is a little silver lining.

          • As a massive nerd, and Supanova Goldcoast and Brisbane devotee, I’ve gotta say I’ve been seeing WAY more “Alpha Nerd” behaviour of late. Now, I’m nominally on the ‘side’ of GG, insamuch as I agree with the bits they say, and am generally critical of Anita Sarkeesian and so-called “tumblr femininsts,” but the fact is as nerds become, well, the big thing, there is a MASSIVE increase in harassment and – let’s face it – bullying coming from nerds. I’ve experienced it myself. If you say ANYTHING against GG or just about ANYTHING to do with gaming, you’re automatically anti-GG, Anti-gaming, and basically a horrible genetic mix of Sarkeesian and Jack Thompson.

            I’m frankly getting sick of it, because as someone who SUFFERED for being a “nerd” in school, it hurts a LOT to see the same kind of hate coming from the people I thought understood me.

          • Yeah it’s so bizarre, I think with any sort of group large or small there’s bound to be things like this going on. It’s a culture that should be celebrated. I’m not going to bog myself down in the details of GG and get fired up against people who are pro or anti. I’ll just go and have a good time, and if I see anyone being a dick IRL I’ll just remind them how to act like a human being.

        • “..given that many pro-gamergate views come with a fairly sexist/misogynist/violent slant to them.”

          Very witty.

      • He started the gamergate hashtag by tweeting links to YouTube videos promoting baseless conspiracy theories about Zoe Quinn, and has supported the movement since then. To the extent that there’s a figurehead for the movement, he’s it.

    • He is a (accidental) founding member of what many to be a video game based, anti-woman hate group.

      • Cheers for actually posting an article that explains the reason people are pissed. Kotaku could learn a lot from this format.

    • I’d like to know this too.

      From what I can gather it’s something to do with gamergate and he’s some kind of public face, but I really don’t understand what the big fuss is all about.

      @markserrels, can we get an explanation to what Adam Baldwin did wrong? To me he was an actor in a short running but nevertheless cult sci-fi TV series and I would have thought his presence at Supanova would have been a big perk for them.

        • His “different opinions” include extreme sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia. He deliberately encourages harassment of women online. He’s a repulsive creep.

          • Can you link to where he’s deliberately encouraged harassment of women online, or extreme sexism or racism? These are common arguments in this issue but nobody has been able to provide evidence so far when asked. I’m trying to get a full picture of the issue and I take a dim view on “I don’t have evidence but I’ll tell everyone he did” responses.

          • I don’t know much about the guy but simply searching his name revealed a Twitter rant about how gay marriage is like incest.

            Apparently questions about GG are off topic for him too but he is seen as a figure head for certain people.

          • I’ve seen comments from him that would be considered homophobic or transphobic, which is why I didn’t ask about those. Making homophobic comments idoesn’t justify throwing in false accusations on top just for fun though, which is why I want to see evidence for the other things people claim about him. Thus far I haven’t seen any, and if it exists I’d genuinely like to review it.

          • Yes please give us examples of the “extreme sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia. He deliberately encourages harassment of women online.” If you don’t have the evidence then you are smearing someone just on the basis of rumors and innuendo, which really is not appropriate.

        • Did he pose for Playgirl, get the award for being a naked man of the year then go into acting?

          • Did he then convince people that vaccinating your children gives them a fate worse than death (that fate being ‘contracting’ autism), which is totally legitimate because some guy published a (later retracted) report confirming it (which cost him his medical license)?

          • You forgot to mention the part where she hooked up with Dave Navarro. Should have been a sign right there ole’ Jenny isn’t playing with a full deck of cards 😉

      • So what I gather from the explanation of this article is that the people that have decided not to go because of said changes are people that no one cares about?

        – Self righteous feminist/s
        – a unfunny comedian


        • Not just them, Baldwin’s voiced particularly distasteful ideas about women and transgendered people.

          • – I strongly dislike Tones abbot and his views but I still live here.
            – I like themeparks but I dislike waiting in the long lines and the lack of sun shade, but I still go anyway.
            – I hate that mcdonalds is unhealthy but it tastes really good, so I still eat it.
            – The coffee that I drink probably has been made with some form of slave labour yet I still consume it on a daily basis.
            – I like a certain TV channel but I don’t agree with the views and values of the networks CEO yet I still watch it because there are shows I like.
            – I own a Iphone and macbook pro but I don’t like how apple treat their workers in China
            – I drive a VW amarock but I dislike how VW was pro nazi back in the war.

            – A guy said mean things about some values that I strongly believe in and is going to said convention, I’m still going to go because I enjoy it. Being trivial and deciding not to go is retarded in it’s self.

            no one is going to genuinely care if you go or not.

            Put things into perspective and compare them to the grand scheme of things.

          • Pish posh, you’ll just get a stream of rational individuals who are sick of both sides shouting at each other. Can I just like games? Is that ok?

          • so in a few year’s time are you going to remember back when that one person decided not to go because of said reasons, are you going to lay in bed late at night and think back to that day when that one guy/girl decided not to go and think what an amazing feat it was, “wow what a cool person” you will say as you fall into a dreamy sleep with a smile on your face.

            Will this person put such an awesome achievement of choosing not to go to supernova in his/her resume as lots of people care about this persons choices and values?

            So, yeah someone will care but it’s not going to matter either way.

          • Agreed, we are talking about a pretty obscure celebrity going to a Pop Culture Convention – high up on the list of priorities it is not.

            But I think it’s still valid to talk about how we deal with people who openly express and advocate the kinds of negative things that Baldwin does.

            I feel that it’s less about simply disagreeing with that he says and more about genuinely being concerned that what he says has the potential to cause harm – on the extreme end, it could incite people who follow him.

            On the more individual and subtle side, I can see how the things he says and the behaviour he supports can make some people very uncomfortable, particularly vulnerable people.

            I’m not saying he needs to be banned or something – he is after all entitled to his opinion. But like I said, I think it’s important for us to talk about these issues seriously, and about how they impact us and others in our community.

            Edit: Spelling & Grammar

          • Ok lets.
            How should we deal with people who disagree with us politically?

            I’m for more discussion and debate when we disagree with another person on a topic.
            But I think the solution to “bad” speech is more speech. (attributed to Mike Godwin)

          • It’s not about him going though. It’s about the people they’re afraid he’ll attract.
            Conventions aren’t fun if you have people harassing you. I went to my first supanova last year and had it ruined by a guy telling a girl that she wasn’t a real fan of Batman and to leave the convention. People are worried that they will be abused.
            So it’s not that they don’t dislike him, it’s that they’re scared. They’re scared of harassment and abuse and have decided that instead of risking it, they’ll step out this year.

          • But A-holes go to these things all the time. And him being there or not will probably not make a statistical difference in that.

            By people saying “i’m not going cos he’s going, cos I will feel unsafe” is a really gross thing to say. It’s kinda reverse bullying. Assuming that his ‘followers’ (really) are potential rapists. I mean seriously? I’ve been to supanova. There’s tons of weirdos in those places already.

            Very, very emotive issue.

          • I wouldn’t say it’s reverse bullying. It’s the fact that he has encouraged people to harass others. That’s why they feel unsafe.
            I know about unsavory types going to these things. It happened last year. It tends to go unnoticed, and no one does anything about it.
            I think it’s completely understandable to not want to go somewhere if you don’t feel safe. They’re not assuming that everyone’s a rapist. They’re feeling uncomfortable about him going and the sorts of followers he’ll bring. The tea partist that I read further down actively encourages find and publishing address’ of people. I wouldn’t feel safe. There is enough creeps, do we really need to add more?

          • Yeah, but there’s “A-holes attending” and “event putting chief A-hole on a pedestal and therefore tacitly endorsing his a-holeness”

          • Yeah, but why should you care? There’s no threat to you, nor are you a target of a subset of people, based on these decisions. If you want talk about perspective, try being a female cosplayer who’s taken a stance against either Gaters or Baldwin’s opinions. I bet you’d change your tune if you were facing the sustained level of harassment, abuse and threats to their safety that those people face…

          • No, because playing the victim is fucking stupid. You DON’T get anywhere in this world by playing the victim and that’s the cold truth of it all. You are only on this planet for so long, life is too short to worry about trivial thing, Ultimately it’s their choice and outlook on their own lives that determine the outcome on these things. .

          • Taking a stance and being harassed or threatened for it, is not playing the victim though. Actually being victimised is not “playing the victim”.

          • Can you explain to me the difference between a petition to boycott Supanova unless Adam Baldwin I’d removed as a guest of honour, and a petition to boycott Mirror’s Edge 2 unless Anita Sarkeesian is removed from the writing staff?

            Only one of those seems to be considered “bullying.” I bet you can’t guess which one…

          • Do you have any idea how economics works? If enough people don’t come, Supanova’s attendance is down and they learn a lesson.

          • Yeah but that’s not going to happen. Do you know how people work? Not everyone follows what happens on the internet.

          • And the lesson is “all gamers are leftists, and only leftists should ever be permitted at gamer events, because they need to be a left-wing echo chamber ostracizing all others or they’ll get whiny”.

            The first requirement for this to work will be: “All gamers are leftists”.
            Is that true? No?
            Then the rest is irrelevant and attendance won’t suffer by any measurable amount, and no lesson will (or will need to be) learned.

            Good luck with your hope that all (or even a large majority) or gamers are rabid left-wing social justice warriors. But I wouldn’t wager too heavily on that outcome.

      • Adam Baldwin is a crazy person. I liked him on Firefly, slightly less so in his other projects, but he’s a shitheel. He’s perhaps most known for Gamergate, but he has a lot of fingers in many conspiracy theory/right wing pies. He’s tweeted some pretty racist and homophobic things from his official account, suggested that Obama is deliberately introducing ebola into the USA (he was also the one who coined #Obola), etc.

    • Go to his twitter handle. He is quite the dick, this is apart from his massively fucked opinion on certain things such as gamergate/vaccinations.

    • Adam Baldwin coined #gamergate and is one of its most prominent supporters. He’s also a rabid Tea Partier, so his opinions on basically everything would be considered extreme right to most Australians, including appaling racism, homophobia and transphobia.

      Many people are uncomfortable with him, and with fans of him, being at the same event, because they have experience with that level of hate turning into very real threats to their safety. Supanova’s prioritisation of those fans, over the people who would like to feel safe at their event, is the main issue here.

      Supanova’s response is that they’re being inclusive, but this isn’t quite accurate – what they’re doing is being permissive, which is not quite the same thing. You can’t be inclusive and also safe, in the same way as being inclusive of rabid wolves is certainly good for the rabid wolves but makes everyone else you’ve locked in the convention centre less safe.

      • Seriously?

        When has a fan ever felt unsafe at Supanova…. it’s nerd heaven and everyone is glowing.

        People are just jumping on the gamergate bandwagon and hating him. I don’t agree with his views but I have no problem with him being there and certainly wouldn’t feel threatened by him or his super fans.

        • Yes, seriously. Your experience at Supanova is not universal, because you do not experience moments where you’re threatened just for being you.

          • Are you saying that this has first hand happened to you or your friends or is this just some moral based thing that you think is happening?

            I’m not trying to say “I don’t see any prejudice so how could it possibly happen to others”. I’m saying, “Dude, I’m there and people are enjoying the shit out of this place. I can’t imagine anyone feeling out of place or segregated for being themselves.”

            It would obviously suck if this was happening but honestly, I’m not buying it.

          • It really doesn’t matter if you’re buying it or not? Things like this is do happen fairly regularly, though usually, it doesn’t become as serious a problem as this:

            Much of the time it’s pretty low key, and I know at Oz-Comicon in Adelaide, security had to exit several people off the venue in a non-public fashion. I know there were multiple ejections at Oz-Comicon in Melbourne for individuals posing as media, or following girls around and behaving indecently. Usually, it just ends there, but then you have guys like Mr. Marshall in the link above.

            Having worked for and at several entertainment venues for some time, I know they often have shit lists of patrons who may be considered to represent various threats, and often they’re either denied entry to the venues, or are escorted off site immediately if identified. You may not see it happen often, if at all (as the policy(ies) is to discreetly exit them from area), but security is a major element of these events. It wouldn’t be so, if things like this didn’t happen.

