"Mens Rights Activists" Impersonate Domestic Violence Organization online. Hilarity ensues.

I didn't say anything about John talking about it, I talked about you and garamet mocking Archangel's hobbies in the exact same way Faceman and Flashlight mocked John's interests.
My wording wasn't at all vague, so I can only conclude you missed the point on purpose.

ahhh they don't bother me.

Gaming is mainstream now whether idiotic dinosaurs can accept that or not.

Besides, if they weren't in a constant state of being extreme hypocrites I would think they were replaced by pod people.

I didn't think you needed rescuing, it's just hypocrisy from people who fancy themselves enlightened irks me a bit.

That's still your insistence that anyone who disagrees with you must not be a true gamer, whatever that is. I play the same games he does; I am not mocking them nor the players. But I will mock him if he thinks that character design proves there's no sexism involved.

Because it's easier to argue against an absolute position that no one actually holds?

Also, it's not just women who are sexualized in games, the men are too. Yeah, they don't stuff them in skimpy outfits most of the time, but they are almost always idealized men. They tend to be handsome, intelligent, tough, witty, strong, etc.

I'm not sure that you've read the thread. If it were as you described, your point would be pretty solid. But the thread is actually about people making death threats and otherwise harassing women who have complained about sexism. Standing up to say such actions are wrong should not generate controversy. And yet, this is Wordforge, so we have people twisting that in to some sort of desperate need to defend the larger gaming community.

Where did I ever say that?
I've never taken the "true gamer", tack, I've said over and over I haven't played a game to completion in 13 years, so how the hell can I even lay claim to that title?
It would be chest-pounding caveman nonsense if I did take the argument in that direction.

Dress it up in self-righteousness all you want.
You and garamet sunk to faceman/Flashlight levels.
You're Will Graham after he skinned and ate a piece of Randal Tier.
You went too far, and now you're ruined.

And I've told you repeatedly, that these so called death threats are the work of a few dedicated trolls from places like 4chan and somethingawful. But you guys completely ignore that and pretend like they are representative of the whole. Because most of the anti-gamer people like those in this thread can't actually handle a real debate on the issue because they don't know enough about it. But they can argue against the caricature of gamers that a few trolls create.

That would be like arguing that WF is a shitty forum full of racists and internet tough guys because someone read a few Tasvir and Sokar posts.

It so totally is.
It's a racist sexist piece of shit board, and Anita Sarkeesian, and Freethought Blogs, and Skepchick, and all their fanboys/fangirls need to destroy it.
Especially Packard.
He's the worst.

So you actually think that we're saying all gamers make harassing death threats?

Take a deep breath, and a step back, that is so not what anybody is saying.

That's exactly the implication being made, that it's most gamers and not a small minority.

And gul.
They need to kill gul.
Rebecca Watson needs to mutilate his cock.
For social justice.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to complain to the board ownership about you giving out personal information about me.

No, just ban him.

It's the Wordforge way.

You've assumed that I don't play the same games; thus misreading my post as an attack on them and their players.

Are you under the impression that I disagree with any of that?

I like pie.

I assumed nothing.

You could have been the greatest fan of that game in the world, and just been a hypocrite.
I don't care either way.
You were being a cock, and I pointed it out.
Now you're being deliberately obtuse to beat a clumsy escape.
Whatever helps you sleep tonight.

I play Zelda, I can has #GamerGate?

Whatever those behind #Gamergate's original intentions, the loudest, most violent, and most vocal have turned it into an excuse to terrorize these women. That it took over from the whole idea of the "Quinnspiracy" in the first place doesn't do it any favors, either. I'm certain there are good people who use the moniker #GamerGate, but they're mixed in with a bunch of very visible assholes who don't have the slightest interest in "ethics in gaming journalism".

The same can be said for the nuts that took over Occupy and the TEA party too. It's a simple fact that any movement or group that attracts any notoriety at all will attract nuts and extremists looking for attention or to just cause trouble.

Only if it's Twilight Princess or Skyward Sword.

On the surface it does seem that way, but with #GamerGate, the whole idea started out predicated on nothing more than a lie: that Zoe Quinn was using sex to get positive game reviews in gaming journals. It was all based on one man's word, for one journal. One man's word that should have been scrutinized before wholesale acceptance, but that's not what happened. What happened was a self-righteous explosion of anger targeted at Quinn, and then Anita Sarkeesian, and many more women involved in gaming. From the moment it launched, it was packed with raging assholes who had motivation beyond threatening rape and death toward these women, even going so far as to try and outright murder some of them. The nuts were there when the party started, not co-opted later.

Fuck Gamergate, there's no pure side to take in that.
All I care is who's a liar and/or an asshole.
I don't care their party affiliation, or crotch-plumbing.
If you're full of shit, you're full of shit, and if you're violent threatening swine, you're that.
I just see it on both sides.
But I CAN see it, because I'm not a team sports person.

You're still using the outliers to define the whole.

Who decides who the outliers and who the 'real' members are?

John is quoting the blog with which the thing started and its main narrative. That's different from other movements that might eventually attack crazies. The argument for GamerGate would have to be that while it was started by crazies, saner people eventually took over. Did they?

Probably the hundreds and thousands of people discussing it and not sending death threats to each other.

But please do remember you asked this the next time someone says all muslims are terrorist or something similar about a group you support.

Like I've said multiple times, you can't discuss the issues for real, so you just argue against the most extreme fringe.

Anyway, I think I'm done with this. It's obvious you guys don't really care, you just want to appear to care about the group political correctness demands you defend.

Interlude:

I will remember, and feel free to remind me.

But Muslims aren't a group I support, and avoiding death threats isn't my gold standard for civilised behaviour, much less maturity about gender roles. So as long as you insist on imagining positions for me I don't take, you neither have a good chance of understanding this conversation, nor of blaming others for misrepresenting other people's opinions.

As I've said two pages ago: If someone has actual data on how many people in GamerGate oppose the beginning and original mission of the movement, I very much want to see it.