          • The poster upthread (@fenix) said

            When has a fan ever felt unsafe at Supanova


            “Dude, I’m there and people are enjoying the shit out of this place. I can’t imagine anyone feeling out of place or segregated for being themselves.”

            and I was providing two example where, yes, someone had felt unsafe at a supanova-type con (I can’t remember the specific con, but it was either supanova or oz comic con)

            I wasn’t drawing a causal link, in this case, to Adam Baldwin, I was talking about the kind of culture that the people are fearing will be amplified by his presence.

          • @RazArtifice But why? What evidence is there that Adam Baldwin who attends thousands of these conventions where he does not “amplify” anything.

            There is no evidence that what is being stated will happen and it’s highly doubtful at an Australian Supanova!

            I’ve been called racist and a bigot somehow this thread but no one has shown me any evidence that a seasoned convention attendee like Baldwin will inflame anything.

            Did you know when a Firefly con was cancelled in 2007 he still attended and met fans in the hotel bar for beers??? No politics, none of this faux outrage bull shit…

            I don’t agree with his stance on things, but I hate more this SJW bullshit to exclude anything they don’t believe in.

            This whole thing is bullshit and people should be ashamed.

          • @mypetmonkey and I’m just asking you to put yourself in the mindset of someone who perhaps doesn’t feel as safe in these sorts of spaces as me or (perhaps) you (I’m not going to make assumptions about you here).

            Sure, there is no absolutely 100% definite link between “Adam Baldwin is coming to Supanova” and “People in specific groups are going to get harassed at Supanova.” That said, Baldwin has been, recently, part of a group that has (whether you think they have valid points or not) harassed and threatened (among others) women in the games industry.

            Baldwin may come and be the model convention guest and not mention anything about any of the groups he has repeatedly denigrated on social media, but the concern is that by giving him a platform, you invite in a group that will not show the same restraint. For many people, they will feel more secure in knowing that the people running a convention won’t tolerate that kind of behaviour, but it’s very hard for people to understand that when on one hand they’re trying to say “this convention is safe for everyone” and on the other they’re inviting someone who has gone out of his way to target people in traditionally repressed groups. For that reason, many people would rather not risk it, and also disagree with Supanova’s stance, so are voting with their wallets, which is well within their right.

            and frankly, dismissing genuine concern as “SJW bullshit” is a little dismissive. You may not see this as a big deal, or think people are overreacting, but especially if you’re in a group that has been harassed it’s pretty damn upsetting to think that there’s a possibility that you’ll go to what should be a super fun event only to be harrassed.

            I’m lucky- I’m not in a group that’s easy to be made to feel unwelcome. I’m a straight white male in a society that’s exceedingly good to my demographic. I’d love nothing more than for everyone to have the opportunities and experiences that I get being in this social class, but I know that changing any of those parameters instantly makes things more difficult. That’s my privilege. The best thing I can do is be alert for when my privilege is blinding me to the experience of others, to examine when my default assumptions about how things work are based on my experiences alone, to recognise that the experience of others is not the same, to recognise that the nature of some of those advatages I get is systemic and ingrained, and to do my damnedest to ensure that others get the same opportunities as me, even if that opportunity is just “to have a nice day out at a convention.” If that makes me a social justice warrior, I’ll wear that label with pride.

          • @redartifice but surely we can’t accommodate for everyone’s sometimes irrational fears. I’ll stick to the fact that Adam Baldwin doesn’t bring a history of anything that the people who denigrate him actually accuse him of. Bringing up past grievances of harassment when Baldwin wasn’t there hardly makes him a catalyst.

            Has Baldwin really been part of the millions of #gamergate tweets? Not really. He’s just the biggest target for one side. He’s got opinions, but so do we all and i’ll stick with my opinion is that when you don’t agree with someones opinion then you disagree but you can’t ban and abolish intolerance with intolerance.

            There is no “platform” he has already said it’s not the place for political or spiritual views. He’s there as an actor to meet fans of a show, something he cares about probably more. But so far we’ve been a bunch of hypocritical arseholes.

            Someone today linked an article about a registered sex offender being banned from Supanova and that’s to be applauded, that person has committed actual crimes. Having an opinion other than your own is still (thankfully) not a crime. You can’t cater for everyone’s insecurities otherwise dogs and cats would be extinct (I agree with cats though, those inconsiderate lil fucks of an animal).

            It is SJW hyperbolic bullshit, no one has yet mentioned where Adam Baldwin appearing has incited any of the imaginary crimes held against him! Because it hasn’t happened. Adam Baldwin shouldn’t be burdened with the gravitas of other peoples actions anyway.

            Please don’t bring race into it, especially white-shaming. It does nothing for the argument. Humanity is racist not just white people, don’t pass the buck. On top of that race doesn’t mean squat when we’re talking about when Adam Baldwin attends a convention. It’s a deflection and that’s all.

            But what would I know? Apparently I should be ashamed i’m white and am the most childish bigot on these forums. If that’s what it takes to show the hypocrisy of this whole thing then so be it.

            I will still laugh at people pushing for inclusion of all by pushing for exclusion of those they disagree with.

            And I say that with the utmost respect of those on these forums.

          • Baldwin has been part of tweeting about gamergate, that’s really not in dispute. A cursory read of his twitter feed will confirm that, and he has made several statements there even in the last 24 hours that could be seen as discriminatory. I think calling him a target presents a false equivalence between the way that sides of the “debate” have been conducted, but that’s a seperate issue that I’m really not going to rehash or dig into here.

            As I said upthread, Baldwin may be, and I’m sure will be, a model convention guest. Still, by inviting him, and then when concerns about his views and potential audience were raised – concerns you may consider hyperbolic, or overstated, but still deeply held by people – Supanova has appeared dismissive and in some ways gone on the attack. Understandably, this has put people offside. and once again they can vote with their wallet and, again, reasonably ask Supanova to make changes.

            Also, I’m not “white-shaming,” I’m pointing out that within this social context I have a degree of privilege. You’ll notice I was referring to myself in that statement, as I don’t know your circumstance. Within other societies, I may not have the same benefits. My point was is that I can recognise that (within the social context I’m in) I have a degree of privilege, and attempt to address that. Many people in this thread may not recognise that. At least that’s my read on several of the comments here.

            And that’s about all I want to say on this matter. You can do what you like with what I’ve attempted to discuss with you here. Dismiss me, or disagree with me as you see fit. This is how I feel though, and if I lived in sydney I’d probably not go to Supanova. I’d spend my money elsewhere.

            As is my right, as yours is to go there too.

          • Tweeting a hashtag doesn’t incite people to harass women… none of the “even the recent ones” actually do that at all. Again you are concocting phantoms to create an argument.

            You are still arguing that there should be a checklist of opinions that is required prior to an attending or being invited to an “all inclusive” conference. You can’t have all inclusive if you exclude. They are polar opposites of each other. Some people think the government are run by lizard people… It’s still not bloody well true! If they are that fragile that they think that someone that does not hold the same opinion as them attending means Armageddon then attending a public event is probably not for them and quite possibly a psychiatrist would be more appropriate next stop.

            Deeply held or not it’s still false. Adam Baldwin is not leaving in his wake a trail of sexual harassment destruction convention upon convention. You cannot deny that. Therefore, it’s hyperbolic. This whole thing crushes the notion of free speech…. “It’s free as long as you agree with me!”

            Race regardless has nothing to do with this Adam Baldwin attending Supanova… At all… Ever…

            I wouldn’t go to Supanova either, it appears to be full of judgmental arseholes claiming to be all inclusive but then trying desperately to exclude people of political and religious leanings.

          • Thankyou @mypetmonkey, you’ve nailed the essence of what I was trying to say.
            @redartifice I was referring to Baldwin specifically, but yes I can imagine there would have been pervs since the first supanova (let’s face it pervs have been around forever, so it was bound to happen).

            I won’t chime in anymore because we’re all going around in circles. Me and monkeys views are what they are and so are Raz’s, happy to agree to disagree.

            I’m glad the rage was kept to a minimum because it shows that even though we don’t see eye to eye on the baldwin situation we have the fortitude to talk things out rationally (with a bit of fire :)).

            I’ll probably be at supanova soaking in all there is to offer (lets face it, mainly pinball) and if I see some piece of shit being an overt pervert, I’ll point them out to security and hopefully have them escorted out the front doors 🙂

        • You’ve obviously never cosplayed.
          Most people are lovely, but there is a minority that is causing a problem. Last year a guy was going around filming women and then asking to kiss them on the cheek. He ended up kissing one girl on the lips, seriously ruining her supanova. You’re probably thinking, what’s the big deal, it’s just a kiss? Not when you feel violated.

          • “You’re probably thinking, what’s the big deal, it’s just a kiss? Not when you feel violated.”

            That scenario is 100% gross and uncalled for, the guy should have been escorted out and banned on the spot.

          • The point isn’t that Adam Baldwin is doing these things, it’s that he’s actively encouraging this type of behaviour, so people are worried that with him there, some of his more zealous supporters will try things like this.

          • Regardless of if he’s there or not, this stuff is going to happen. I don’t think people are going to turn into crazed hyped up pervs just because he’s there.

          • “he’s actively encouraging this type of behaviour”

            HORRIBLE: show me where he does this and we can press charges against him for harassment under US law.

            Come on, you clearly stated he is ACTIVELY ENCOURAGING this behavior.
            A couple links and we can really put this to rest.

            Actively and openly encouraging criminal sexual harassment is terrible; and in fact criminal in the US (where he is) so we can have him prosecuted and at the very least fined for such behavior.

            All we need is evidence of your claim. I can’t seem to find any evidence to support this, but you must have it… right?

            Or did you make this up and hope nobody would call you on your bullsh*t?

    • He was the first twitter user to use #gamergate apparently. He used it to link two Internet Aristocrat videos.

    • He’s apparently going to get an army of rapists to attend according to people who dress up in sexually evocative clothing who are against the sexualisation of women in gaming and pop culture….

      But 99.9999999999999999% would probably turn up because he was Firefly…

    • Well, the Supanova appearance went off without a hitch, despite the scaremongering…

    • Maybe she could see if Armageddon needs volunteers? That way she can still work at a con but not support Supanova? I have friends who volunteer there, I can see if they need anyone, and I’d say someone like your friend with experience would be sought after if they do, too.

  • This is why boycotting matters. The two tickets I was going to buy? Eh. Small potatoes.

    If everyone who disagrees with a corporation’s business practices decides to stop financially supporting them? Big, expensive potatoes.


    “Tea Party members posted the home address of their opponents and encouraged readers to ‘drop by’ to express their anger at them”

    “it’s not civil discourse, it’s an invitation to intimidation…”

    “the movement tried to cotain the damage by denouncing and distancing themselves from those behind the acts”

    Remind you of anybody?

    I can’t stand cons regardless. They don’t care who you are there to see or how you dress up. They want to sell you pointless crap and that’s it.

    Supernova should have been aware of something like this and they did not do their due diligence.

    Temper your thoughts and feelings – and yes, your politics – and put yourself in the shoes of somebody else.

    That is what this about, personal safety for all.

    • Tea party members did something bad, and Baldwin is a tea party member?

      He’s GUILTY!

      We’ll round him up, but first we need to round up every Muslim, as they’re all terrorists by the same logic.

      But once we’re done rounding up every Muslim for guilt by association; we’ll get to arresting Baldwin for the same crime.

      What groups are YOU a member of?
      Just so we can save time and make sure you’re not one we need to round up as well.

  • Good. The kind of people that would boycott an event for something one guest said are the kind that I don’t want there anyway. The rational people can still go, avoid anyone they don’t want to see, and have a good time.

    • Agreed – Baffled by the trivial matters here – you can avoid seeing 1 person out of thousands at Supanova.

      If you don’t like someone or don’t agree with them – ignore them and move on, they will eventually fade away into nothingness don’t go hurting the thousands of people wanting to attend the event by stirring this pot of nonsense (in no way am I advocating for who this guy is or what he’s done but it’s most certainly hasn’t locked him up in jail so calm your farms?)

      *Wontsomebodypleasethinkofthechildren* -_-“

      • That’s fine on an individual level, particularly from a privileged position. But unfortunately a lot of the people that Baldwin has actually come out against (women, LGBT) are in the minority, and often aren’t in a position to easily defend themselves.

        By allowing someone who has voiced some seriously hostile sentiments onto their stage, Supanova is ignoring the legitimate concerns that vulnerable members of their community may have.

        • They are at a convention for nerds. Do you really think knuckle dragging gamerbros are going to swarn in because of Adam Baldwin and start harassing random people?

          • I think for the people who are choosing to boycott, it may be less about what they think will happen and more about the feeling of what could happen. This all coming off the back of some ugly online harassment, it’s not completely unreasonable to think it’s within the realm of possibility. Remote, but not impossible.

    • But if Baldwin’s stance on feminism and other issues has been explicitly exclusionary, what message does that send about this event?

      If he had said, “I disagree with Feminism, but I accept that people have the right to their own opinions” that would be alright. But he’s made some really terrible comments about women that are shockingly exclusionary.

      For a lot of people, it’s not a boycott because they disagree with him. It’s a boycott because the things he says and the position he advocates threatens them personally.

      Take his comments regarding Trans people, and imagine you’re a young person struggling with that issue. If you go to the event and you see him, you’ll know that there is someone who, by their own words, thinks you are an abomination. That is not inclusive.

      • The only way to see him would be to line up for his photo session or to line up for his talk session. You are as likely to stumble across him on the floor as you would be to bump into him at the airport.

        I can see people not wanting to attend, but organising a boycott or picketing the place seems a stretch. He is a pop culture identity and has agreed to be there only to talk/represent his roles, status, etc. as an actor in a bunch of popular films and TV shows. Some people will be keen to see him and be able to separate the character from the person and enjoy finding out about what it was like to be in a certain film or TV show.
        I love his characters, but from what I have read, would not like the man (to say the least), but just like Alan Jones or John Laws or other people that turn my stomach, I don’t think it is right to stop them appearing at events. If you don’t want to go, don’t go.
        Conventions are fun, people put a lot of effort into costumes, and it is a very friendly, open and accepting atmosphere, having an actor give a session who isn’t friendly, open and accepting to certain sectors of society is perhaps not in the spirit of the event, but if they aren’t there with that agenda, it is hard to see how you could exclude them without effectively becoming the thing you purport to hate.

        • True, he is there as a Pop Culture icon, and you need to go into the talk to see him. But I do think it’s important for us to consider the reasons people would choose not to go to or support Supanova. Right or wrong, we only grow as a community by talking about these issues together. Dismissing peoples concerns and saying, “Fine, don’t go” kind of just says that we don’t care.

          • Not at all, I think it is fine to voice why you aren’t going, but I think that say picketting the entrance or staging a protest out the front is counterproductive.
            By all means setup a website, state opinions, let others know why one doesn’t like the man and take a stand on issues. I am clearly fall inside some of his ‘targets’, but I’m not going to miss out on an event I enjoy each year because he is going to be there. I can also still appreciate his work as an actor, even though I couldn’t stomach the guy personally. The list of artists that have horribly offensive views is huge (from the Foo-Fighters and their AIDS denial stance, , Leonard Cohen’s love of guns and support for bombing nations to George Bernard Shaw’s support of eugenics), so the list of people you couldn’t invite to an event would be very, very long.

            So from my point of view, I’m voicing my opinion to Supanova directly in a letter, but I am also going, as why let a deekhead ruin my day? I feel (and again, this is just my opinion) that by not going, I have let someone actually oppress me, i.e. that I have missed out/changed my lifestyle because of their misguided opinions/hatreds, so why let that happen?

          • Yeah, it’s definitely important to modulate our response to things like this depending on the situation. Slipper slopes and all that.

            And respect to you for also articulating that you disagree with the situation, but won’t let it dictate your response. Of course it also doesn’t discredit anyone else’s choice not to attend.

  • I’m pretty left wing and I think Adam Baldwin is an idiot, but the fact that he’s an idiot shouldn’t bare him from attending events that are dedicated to an industry he is a part of. He’s already said he won’t be talking politics there because he doesn’t feel it’s the place to do so, which is a far more mature responce than most of his detractors have been giving.

    Additionally, I’d hate to see the industry (that is the general nerd/pop culture industry, not just gaming) turn into such a hostile place where people aren’t allowed to be part of the culture if their political beliefs don’t align to a stringent set of requirements.

    • Hmm. He’s not actually being barred, however; those who are uncomfortable around him are voting with their wallets as a response. Not sure that his responses to the articles (and some of the writers) around Supanova have been all that “mature”, either; he’s been pretty aggressive pre-event, no matter how much he may have put out a carefully worded PR statement about his behaviour at the convention itself. He is, naturally, free to express himself however he likes on Twitter, as are folks to not pay money to an organisation that funds him.

      Actually, it strikes me that the Firefly panel could be all sorts of interesting; you’ve got Nathan Fillion, who’s apparently pretty close to Felicia Day (doxxed by GG), and Morena Baccarin, who’s both publicly said she can’t quite deal with Adam, but may hit a scheduling conflict anyway, having just apparently landed the female lead role in Deadpool, which shoots around the same time.

      • Wouldn’t be surprised if they require the questions to be pre-approved, though they’re still going to run the risk if someone decides to go ‘off-book’.

  • Why can’t people just be nice to each other and respect others’ opinions, whether you agree with them or not?

    • I can’t tell if you’re for him going or against it. I’m hearing this argument a lot from the ‘he should be able to go’ crowd but his inability to respect other people’s views and opinions is exactly why people don’t want him to go.

      • Just a general observation…a lot of conflicts in the world seem to be due to differing opinions, and it’s absolutely ridiculous when you think about it. How important is it really to be ‘right’ in the grand scheme of things?

        • The grand scheme of things is a wonderful term for diminishing an argument. To push it to absurdity: Bobby wants to become a physician, should Bobby care when in the grand scheme of things he is going to die, all of the people he helps will eventually die, and any achievements he makes will be long forgotten over the centuries?

          Being right can exist anywhere on a spectrum of importance that is influenced by each individual event or circumstance. Reducing the importance of being right because some instances are ridiculous is in itself ridiculous.

          I don’t believe either of us are wrong in our views, we just phrase and accommodate for scope differently.

        • Totally. Oftentimes it’s the reaction AGAINST the idiot that makes it so much worse. If people could just say “oh he’s an arse” and just ignore him, there’d be no issue at all.

        • My comment isn’t about the importance of my ideals being right or wrong, it’s about you (I assume inadvertently) telling the people who are concerned about his track record of behaving/encouraging others to behave in a way that goes 100% against what your comment is about to shut up and ignore it. As if his actions are trivial enough that we should ignore it to keep the peace but him being paid to attend Supanova is important enough that we must defend his right to be a bigot without it impacting his career as a paid convention guest who is there to draw crowds*.
          I do agree with the core concept I just think it’s super strange to be making that point here of all places. And like I said there are a lot of people insisting that he shouldn’t be discriminated against because he has a ‘difference of opinions’, as though they were harmless opinions that he keeps private.

          *Just to be clear, as I’ve said in other comments, I think he needs to appear at Supanova just to show people that he is just a random loudmouth with a Twitter account and not some general in an army of hate.

          • My previous comment wasn’t directed at you in particular. I’m definitely not saying to turn a blind eye to prejudice, I just think people shouldn’t give him so much publicity if they want him to go away.

          • I half agree, by giving him so much attention we’re giving his platform a greater reach, but I’ve seen what ignoring prejudice does.

      • As ridiculous as he is, nobody really respects his right to a perspective either. He isn’t promoting violence but people are painting a picture that libertarians are DANGEROUS. This isn’t because of Adam Baldwin, he’s a representation of a “type” of person that people want to exile and label dangerous so it sticks culturally. To me, this is fear-mongering and it’s almost sickening to see Kotaku ignore the prejudice-on-prejudice here. The way Kotaku label’s a dissenting opinion as immature (Kidman) really shows a lack of empathy and consideration for a “type” of person as well.

        Now, I wouldn’t feel comfortable having a personal conversation with Baldwin but then again, I would stay clear of him since this is a show for everyone, not just for one group of people who are using anecdotal fear tactics (this is a thing and as writers who presumably went to school you can’t just ignore the existence and application of such a tactic whilst acknowledging its use elsewhere just because you agree with the sentiment; that’s prejudice) to spread a message of inherent danger in a specific political alignment.

        I don’t agree with a single thing Adam Baldwin has said in regards to Gamergate or even his politics but exclusion based on political alignment is prejudice. I would say the same thing if they presented a middle-eastern guest who has also made questionable political remarks, I would say the same thing about a woman who has made questionable political remarks, I would say the same for any guest of any political, sexual or cultural ideology. He has done nothing unlawful and there is no reason that people who are fearful should be considered beyond anyone else who uses such tactics to move the political needle. What if a bunch of racists (we have a lot of those) rounded up enough people in an attempt to remove a middle-eastern guest from the AFL Grand Final using “fear” and “safety” as reasoning? Do we give these people (who are still presumably equals unless you’re prejudiced) the time of day? Why not? Terrorist attacks and cultural violence are far more prevalent in big events and from certain political and cultural groups so you could argue they actually have a solid foundation for fear. Do we actually listen? No. Why not? It’s prejudiced FFS, that’s why. Not all people who comment on the Gamergate controversy are dangerous and not all are prejudiced, some may be ignorant and some don’t like being lumped in with misogynists since they don’t espouse any anti-gender equality views but this touts them as dangerous.

        There are many ways to bridge gaps of difference and intolerance, to promote equality, safety and inclusiveness, some may even be worse for Baldwin than simply being left off a show but what isn’t a particularly useful way is exile. This is why we have books on the subject, this is why we have learning theories, conflict resolution and education on indifference. At no point in school, university or my working life in the social sector did I ever read a book, hear a lecture or engage in an exercise where the answer to intolerance was exile and there’s a reason for that.

        • You’ve nailed at always.

          Imagine the uproar if people were boycotting Supernova if Anita was going.

          • We would be getting the same articles except they would be less fearmongering and more insulting to the people doing the boycotting.

          • Imagine the uproar if a person who is only tangentially related to the conversation and with a completely different personal history was going? Um… It’d be a different situation.

            That’s not a good comparison at all.

          • You think Anita Sarkeesian is only tangentially related to Gamergate? I’m sure she’d be relieved to hear it, if only it were true.

          • The conversation is whether or not Baldwin is an arse who shouldn’t be there. Anita Sarkessian is tangentially related in that they both have connections to the GG bullshit. However, she has a completely different personal history and is related for entirely different reasons. It is a poor comparison.

          • You don’t think there are a lot of people who regard Sarkeesian as an arse too? Both have a history of antagonising people with contrary perspectives, both hold controversial views and have the potential to attract boycotts. Both hold views that are regarded by many as an attack on their identity. I doubt anyone is saying they’re identical but I don’t think it’s an unfair comparison in this context.

          • I can’t reply to you. This topic has too many nested replies.

            No I don’t think so. Saying things that you disagree with isn’t the same as saying things that are directly and deliberately disrespectful and minimising to those who are already getting the shitty end of the stick.

            I’ve seen her get angry and I’ve seen her say things I think are stupid. But I don’t think I’ve ever seen a time where she says something bigoted, or hateful. Baldwin on the other hand has a list of offenses as long as your arm. If you can show me a single time Sarkeesian has been a big dumb bigot like he is, you might have a point.

        • At no point in school, university or my working life in the social sector did I ever read a book, hear a lecture or engage in an exercise where the answer to intolerance was exile and there’s a reason for that.

          When was the answer ever to shield someone from the backlash of their bigotry? To protect someone acting the way he does from the (non-violent, non-life threatening) consequences of their behaviour is not a good thing. If he was coming out and apologising for his remarks and showing a genuine remorse I’d be all for giving him another chance and not holding his past against him but the best we get is ‘I’ll behave at Supanova’ and that’s just not enough for some people to be ok with supporting the convention that in turn supports him.
          While there may be a group of people who are upset and have a petition, this is about on ething – Adam Baldwin’s convention career going down the crapper. Be an extremely loud asshole, watch your career as a beloved celebrity fall apart. Why does he get protection from that?
          He’s not being exiled he’s being uninvited. They can get two Alfs for the price of a Jayne and Alf’s creator is only insane in a harmless way. If they refused to employee him as janitor that’d be one thing, but convention goers actively don’t want to see him and wanting to be seen by convention goers is his entire job description.

          Not all people who comment on the Gamergate controversy are dangerous and not all are prejudiced, some may be ignorant and some don’t like being lumped in with misogynists since they don’t espouse any anti-gender equality views but this touts them as dangerous.

          I’m normally right there with you. I don’t think they’re there anymore but there were a lot of people involved with Gamergate who really just wanted gaming journalists to stop pulling all the shady shit they quite openly do. But Adam Baldwin does not represent that part of Gamergate.

          • If comments in these articles are anything to go by, most people don’t actually know what Baldwin has or hasn’t said, they only know what they’ve heard from third hand sources, both for him and against him, and almost all with their own agenda to push. Informed people are welcome to take Baldwin to task at an appropriate time and place, but an uninformed mob baying for blood and operating on half-truths and exaggerations isn’t beneficial and it’s not unreasonable that others will step in to shield him from that.

            I personally take the same stance with Baldwin as I do with anyone. People should answer for what they’ve done, no more, no less. Do your homework, find evidence to support you and attack the idea, never the person expressing it. It’s better to leave a guilty person be because you don’t have proof than to attack an innocent person because you were misinformed.

    • Exactly.

      The fact both sides employ the ‘well, his bigotry justifies my bigotry’ line just goes to show both sides are morons

  • i still love him. if we hated and boycotted things because someone has a differing opinion on something, we’d never get anywhere in this world.

    im still thinking of buying tickets to fly from adelaide to perth for supanova to see the firefly trio.

    • But where do you draw the line? Let’s say I’m super racist. You and I could do business and generally be civil. It’d be a bit of a hazy issue and it’d be perfectly understandable if you thought doing business with me was supporting my stupid views. However what if I’m super racist and a big part of some racist movement? I’m a chapter leader in the KKK or something ridiculous like I run the worlds largest anti-Norwegian forum. At that point you’ve got to start saying ‘he may be fine and civel with me, but he’s a massive asshole who is actively rallying people to his asshole cause’.
      Adam Baldwin doesn’t simply have a different opinion. He’s not just some freak who thinks Pepsi is an acceptable substitute for Coke. His ‘difference in opinion’ is that he’s a terrible person who encourages other people to be terrible. It’s not like he’s being cast out because he quietly sits there keeping his opinions to himself. Even now he’s undermining his promise to be civil at Supanova.

      Although as I’ve said before I think he needs to go to Supanova just so that people can see that Gamergate as we know it doesn’t really exist outside of mean Tweets and online harrassment. Sure it’s a real thing but it’s way more of a fringe group than it’s presented as in media coverage. That said I totally understand why him being there would make some people uncomfortable on both a personal safety and ethical level.

      • “He’s not just some freak who thinks Pepsi is an acceptable substitute for Coke”

        Hahahaha, the best

      • It’s like with Orson Scott Card – he’s a giant homophobe which some people are still okay to deal with because of his writing, but when you support his writing/movies/etc, you’re actually giving him money he actively puts towards supporting his homophobia.

        • I choose not to read any more literature from Orson Scott Card and If he appeared at my event, I wouldn’t attend his session. That’s my personal choice as an individual.

          I couldn’t even watch a downloaded copy of Ender’s Game.

        • If I buy his books, I’m supporting him making books. If he wants to hold retarded opinions, speak them and be criticised for them, then that’s his problem. My purchase of his unrelated material is separate.

          People aren’t going to supernova to see Adam Baldwin, they’re going to see the characters he played.

          • Except your purchase of unrelated material isn’t at all separate, as he donates the money he makes from you buying this unrelated material to anti-gay causes.

          • oh no. A guy with money spends it! If I buy a car from a some guy, and he spends it on an axe to kill somebody, am I at fault? Of course the perpetrator should be held accountable (anti-gay causes), but I just got a lawnmower (book).

        • It’s a hard line to nail down. If Orson Scott Card was just a giant homophobe but he kept it to himself I’d be willing to write him off as an idiot and continue playing/recommending Shadow Complex to people. I can ignore with my nan’s racism most of the time because it doesn’t usually come up, I love her and I honestly just can’t think of any way to change her mind.
          With Adam Baldwin I find myself in a really confronting position. I actually like the guy. He seemed really cool. He wasn’t a fantastic actor but when he was in the right role with the right director he did well. Then he got Twitter. Now I genuinely feel bad that I don’t hate the guy.

          • I feel bad because I’m allowing him some breathing room that I know I wouldn’t allow someone who wasn’t in Firefly. I’m not letting him off the hook, but I’m closer to the people who insist that Chris Brown’s music is all that matters than I’d rather be. When Michael Vick got off easy because he’s a decent quarterback I thought that was completely unacceptable, but here I am letting my feelings for the fictional character Jayne Cobb influence my feelings for Adam Baldwin.

          • You can hate some of the things he does and love some of the other things he does. You don’t have to rationalise things at a ‘whole person’ scale, which sounds like what you’re finding confronting. People will try to push you to think that way, but why would you? It would be unreasonable to condemn the whole Abbott family just because Tony is a jackass, why condemn a whole person just because some of their views are terrible?

          • Adam Baldwin is a pretty great example of how the internet can ruin the whole “ignorance is bliss” thing when it comes to celebrities of any grade and media opening their flaptraps on social media.

      • you sir win the internet and my heart.
        lost it at the ‘anti-norwegian forum’ – ha ha ha, and the pepsi quip.
        i definitely understand your stance and also agree with it.
        i guess in relation to Adam Baldwin in this specific instance though.
        all i was basing my opinion on was the wiki stuff which just says this. (i know, rookie mistake….)

        **Originally termed the “quinnspiracy” the controversy moved on to use the Twitter hashtag “Gamergate”.[17][21][28][29] The hashtag “Gamergate” was first used by actor Adam Baldwin in a tweet with links to two videos critical of Quinn, shortly after he retweeted a statement from a feminist blogger who had readjusted her stance to be critical of Quinn.[29] Baldwin critiqued the media for trying to “enforce arbitrary ‘social justice’ rules upon gamers & the culture” and described the events that followed as “a skirmish in the long culture war.”**

        this doesnt seem all that bad, coining a term, right? although i did a bit more research about what other things he said in his involvments, and i am definitely in no way supportive of his opinions, that shit is messed up.

        but i still would like to meet him.

        i get the whole boycott thing, and i get the “you are bad and you should feel bad” attacks on him, but generally most people wall up and hit the defensive when they get attacked, its instinctual and makes a lot of people dig in because they feel like they have to attack back to feel safe.

        i just dont know what the real answer is, is it non-judgemental love? like, ‘hey, yeah, you f%%ked up, but we arent going to hold it against you, and by the way, how are you actually going? do you need anything?”

        it sucks, and there does need to be an end to all the BS.
        lets hope the gaming community comes out the other side stronger, safer and more betterer.

        • Yeah. There was a while there when I wasn’t quite sure if he was just copping a ton of flak because he was the first person to use the hashtag. There was so much hate flying his way that it all felt like reactions rather than provoking anything. Then it got a little clearer that he’s not the guy I hoped he was. I don’t think he’s dangerous or anything but yeah, I can totally understand why people don’t want him at the convention.

        • I don’t think the BS will end. All the issues that arose during the debacle are still kind of there, and it’s clear many people would like to talk about them. But as soon as people try we’ll all be reminded of this and certain accusations will begin, with debaters quickly corralled into groups or sides.

          Even recently when some gamers had the gall to claim a recent game was ‘too short’ we get articles decrying the entire argument as petty whining. Neatly putting anybody who had anything to say about it in the ‘petty whiners’ group.

          • this!
            Seems it’s ok for journalists to refer to those who disagree with their views as dumb, immature and inane- that’s just to do with the recent ‘short gameplay argument.
            See how well that went with the follow up reviews of The Order

      • I can’t agree. If you were a massive racist, and you come to my paint shop, I’d still have to sell you paint unless you were disrupting the customers. I wouldn’t have to like you or agree with you but I can’t exclude you for unrelated reasons.

        If you go and use my paint to write some slurs, it’s not my fault, and I shouldn’t see it as my fault. In the same way, a convention for celebrating pop-culture and those involved in making it aren’t responsible for the opinions those people have at home, nor the opinions of those paying to run around enjoying said pop-culture.

        • What if I wanted to be paid to appear at your paint shop as a celebrity to draw in a crowd in an attempt to sell more paint? Especially if your current customer base is made up of jerks who find my perfectly reasonable/vocal views offensive.
          As stupid as I’m being here we’re talking about a celebrity alienating a huge chunk of his fan base, ruining his credibility and making it harder for him to find conventions that are willing to invite him (remember, it’s not a ban from Supanova it’s merely a call to take back the invitation to get paid to be there). If he wants to continue doing conventions he needs to realise that people aren’t going to want to see ‘the guy who played Jayne’ if that guy happens to be a loudmouth asshole on Twitter.

          I do get what you’re saying. I just think there’s a line for everybody where they say no. Would you let the KKK as an organisation setup an account specifically to buy their paints for signs? If you owned a hardware store would you sell them the tools and materials they need to make a cross to burn on someone’s lawn?
          As a business owner I’ve got legal obligations and an obligation to my creditors to run the business well enough to bring in enough money to pay them, as well as an obligation to myself to succeed, but that’s not a free pass to just ditch all social responsibility. Bar tenders don’t turn around and say ‘well, this person is too drunk to stand, but capitalism means it’s wrong to turn down financially profitable deal, so drink until you’re out of money’.

          • That depends on if you as a celebrity has more to present than just racism, that ‘something’ being the point of such promotion.

            Unfortunately, my beef in this situation is not just about ‘don’t be inclusive by being exclusive’ mentioned in other comments – it’s also about ability to separate people from their work. I just don’t buy that Adam Baldwin has managed to alienate such a large proportion of his audience, especially if they, like me, are capable of separating. Those people surely don’t deserve to miss out? I don’t have a problem with people making a stand and saying no, even if I think it’s a bit unnecessary; it’s their right. But they can’t say no for everyone.

            If I knew that I was funding a cross-burning, I would refrain. But 9/10 times you won’t know. In this case it’s reasonable to say money would go to Baldwin’s nefarious schemes. However, that’s not the transaction, people are buying his performance, and in Supanova’s case, his celebrity only in reference to that performance.

        • That analogy needs work.

          If someone were a racist, and you’d had complaints about him harassing your customers outside the store, then yeah you could refuse to serve him. You might choose not to, but either way it’s a choice.

          But even so, that analogy still isn’t right. It’s more like this. If my paint shop sold a brand of paint, and the creator of that brand was well known for using and encouraging people to use that particular brand in writing slurs, then it’s my choice whether to continue selling that brand to my customers or to disassociate myself professionally from a someone who actively promotes hatred. Either way I lose some customers, but one way I at least get to keep my self respect.

          Supanova? Yeah they’re keeping the paint in their stores.

      • “His ‘difference in opinion’ is that he’s a terrible person who encourages other people to be terrible. ”

        I missed this, please submit three quotes, or links to show this claim.
        Three will be more than enough I’m sure; and since he does so much of this; that will be trivial; right?

        Oh, and not other gamergate people; but Baldwin actually doing this; because guilt by association is bullsh*t.

        Unless you think bad action from a group makes the entire group both bad and guilty… 1.3 Billion Muslims want to know if they’re all terrorists in your view; or if you’re not playing “guilt by association” after all.

  • I for one am GOING to supernova, because ill get to see Doc Brown and Mr Zulu which as far as i can tell out weights not going because Jayne/Unkillable X-files Alien is going to be there

    • Melbourne/Gold Coast have a different set of guests, but it’s going to be hurt by those who want to “send a message” to the company overall.

  • This is all blown out of proportion. He does not hate women, He hates feminazis that are anti men.

  • I’m just annoyed that the other two locations that have nothing to do with all this (Gold Coast & Melbourne) are going to get hurt in the crossfire.

    All of these drama llamas from BOTH SIDES need to just disappear. It seems every month we see the same style of llamas popping up saying “Ban this person from coming to our country because his/her ideas/opinions do not agree with mine!”. Australia is very quickly becoming a nation of people who get offended at every little tiny thing on the planet, and it’s a country a feel ashamed to be in.

    • representing an imagined middle ground does not automatically make what you say more reasonable

    • Horses for courses.

      The last three people to be banned, at least in the public way which you have proscribed, were:
      An entrepreneur offering a service where emotional and physical abuse for one’s sexual gratification were to be taught.
      A professional aiming to teach parents that vaccinations are injurious to their children.
      A boxer showed no regret for his long history of assault charges.

      These aren’t instances of “soft cups of water” complaining about a difference of ideas/opinions.

      Edit: Final sentence removed for being unnecessarily antagonistic.

  • Maybe the Supanova organisers should weigh up how much they’d lose by cancelling Baldwin’s contract against how much they might lose by people not buying tickets.

    Supanova hosting him is seen as an indirect support for what he stands for. The fact that they are also ignoring the concerns of many of their customers is also worrying.

    • There’s just as many supporters that would boycott if they cancelled than people boycotting for him being there. They’ve been painted into a corner and not handling it very well. Stuffed either way.

      • That’s the thing – the damage has already been done by the conversation – there is no ‘safe’ decision at this point.

        Why am I reading the comments again?

    • It would be breaking the contract and they would end up giving Baldwin money just to not show up. It might be cheaper for them but either way, Baldwin would still be getting money.

      FFS. If Baldwin is so offensive, why not ban him from entering the country? Is his words going to actually incite hatred like holocaust denier David Irving or misogynistic rappers? It’s all become a bit too much from both sides.

    • I’m sure they did weigh it up. I’d be amazed if this wasn’t a business decision first and foremost.

      I’m not criticising it on that ground, but I think it’s probably a bit silly to think they didn’t do some risk assessment on the issue before they responded.

    • I’m sure people aren’t going because he’s there as well, likely with some significant money lost there too. A perfectly acceptable way to respond to something you don’t agree with that can spur change and progress through money.

  • Won’t somebody think of the Firefly fans? We are still recovering over the cancellation of the show. Please don’t take this away from us!

  • The concept that the mere presence of a man who has been made to represent a nebulous hashtag should be removed because he makes attendees feel physically unsafe is a laughable absurdity.

    At what point did ‘mild annoyance’ become an actual lack of safety?

    Do we expect Baldwin to leap from the stage and go for someone’s neck?

  • Um, can someone tell me what this baldwin is famous for & why is his values are nessed up? *done in an emo tone*

    • He was in the cult TV show Firefly, as well as a couple other things.

      He’s hardline conservative in the American sense, which includes being anti-gay, transphobic, and, of late, supporting and promoting the harassment of (primarily) women in gaming. It’s Supanova inviting him and then doubling down on this invite that’s got them into this mess.

  • For heaven’s sake, this is just ridicious. This whole scenario, GG, “harassment”, the lot, is rigged up to the loudspeakers. These “boycotters” have no idea what they’re on about. Baldwin has his opinions, and they have theirs. He’s not going to launch an attack on them.
    Honestly, the man should come to Supanova, nothing will happen, and then all the boycotters and Albert Santos-esque PC-police dictators will see that it’s all a facade.

    Why spot there? Why not ban everyone that disagrees with your views and forbid them from attending a convention?

    • Why stop there? Why not ban everyone that disagrees with your views and forbid them from attending a convention?

      The would be the precedent set if they did remove Baldwin from the convention. It would create a situation where one group would believe that they have complete control over the convention and who attends.

      • But here’s the thing, there’s no legal side to this at all. You say it creates a precedent but that doesn’t really mean anything when it’s the event organisers making the call. They’re not forced to respond the same way with the next person. There’s no loophole being created that could be exploited. They’ve set a precedent for running a show about comics, movies, pop-culture, etc and they could turn around and make Supanova a boat show next year if they chose to.
        This isn’t a back down once be a slave to the petition situation.

    • Yay, no more 4 hour lines! In all seriousness I still do not understand this whole gamergate thing. I play games and enjoy them. I don’t get involved in all the political crap.

      • Although I am not religious, I plan to give up these pointless arguments on the Internet for Lent this year… So what am I doing here? Expressing my desire to not care anymore, I guess. 🙂

  • I said this a month ago. Predicted that everyone would lose. As a Supanova exhibitor, alas, that also includes myself.

    I signed a petition this morning about Adam Baldwin, encouraging his uninvitation from Supanova. But since I did that, I’ve been wondering to what extent conventions should be seen as vehicles for politics. Adam Baldwin has been invited not because of his opinions or politics, but because he’s a pop culture icon. People won’t be attending the convention to see the #GamerGate guy, but Jayne from Firefly. There are plenty of people who (rightly or wrongly) don’t care about his misogyny.

    For those people, conventions are places where we (try to) leave all our differences at the door, and just celebrate popular culture entertainment.

    He’s not a role model that I want for my kids, but I’m not convinced that’s even relevant to this issue.

    I’d like all celebrities to be nice people who hold open-minded and open-hearted values, but the truth is: there are plenty of unlikeable celebs out there who attend these events as guests. Where do you draw the line? If a celeb makes a racist comment, would you petition to ban them? If one decides to post something deriding all Democrats for their political beliefs, would you petition to ban them? If their lifestyle includes elements that you have a moral objection to (sex, drugs and rock n roll), is that sufficient ground for banning? What about if they’ve had a child out of wedlock? There are lots of ways that people can be bad role models, or take positions that you might not necessarily agree with.

    It’s a little more clear-cut in this instance, of course. Adam Baldwin seems to be the very picture of an online bully. He seems an ideal candidate for this kind of response.

    But it could set up a slippery slope where popular culture conventions are caught up in a devastating political storm that hurts their ability to draw guests and crowds (which has a flow-on effect to all exhibitors). Not saying that should be the primary concern at this point, but no doubt it’s a factor that Supanova is considering at this point.

    I don’t have the answers. Maybe it is actually better to wield the ban hammer with extreme prejudice. Maybe Baldwin’s acting career does deserve to suffer for the comments he has made in public. Maybe we should be conducting personality checks on celebrities before they become famous, and before they get invited to events like this. But I just don’t know. I feel like this, in a big-picture sense, could ending up costing as much as it gains.

    Unfortunately, it seems like having no firm opinion on an issue like this just alienates me from everyone in the debate. I’m not standing up for freedom of association, I’m not standing up for the oppressed and threatened, I’m not even standing up for myself.

    • It’s a common criticism of this debate, that a middle ground is imaginary (what makes it imaginary is everyone’s insistence that it isn’t possible) and those who lie there are lumped in with one group or another and not seen as valid human beings with more legitimate questions than answers. I kind of feel the same, I can see how people will feel threatened by his presence but i’m not sure why or how we just go with one side of politics over the other in a fan convention. Any sort of exclusion or labelling of an individual or group who hasn’t committed any type of crime or atrocity but merely speaks an unpopular political stance feels like prejudice to me. Maybe my curse is that I read the definition… I just don’t know.

      • So going back to what was written above, what is he were very racist? There are any number of completely socially unacceptable stances a person could make that would make most people run from them like a bad smell. So why is it ok in this instance but not another to ignore it? This isn’t a bat question. This isn’t even a question that has a ‘right’ answer. Where do we draw the line? Why do we draw it there?

        The argument that by excluding him we aren’t being inclusive doesn’t hold up. Hypothetically, the only person who is to be excluded is someone who has shown that they are willing to be a larger problem. It’s like kicking out someone who is drunk and abusive. We would absolutely be more inclusive by excluding the drunk, abusive person because they are exhibiting anti-social behaviour.

        • Hasn’t he agreed not to discuss the offending issue? So if he breaks that agreement, they can sue him if it’s part of their adjusted contract. So, he’s just an actor with a past now. He’s not a drunken abusive person.

          • He is a person who has consistently shown that he has no care or respect for large segments of the population who will be in attendance. If he were an actor with a past of being a mouthpiece for a racial purity movement, would you say the same thing? Like I said. Where do you draw the line and why there and not somewhere else?

            “Oh, he’s an ex-KKK leader. He’s agreed not to talk about race traitors, so let’s all give him the benefit of the doubt.” – I wouldn’t want to be a part of something that supported an actor with a past full of racism. So I also don’t want to support an actor with a past of sexism, transphobia, anti-vaccination craziness, or any of the other pretty stupid shit he has said.

          • Its not giving him the benefit of the doubt. When was the last time that Adam Baldwin came out at a convention and started ranting anti-female sentiments? Supanova is not supporting his point of view, they are supporting a contract with a pop culture icon who is coming to promote a show/past ventures. If you disagree with this, fine. But he is still entitled to attend irrespective of what you think of him. Especially since he has stated that he wont be bringing any of this up/discussing it at all.

            If he is likely to cause trouble and actually be a problem for people, and there was an actual security risk, then fine, ban him. But I just cant see it in this case considering the type of people going to the convention and the fact that he has been rather professional so far during this whole argument.

          • So then answer my question: If he were an ex-kkk member, would you have the same opinion? If so, why?

            I’m not even trying for a gotcha here. Nobody seems to want to examine where they draw a line or why. They just like a thing he did in the past, so he gets a pass on things that would get other people no support. If you can honestly examine your motivations for your opinion and come up with the same result, then so be it. Everyone does something that you don’t like, but you decide the good outweighs the bad and you associate with them, or be friends with them, or marry them. But why is it ok to publicly be a complete piece of shit to gay people, or transgender people, or female people and that’s ok, but being a piece of shit to Kenyan people or disabled people isn’t?

          • The issue is, the only people who can draw the line are Supanova. If it were me, I would only disallow if he actually posed a real threat. People are assuming that just because he is opinionated like he is, that an angry mob will turn up causing trouble. A KKK member is perfectly entitled to enter a public forum, as long as he does not incite an angry mob or break any laws.

            The convention promoters arent stupid. Professional contracts have these sorts of things put into them so that guests cant just spout shit in an innappropriate forum. Again, it does not mean Supanova agree with his views. If Adam then goes against this he deserves everything he gets. Once again, if you feel threatened by him etc, feel free not to go, but stop trying to force your ideals on people who feel as though his appearance is simply a nostalgia trip to a show most of us enjoyed before all this shit.

          • If someone is an ex-KKK member, shouldn’t we be encouraging them for no longer being a KKK member?

          • I can’t reply to @elwyn5150 in the thread. It’s getting too long.

            You’re missing the point. I assume on purpose. But in case you aren’t, take a look at everything except the “ex” part of my post.
            Is it ok for this loud and proud white supremacist to be given the celebrity treatment because he was in a cool movie? What if he promises not to talk about how interracial marriage is an abomination on the day? I’m assuming that would cross the line for most people, even if he promised to not mention it on stage. So why is that line not ok to cross, but this one is?

        • I think the difference here is that Adam has come out and said that he will not be discussing this topic at the convention and is merely there as a guest discussing his previous work. Whether you agree with him or not, he is at least saying that he will respect the fact that a fan convention is not the place for these sorts of discussions. If he then breaks this, by all means he should be removed and prosecuted as required.

          It doesnt really matter which way you slice it, people are over-reacting to what may or may not happen. And that’s perfectly fine. If you feel that Adam Baldwin’s presence is going to detract from your experience of the con/make you feel threatened/whatever, then fine, dont see Adam Baldwin, or even dont go. Nobody is complaining about that. But trying to ban someone from a convention, for having “incorrect” moral views, especially since he has made a statement saying he wont be airing those views at said convention, is the exact definition of hypocrisy…

          • You may not have seen it, but my point in reply to elwyn still stands. People have decided that being all of the ‘incorrect’ (read: completely bigoted) opinions are ok in some places, but not others. Why is that? If you examine your reasons for your opinion and decide to go see the guy, then fine. But why is it ok for him to be unpalatable in one way, but someone else isn’t?

          • Im not saying people should like him. He has said some ridiculous things. But trying to exclude him purely because of his comments/opinions is hypocritical. Because you are trying to force your side of things on people by removing a disagreeing element. Please enlighten me on how that is the best way to go about things. What if Adam created a petition to prevent any feminists/whatever from coming? Its the same thing whether you agree with the point of view or not.

            The man has said that he will not bring up GG or anything like that and will only discuss his shows. He poses no serious threat to people at the con. If agreeing parties decide to cause an issue on his behalf, they should be dealt with accordingly. But it is only a potential situation that may or may not happen. If people decide they are uncomfortable with this, then by all means boycott. It’s your choice.

            It doesnt mean the people who do go and see him are supporting his views, they are simply going to see an actor who was in a great TV show.

          • It isn’t hypocritical at all because there’s nothing legally binding here. He isn’t going to be “banned”. That’s a poor choice of words.

            A petition is a way for many people to make their voices heard. People who are famous don’t need this. They already have the power to make their voices loud and command attention. You said so yourself: People can boycott if they like.

            The petition was exactly the way that customers of a product (Supanova) to tell the corporation that they dislike their business practices and will boycott. They spell out the practice they don’t like (hiring somoene who is seen – by them at least – to be antisocial and damaging). If they change the business practice, those customers will return.

            There’s no hypocrisy here. This whole “be inclusive by excluding HURR” argument is as stupid as the HURR on the end of that fake quote. He is seen by a sizeable portion of the community as destructive and they will have no dealings with him or those who wish to have him present. It’s functionally no different to people boycotting and petitioning Nike for using child labour.

          • Sorry, but the entire point of the petition was to remove him from the list of guests at Supanova. It doesnt have to be legally binding for it to be hypocritical. Its completely different to simply boycotting. You are effectively saying “I dont want you to have this because I dont agree with it.” By simply boycotting, you are saying “I dont agree with this, so I’m not going to have anything to do with it.” Option a is bad because you are trying to dictate what people consume. Option b is good, because you express your opinion in the form of not providing money to Supanova/the guests. Supanova should then learn from this and not invite guests like this.

          • I can’t reply to you in the other thread, so I’ll do it here.

            It’s not a public forum. This is a private company selling a product. The people can decide they do not want this product and can ask the company to change. That’s what is happening here. The argument is “Why should they want the company to change the product?” These people think the product is exclusionary and socially destructive. You don’t have to agree, but there is no ban, this is not a public forum, and threat or no, this wouldn’t be a contentious issue if he had said something to the effect of “fuck the Swiss” instead of “fuck feminists”.

            Once again, can’t reply again. No space. In response to your last post, you aren’t actually talking about two different scenarios. How is the company going to know why their popular product suddenly dropped in popularity? How do they get customers back? Maybe they should revamp the whole thing with rappers and dancing sharks? If only the customers who left could tell them why they have decided to leave and not come back… Like say, with a big, unified voice that summarises their problems with the business practices. Like a petition. A petition that says “We find this personally offensive and will not be your customers while you are offending us”. It doesn’t matter if the offensive content is ugly poster fonts, a person they don’t want to associate with, or because the company refuses to kill all gays. They are not giving business because they don’t like it. They can do that. The company can look at that and say “oh wow that’s what went wrong”, or they can say “fuck these people. Why would we kill gay people?”

            You are saying that the best possible way to say what they want as customers is somehow bigotry. That’s… I dunno man… Not even close to the same thing.

          • In this case the company should really be researching their guests before inviting. If they want to ruin their profile by inviting a controversial figure, then let them die by their own sword. At the end of the day money speaks a lot louder than words on a petition notice ever does. There will be other cons, let Supanova find that out and fix their own mess.

            Im saying that thats not what the petition said. It specifically asked Supanova to remove Adam from the guest list. That is bigotry and hypocritical. It is basically trying to enforce censorship. If they did not intend that then they should have worded it better. As I said, IF Adam Baldwin posed a serious and real threat to people at the con, then by all means, he should be removed and the petition is justified.

            But at this point Im happy to agree to disagree. 😛

  • Here’s an idea, if Baldwin is such a “terrible person” and “dick”, why not just ignore him? Why pay so much attention to what he does? Why follow him on social media? Why get so worked up about it? Even if he has messed up views, just shrug and move on. Be the bigger person.

    • Because ignoring problems rarely solves them. People thought racism was a problem, so they fought against it and (mostly) won.
      He is perceived as a force for a different type of discrimination. Regardless of how discriminatory he may or may not be, enough people feel that he is perpetuating a social problem and are willing to try and fight that problem.

      • He’s a force armed with a Twitter account. If you don’t want his views to spread then stop talking about him and why you think he’s a dbag. He’s only a force because people (for or against him) give him the platform. If people stop caring about what he has to say, he’ll only be speaking to himself, he’ll then just be another idiot in the Twitter sea.

        • Once again; ignoring a problem will not make it go away.

          The little things ARE the big things. MY brother doesn’t have to say “fuck chinks” to be a racist dickhead. As much as I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt for his other, better qualities, he’s a racist and I won’t stand for it in my house or my presence. Pretending that he isn’t when he has a history of being racist and continues to think and act that way isn’t going to fix anything.

          Ignoring racism didn’t make it go away. Confronting it didn’t even make it go away. It did help, though. Confronting people who are loud and proud bigots (like the previously mentioned Orson Scott Card) is the only way to have a more equitable society. You don’t have to hate Baldwin for his bad behaviour, but pretending it isn’t bad behaviour because you otherwise like the guy is being complicit in that behaviour. If you support it, then you’re part of the problem that you obviously don’t think is a problem.

          • The war on racism is not mostly won. It’s institutional such as in the government or forced into the shadows except when people let their true selves slip out.

            Does confrontation actually work? Those who use confrontation such as Westboro Baptist Church and Fred Nile are only annoying people – they aren’t getting noticeably more followers.
            Education is the key.

          • I never said it was mostly won. What I did say is that it helped.

            If you don’t think that telling people that being intolerant isn’t ok works, then explain why people like Fred Nile and Westboro are almost universally ridiculed. You proved my point for me. Telling people to stop being intolerant has worked so well that intolerance is forced into the shadows, or preached openly only by ridiculous caricatures.

            Saying that it is systemic is also arguing my point for me. It’s systemic. It’s seen as normal. Pretending it isn’t there helps it to cement its place. Throwing open the windows and letting sunlight pour in is the only really effective way to stop this kind of thing.

        • “He’s only a force because people (for or against him) give him the platform.”

          Isn’t that what some people are arguing on why he should be excluded from Supernova though? Wouldn’t the ultimate form of ignoring him be to not give him a platform at a mass private event where he can speak? It’s ultimately up to the Supernova organizers, and no one’s saying he’s not allowed to come to Supernova as a regular paying convention goer, but inviting him as a paid guest shows the organisers either don’t care or endorse his rudeness and bullying. It’s a free society though so they’re free to endorse that if they want. Just own up to it though.

  • you know what I find hilarious/bizarre about this whole GamerGate thing? Adam Baldwin doesn’t even play video-games. He’s been quoted a number of times talking about how stupid they are and insulted those that enjoy playing them.

    • So he’s basically everything that Gamer Gaters say they hate about… well, Gamer Gate? Good to know. He’s ALL about Ethics in game journalism, right? Because he wants the industry to thrive, Right?!

      • I honestly don’t think he actually knows what he’s arguing about anymore. He’s just a professional troll at this point

    • Down voted by those that see imaginary threats…. My heart weeps.

      I better start a petition to ban them… I feel so threatened and isolated by them…

          • It was in reference to your bleating about the ‘imaginary threats’. Come on, even you could have made the link, or was I overestimating your capacity for intuition and perception…? Should I speak slower?

          • Imaginary threats over Adam Baldwin attending…. That’s what this boycott is about.

            You could meet a sex offender anywhere, you probably do. If anything your article showed that Supanova were all over this and had it covered.

        • I’m not really sure why you’ve linked this article.

          The guy is a creep and self-admitted and convicted sex offender… but made his guilty plea very late.

          Personally, my gut instinct says he should be kept in prison and not have his sentence suspended.

          However, the article does link to the judge’s decision and the judge explains why he doesn’t think he is likely to reoffend. The judgment also includes a recommendation that the offender seek psychological therapy.
          Is the judge a superior expert regarding crime than the organisers of the conventions? (Yes) Is the offender *really* not likely to reoffend? (I don’t know but obviously, it’d be nicer if he went away forever.) As required by the judgment, the offender has to stay away from the victim but if the judge is correct regarding the unlikelihood of reoffending, shouldn’t the offender be allowed back? (Well, it would be nice if the offender sought rehabilitation before seeking to go back.)

          This is a complicated issue regarding rehabilitation.

  • Or, stop playing the victim angle by claiming to be a potential victim with no substantiating evidence.

    Complain about dividing the community, then refuse to attend a community event.

    Adam Baldwin did nothing wrong.

  • Look. Lads. Just because you have nevet felt uncomfortable at Supanova does not mean that there have never been women, men or children that have. Just keep that in mind.

  • I love football: if Chelsea get into the Champions League Final, I’m not going to boycott the event because of a few idiot ‘supporters’ who are racists.

    Similarly, if you love gaming and going to cons, if it’s your thing then go! Don’t let one individual stop you from enjoying the day out.

    Go, have fun, and simply don’t go to anything onsite involving this one individual.

    Bad enough we have to put up with people like Baldwin, let alone giving him the power to stop us enjoying our lives/events. God only knows where feminism would be if historically their response to every crisis… was to simply not to show up.

    Imagine a vibrant, fun-filled event, with throngs of people enjoying themselves – then cut to an empty room (insert noises of crickets) with Adam Baldwin wondering what the hell’s going on….

    For me, THAT sends a signal. Not, as an alternate signal, the message that any time someone with revolting views comes along (insert whiny voice) “I might feel uncomfortable … I might feel threatened” I’ll stay home… listen to Taylor Swift…

    Jesus what a pissweak society we are becoming…

    If we want inclusive society then it behoves us all, ESPECIALLY when we feel threatened or uncomfortable, to show up.

  • Maybe some people will stop and think why some people don’t feel safe about all this drama.

    • People seem to have ignored that part of the article.
      I imagine that they should agree to put on extra security guards and then maybe people would feel safe enough. The people who support gamergate have a right to be there, but they do not have the right to harass attendees.

      • you mean people who SUPPORT OR OPPOSE gamergate have a right to be there, but they do not have the right to harass attendees

        • Supporters of both sides do have a right to be there… But I’d also add that if both sides would just shut up for two seconds about the whole GG thing WHILE there it wouldn’t even be an issue.

          Ideally you wouldn’t even know if someone was pro-GG or anti-GG… Ideally you’d just assume everyone was a person worth treating with respect and you’d be treated with the same respect in turn. You know, like how these conventions generally tend to work out in REALITY.

          Man, if I was Supanova I’d release a new press statement along the lines of, “Right… Now none of you fucks are invited, go fight your shit out elsewhere.”

    • I hope so, but given a lot of the responses about it have been along the lines of “I have never felt threatened or unsafe therefore no one else will or has”, I think it’s a long shot.

      • Given that feeling threatened or unsafe is entirely subjective, it’s not surprising that different people regard the same circumstance in different ways. The question is, to what extent are the event organisers responsible for each individual’s subjective feelings of safety?

        We would both agree that keeping an axe wielding psychopath out of the convention would be a reasonable action to take for everyone’s safety, and I’m sure we’d both agree that if Jim were to contact the organisers and tell them that he doesn’t feel safe being around people under 5 feet tall, it would be unreasonable for organisers to act on that fear.

        When you’re dealing with tens of thousands of subjective views, you have to use something else as an indicator. At the end of the day, harsh as it may sound, people’s fears are their own concern. Fear alone isn’t enough, there needs to be a credible threat accompanying it. Courts don’t issue AVOs without it, no matter how fearful a person may be, and events shouldn’t be barring people without it, no matter how fearful some patrons may be.

        People fear that GamerGaters will attend and harass people, but as far as I know there’s no credible indicator that this is likely to happen.

    • I don’t know, I feel that you’re just as likely to run into a person with Baldwin’s views at a train station, at a sporting event or just walking on the street. Not that you’d know though because they’re likely to just be minding their own business, so I don’t think there will be a major increase of crazies attending just because Adam Baldwin will be there. Certainly won’t be any worse than than walking on George St after 10pm on a Fri night…

      But of course if I don’t feel safe about something, I’d stay home too.

  • I think that at this point we should perhaps stop referring to ‘GamerGate’/’GamerGaters’ because this no longer is about games.

    I would compare the ‘movement’ to terrorists using religion as a shield or justification for their actions, these misogynists/racists/so-and-sos are using the ‘movement’ as an attempt to grant legitimacy to their appalling behaviour. If we try to stop referring to these groups under their banner then we can take that shield away, they cease to be people with a cause and become ordinary badly behaved individuals.

    Games media can do a lot to change the issues here but I don’t think that shaming and using the ‘trending’ twitter language will accomplish that. Let’s call these people out plainly for what they are.

    If you genuinely believe in the proposed issues of gaming media supposedly put forward by the above mentioned ‘movement’ (I think those issues have been put to rest), go about making changes the right way, a civil discussion without aggression will serve you so much better, you don’t need to share a banner guided by the misguided and misleading.

  • Ok as a COMEDIAN myself
    ( )
    and a active member of the popculture community

    I got to say this…
    If you don’t like Adam Baldwin, you know what you can do… still go to NOVA and not go see his talk, get his autograph, take a photo with him
    Because he is only 1 of 100s of guests, artists, vendors that make the event great!

    I been going to Nova, since it started and have found, if there is a guest I don’t particularly like… I just walk away, and it doesn’t effect me!

    And SINCE WHEN… are people afraid of nerds and gamers? If they cause you any problems, smack em!

    I know both parties of the situation, and you know what… if you want to get in the middle of something that really honestly doesnt effect you what so ever…. you need to stop creating all this melodrama cuz your life is that boring you need to create this fantasy of being threatened? Seriously?

    This convention, is a reason to meet up with all these friends they I don’t usually get a chance to hang out with, meet more new and exciting people who geek out over stuff like I do

    Get a grip people, lets get the hashtag #ImGoingToNovaCuz trending. Supanova is about fun and helping artists get their name out… lets not forget about that!

    also follow me on twitter as well … #MightAsWell 😉

    • Since when are people afraid of nerds and gamers? IDK why not ask all the male nerds and gamers who find it necessary to threaten and harass female geeks every time we speak?

  • You predictably neglect to mention that over while the petition against Baldwin has almost 6000 signatures, the “don’t revoke adam baldwin’s invite” petition has OVER 6000. So, like any Gawker article, this one can be simply swept away and filed under “big salty tears because gamers SUX.” It’s a rather large file. Bravo, Mark. Bravo.

  • Stunned by the almost total lack of empathy in most of the comments here. I’m going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess that most of the people on here are [white] guys. Of course you have no idea what it’s like to be a minority. In previous GamerGate articles I’ve generally been pleasantly surprised by the comments, today is not one of those days.

    • But don’t you get it? It’s not happening to them, so it’s not happening at all! It’s always depressing reading when this subject crops up, huh?

    • The assumption that because someone is a white male they have “never been a minority” is patently absurd.

      I’ve got news for you, the world is chock full of people who are neither white nor male.

      I’ve lived overseas, I’ve also for many years worked in a 99% female workplace. I know EXACLTY what it’s like thankyou.

      I also know, that bowing out whenever I felt threatened was rarely the solution.

      • Thanks for the news update, had no idea. Please, tell me more about how it was incredibly difficult for you being a white guy overseas.

        I’ve lived in the Philippines and the Netherlands and had no problems in the latter and was treated as a minor celebrity in the former.

        I used the word minority without a qualifier like disadvantaged / oppressed exactly because of people like m2d2, by the way.

        I also currently work in a majority-female workplace. Can’t say I’ve experienced much difficulty beyond ‘You’re taller than me, can you reach that for me?’

    • So because people are white they don’t know about being a minority, and that some of them can’t empathise, that rules them out from commenting on anything? Sounds a tad racist if you ask me.

      I’ll admit I don’t know shit about being a minority, but I’m also not going to apologise for being born white… However, you can also be damn sure I won’t mistreat you based on the colour of your skin or your gender. What you SAY is another story, especially if I find it especially offensive.

      I have friends of all sorts of races… And it’s for that reason that I am pissed off that you’ve lumped THEM in with people who think like YOU, because they’re nothing like you. For starters they don’t just automatically write off white guys because they’re white.

      An story of note, whether you believe it I could care less but whatever…

      One of my best friends was born in Hawaii, and he’s one of the whitest guys I know. Grew up there going to school… A school where he was one of like three white kids in his class. And anytime I see comments like this I am reminded of him, and all the bullshit he told me he dealt with in school for being ‘the white minority’.

      And to think you would treat him the same as any other white guy, and just assume he knew nothing about being a minority, thus ruling out any comments he may have on situations like this. Solely based on skin colour. THAT is something to be stunned by.

      TL;DR – THIS white guy chooses not to empathise with people who automatically writes someone off based on the colour of their skin.

    • AAAAAAnnnnnnd…. Here’s the race card!

      Shows over people you’re all white racist rapists!

      Discussion is over!

    • I’m Chinese, and I thought that was a terrible thing to say.

      Happy Chinese New Year to all though!!!!
      *spreading love in this miserable world*

    • It’s funny how this form of racism gets the most “up” votes from the standard group that would normally be against racism. Especially since race has nothing to do with Adam Baldwin attending Supanova.

      EDIT: Luckily we aren’t Jewish eh @ad @pokedad @mikeockertz?? Surely that’s the only thing worse to you than being white!

      • I normally agree with the things you say but boy oh boy you’re gonna have to explain that edit to me.

      • Being someone of Jewish decent, I find your suggestion to be quite offensive. But I interrupted your diatribe. Please, do continue…

        • Isn’t that where we normally go after blaming whitey?

          Leftwing casual racism and bringing race into every argument is confusing….

    • “I’m going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess that most of the people on here are [white] guys. ”

      Damn, that’s magical, you can tell someone’s skin color and gender by their typing or thoughts?
      Amazing, so all white people are the same, all males are the same, heck all stereotypes are true.
      I never knew stereotyping and bigotry were how we AVOIDED racism.

      Oh shoot; do I have to apologize to the KKK for their thinking that all people of the same skin color were the same and stereotyping and bigotry were good?

      Because that’s going to suck.
      Wait, maybe we can claim it’s only good when YOU do it. That would help, right?

  • Anybody else notice how recently the feminists, the activists are the ones being bullheaded, myopic and bigoted more than the so called racist, sexist and homophobic people by trying to get everyone to agree with them by trying to get people whose opinions dont line up with their own thrown of a convention?
    What was that about not wanting to give him ‘validation to voice his opinions’ by allowing him to come? But you sure as hell want your opinions validated by making him not come.
    Is everyone so blind that they cant see the inherent hypocrisy in play here?

    • How are you so blind to not see that A does not equal B?

      When a person in power tries to further reduce the safety, rights, or quality of life of the already disenfranchised, they deserve to be vilified.

      When the disenfranchised fight to have said powerful person removed from a place of power, they are not disenfranchising the powerful.

      These are the exact kinds of back and forward arguments that happened with women getting voting rights, with aboriginal people getting human and other civil rights, with gay people being allowed civil rights today, with transgendered people being able to exist without a constant barrage of abuse and danger.

      • What hyperbolic hypocritical bullshit.

        A person in power? Adam Baldwin? How is he reducing the safety, rights, or quality of life of the already disenfranchised?

        Imaginary oppression by a guy turning up to sign an autograph it’s that clear cut.

        You’re using your own bigotry to try and counter bigotry.

        • I’m not going to argue with you, mypetmonkey. You are the most hilariously childish bigot on these whole forums.

          • Mighty bigoted of you to say.

            You might be pushed to explain your accusation… But hey why bring fact in when you can just scream BIGOT/RACIST/SEXIST really loudly?

  • Remember when conventions were about showing your enthusiasm about pop culture?

    I don’t like that this “controversy” has turned into another gamergate argument, i understand that people don’t like this guys for good reasons, but why ruin it for those who genuinely are a fan of him?

    Conventions are for everyone, they aren’t echo chambers for your political ideals, just because someone is for or against gamergate doesn’t mean they should be denied the right to go to it.

    I don’t even know the guy, but i’d feel bad if he got kicked out and some huge fans of his miss out. It’s the same if someone against gamergate was in the same situation, i wouldn’t want them to not be able to go because pro gamergate people would be angry.

    As for safety concerns, those are legitmate, but altogether an unfair generalisation of people who are pro gamergate, if someone is going to the convention to harass people, then they are a terrible person, and hopefully security will deal with that.

    How about we all get along and be nerds together, okay?

  • A better response than boycotting Supanova (we should support local things like this as much as we can so they keep going), would be to go to Supanova and boycott Mr Baldwin’s panel, his signing and pretty much everything he’s in. Even if that means missing a Firefly mega panel. That would show we like and support Supernova, but we dislike Mr Baldwin and he can go to hades.
    A guest that pulls no ticket sales is not a guest that gets a call back.
    As for the misogynist brats that are purported to follow in his wake, let them come.
    We, as a community, are better than them, and keeping that community alive and well is worth fighting for and is an achievable aim.
    Strategies for making sure that everyone, regardless of orientation, feels safe is a more productive use of time than picking up our toys and going home.
    Perhaps what Supanova really needs is a panel about how to combat online and F2F bullying.

  • Problem: a c list actor from the deep south with deep south, ultra conservative values, who also hates playing videogames, gets invited to a convention that has a lets all be equal attitude,unfortunately, he lit the fuse of the nuclear bomb that has became a cancer of the nerd community
    solution: invite either steve price or alan jones, since both have good experience with being not that extreme a conservative

  • Dear Boycotters,

    Thank you for boycotting Supanova. Adam Baldwin is a completely arrogant and rude douche. Gamergate? I have no idea what that is! I don’t care about that. He’s just a really horrible and shitty person. So why am I thanking you, boycotters? You’ve rocked ‘nova. They will take this as a set back and use other means to get good publicity again. How? Through bigger and better guests to bring the fans back. Remember when Oz Comic Con came into the scene with Stan Lee and Patrick Stewart one weekend, Norman Reedus another, William Shatner another, Benedict Cumberbatch another, Orlando Bloom another? Yep! That rocked ‘nova before to up their guest game! Back then the biggest guests they had were Harry Potter side characters. Now, they’re catching up with Stan Lee, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cullen, George R R Martin, etc. Who knows who the guests would have been this year hadn’t ‘Nova gotten the competition they needed from OCC. I say Boycott away! Who knows… maybe we’ll finally get Mark Hamill (who’s in the US$90,000 per weekend price range) or Bruce Campbell or Andrew Lincoln or Peter Dinklage… and with SHORTER LINES!! Thanks again, Boycotters, and yeah maybe thanks to Adam Baldwin as well.

    yours truly,

  • I am pro-gamergate. Allow me to describe people’s fears. I am an atheist liberal left-libertarian. I am pro gun control, pro-choice, pro vaccination and I support socialist views. I have never harmed anyone in my life, you could honestly call me a pacifist. I am currently doing a Batchelors of Social Sciences Majoring in Psychology and Criminology. Meet the monster ladies and gentlemen. Oh and yes I do not spend my time plotting to kill all the women on the planet *rolls eyes*

    In all the time I have followed Gamergate I have run into something Adam has said only once and it was in reference to the first tweet where he used the term “Gamergate”. Perhaps he is relevant to some people but he is not relevant to me nor is he the reason I supported the movement in the first place. I rarely see him discussed or referenced in any capacity. He is not an idol that we worship ffs. I do not believe he poses a real threat to anyone and I am tired of this “We should exclude anyone with views we don’t like” sort of mentality.

    I can’t wait until next year when someone says “Right-wing people, religious people, non-white people, anyone over 6 feet tall and anyone named Barry, make me uncomfortable” and the petitions roll out to ban all these people. If you can show Adam has done something illegal or has plans to harm people, ban him. Otherwise, be an adult. If we banned everything that made someone uncomfortable then we would all be living in bubble wrap. Part of growing up is dealing with uncomfortable situations. I assure you, there is not a single person there who will not find someone else disconcerting for some reason.

    I get it, you don’t like me because I don’t think people should be ostracized due to a difference of views. I think I hold this view because I understand history. There was a time where non-believers were “ostracized with an axe” because their ideas were just “uncomfortable”.

    (Btw, yes there was a petition to ban him and the author of this article clearly desired him to be banned. People have the right to not go wherever they please for whatever reason, just as I have the right to consider your reasoning silly.)

  • Ah, yes, he will attract harassment, because he spoke pro-gamergate things. Disregard the fact that no one manages to show proof that GG is a harassment “movement” (its a consumer revolt, actually). But lets focus on one thing: those nasty gators attending our events!

    Well, here is the thing – we have been going to “geek” conventions since way before GamerGate. Baldwin or not, a lot of people that align themselves with GG will attend suprnova, as well as other, similar events. Will you just avoid going out from home because you might meet us? And if that happens, what do you think we will do – scream “GO HOME GAMER GURL!” in your face…? Really?

    I do have a tale of harassment from someone that is aligned with GamerGate that went to a convention (MAGFest) cosplaying as Vivian James (a sort of “mascot” of GamerGate). You can read about it here:

    Frankly, it is a lot more dangerous fo US to go to these places and identify ourselves as people who believe in the ideals of GG than to any of you people.

  • It seems a lot of the against is ‘Think of the crowd’s that’ll attend because of him!’

    So, in that spirit, I can think of three types:

    * Firefly Fans
    * Chuck Fans
    * Mass Effect Fans

    After some thought, the group I’d be most concerned of him drawing in would be the Mass Effect Fans, simply because of the amount of FanDumb that fills that particular group. However, since its a Firefly panel, the world should be safe.

  • Hey it’s capitalism at work. Don’t like don’t buy. Can’t claim ethical righteousness till you take the iPhone out of your pocket and the CottonOn shirt off your back though.

  • to boycott an event just because there’s someone with a differing opinion there is just stupid and unprofessional. I dont agree with all of AB’s opinions, but I sure as hell ain’t gonna boycott just for that reason alone. I can understand if people are scared that AB’s gonna attract gamergaters, but fact of the matter is, the Firefly fans will outweigh the GG’ers by a mile.

  • Supanova only care’s about the Money they can bring in, and not the Attendee’s.
    So many Incident’s with people have Happened at Supanova’s in the Past and no 1 did anything about it, I myself was Evident to a very Dangerous Incident that i saw happen right in front of me at Supanova. I Notified Staff and put in a Complaint, Never got a Reply about the complaint they just Brushed it off. Because the person who caused the incident was a member of the so called Inner Circle of Supanova.

  • Incidentally… if we were to go back through our histories of chat logs I’m fairly certain quite a number of us wouldn’t be allowed at Supanova.

    Either way this is such an overblown load of shit. If you believe you’ll come to harm at a convention for whatever reason, that’s unfortunate and sad. But all I’ve read in every single comment related to safety is baseless exaggeration and hyperbole in the extreme.

    Im going. Im not pro or anti GG. like angry joe said, fuck all those people who wanna ascribe a label to me. Im gonna meet Jane. Get his autograph because I love firefly and I WONT bring up this shit at all because Im positive as hell its the last thing he wants to speak about either.

    • I can understand the fear that people, women in particular, are feeling about this.
      It’s certainly not baseless fear, seeing as to what other Gamergaters have done thus far.

      I myself wouldn’t go see him (because apparently he is homophobic, and judging by his twitter feed, quite toxic in general), though I wouldn’t boycott the convention either.
      I’m not one of the people feeling threatened though.

      You have to admit though that when there is a large portion of the demographic feeling as though there is something to be feared, then there is more than likely something wrong.

      They should have waited till next year when this whole gamergate nonsense / BS has gone away to invite him.

      • Not really, if I don’t agree with someone I don’t agree with someone. A ‘large’ portion feel the other way. Personally, I don’t give a shit what anyone thinks. I love Firefly and I’m going to meet the man who played Jane, shake his hand (if he will) and thank him for playing Jane and his role in Angel as Marcus. Because I like the guy *as an actor*. Same as I like Tom Cruise *as an actor*. I don’t care about their off-screen persona one iota. I don’t follow their twitters or personal lives.

        I don’t *care* about his personal beliefs, it doesn’t *worry* me what he thinks. I wish more people would adopt that train of thought. I don’t go to bed at night worrying about Adam Baldwin, I don’t shower thinking ‘What would Adam Baldwin do?’

        Just because a group of people think one thing, doesn’t make them right, nor does it necessarily make them wrong.

        But it sure as fuck doesn’t mean I have to side with ANY of them over all this blown out ridiculous bullshit from BOTH parties.

        • Woah woah woah, settle down, buddy!
          We’re all friends here!
          I’m not saying you can’t like the guy. You can like whoever you want. That’s nothing to do with me.
          My understanding was that the fear was around the likely crowd he would attract (Gamergaters), who have been threatening women.

          I’m sure he’ll behave himself just fine, which is why I said a better time to have him would’ve been when all this gamergate stuff is over.

          • I’m just over both sides. Both sides are acting like victims, both sides are threatening each other (yeah, they really are now) one side just gets more publicity about it than the other. Like Angry Joe, Total Biscuit and Jim from Jimquisition and even Boogie have all said, this has all blown out into such a stupid thing that people with their own agendas have taken over both sides of the matter in equal measure and perverted both sides original causes which were, incidentally, noble on both sides.

            I keep mentioning both sides, because after exploring what the intention of both was, I can’t fault either really. I think there was merit to both. I just think as it went on, it got ridiculous and stupid, like any drawn out argument… see: any internet argument *ever*.

            And sorry if you thought I was going at you, I wasn’t, just expressing how frustrating it is at times when stuff like this goes on and on and on and on and on way past its used by date lol.

          • Hahaha, I fully agree, this whole gamergate “drama” is unnecessary and has gone on way too long.
            Stuff like this issue only drag it out longer though, unfortunately.
            That’s why I thought not having him at this year’s Supernova would’ve given it time to die down so that he could come to next Supernova with no issue.
            Just trying to think of compromises really.

            Everyone is thinking the worst anyway!
            Everything should go smoothly, I think.
            People go to Supernova for the convention, after all, not the politics.

    • *labels Weresmurf as “doesn’t care guy”*

      Let me tell YOU Mr Weresmurf… I’m very, VERY glad the things I say with friends aren’t written in stone somewhere, because my sense of humour is just terrible.

  • Whilst I still can’t understand how prejudice against an entire community and insinuating they’re all the same is supported so wholeheartedly by the media and even insinuating that Baldwin’s presence alone is what constitutes danger when “these people” (just getting into prejudice mode since it’s cool now) could just attend anyway and retaliate with Law and Order style sexualised violence. Presumably so they can “level up”, right?

    Existing prejudice aside, voting with your wallets and sending a message that you simply do not share the ideals Supanova is exhibiting is at least a tactic that treats others with respect (insofar that any fan of Baldwin will still assault them in some way, watch out for Browncoats! ) whilst calling for some of your own. I’ve got a feeling this would be way more effective anyway. I still can’t get over the selective prejudice though; that legitimately makes me feel unsafe since now the perceived likelihood of me assaulting someone can be entirely based upon the media i like. Yeah, that’s ok. Thanks for the heavily considered judgment.

    I’m actually genuinely concerned that I’m going to be seen as member/ supporter of Gamergate because that’s what’s happened in the past. Any scrutinising voice is labelled as such. There’s no word for people who attempt to think holistically instead of politically. Good on them for having their legitimate concerns heard, shame on them for their political tactics. I wonder if we can finally solidify prejudice and cultural and political fear-mongering as fully-supported strategies.

  • And here’s kind of the whole problem with #gamergate, the false equivalencies that arise when people in positions of privileged feel even slightly ruffled.

    You’re claiming you ‘feel unsafe since now the perceived likelihood of me assaulting someone can be entirely based upon the media i like’.


    You may ‘legitmately’ feel that but you’re so wrapped up in your own world you have no idea what that word means.

    ‘Unsafe’ at a con is where a woman is constantly leered at. Where she can have a random stranger physically touch her body to cop a feel. Where sexual assault is a possibility.

    These are documented con experiences for women, going back years. They are not uncommon. And beyond that point, sexual assault in general is a reality for most women. I know women who have been grabbed off the street and raped in alleyways in broad daylight. You may not understand the level of threat many women experience at even the ‘slightest’ negative male attention but at least try and respect it.

    I know many women who go to cons and while most of them have great experiences, some of them have horrific times and that’s all it takes to make it bad for everyone.

    Cons should be a totally safe space, where you can just relax and enjoy your interests. But they aren’t. There’s just a significant percentage of guys who are scumbags. This is present in almost any large group, but it seems especially so when you have a combination of some dudes with social issues and women cosplaying in skimpy outfits.

    Yeah, most guys at cons are fine. But it only takes one, or two, or three who feel that it’s OK to stare, OK to make sexual suggestions, OK to grab some ass ‘jokingly’, OK to take candid images without permission.

    That’s unsafe.

    In that something REAL and BAD can happen to you.

    Outside of delirious fantasies, nothing REAL or BAD will happen to you based on your overblown terror of allegedly being judged based on the media you like.

    Which by the way, isn’t happening. No one has really linked Firefly to any of this.

    Jayne is a character.

    Baldwin is an actor who portrays that character.

    These are not the same thing.

  • Incidentally, anyone who skips Supanova because of Adam Baldwin and misses the opportunity to meet GEORGE TAKEI????

    Get your head read. Immediately.

  • Except that what they and you have done is define “harassment”, racism, misogyny, etc. as “disagrees with me.”

  • I sure hope he’s going to be at Worldcon 2015 “Sasquan” in Spokane WA this Summer, as I’m planning to attend! It’d be a great way to weed out these intolerent whiners!

  • If a bunch of whiny politically correct bigots don’t want to go then it makes me wish I could be there. I’d certainly feel safer at a sci-fi con knowing it won’t be patrolled by dishonest sanctimonious people telling me I’m being a fan and nerd wrong. and who think they have the right to shame or hurt anyone who might make a dick wolves joke someday.

  • How big of an outcry over this is there, really? Is this simply an overblown story when in reality only a few voices are heard complaining about this? If not then this is the dumbest display I’ve seen in a while.

    Your thoughts on Gamergate are irrelevant. His opinions politically are irrelevant. I am stunned to hear that artists, among all else, are also boycotting this con. I am curious how many of those artists just weeks ago drew tributes with the text ‘Je suis Charlie’ in the name of freedom of speech. Suppressing peoples views and trying to sensor opinions is wrong, oh except when it’s a view and opinion I disagree with. Good job. Really driving home that message that people are too childish to put their own pride behind them.

    Has he said some dumb things on Twitter? Was the man you’ve never shared a conversation with in your life a meanie-bo-beanie? Because of this, you are willing to throw all respect for freedom of speech out of the window and spit on what it stands for to throw a hissy fit about him, an actor, being invited to a con to sign pictures of himself because he has a differences of opinion. Outstanding.

Show more comments

Comments are closed.

Log in to comment on this story!