BruceVC

Okay look I am trying to be more understanding towards the offense you guys feel around how you feel gaming journalists have treated you But I'll be honest I am battling with it for two main reasons You guys have never cared about gaming journalists before and what they thought. You guys have always basically felt that gaming journalist are corrupt and there opinions don't matter. In the past I have used various gaming websites as a source of information and been told " LOL...why would you take that website seriously " I have been told numerous times that words don't matter on the Internet and people musn't get offended and people must grow think skins. How many times have I posted links about bigotry on the Internet and expected people to be horrified and the normal response is "its the Internet, deal with it" So I see a weird inconsistency with how some of you apply this feeling of being outraged, and I don't understand it. Maybe you can explain to me now why there is such discussion about what gaming journalists have said...surly they are just words that can be ignored? It bothers me because I could have never imagined the extend of their influence, it bothers me because every reputable website is printing their side of the story. Even though by the own admission there was no story and only ran after they became the target. It bothers me because on the face of so much corruption there are still people nitpicking about the matter, saying that this isn't like Dorito-Gate or that this is just how things get done. It bothers me because this has actual repercussions that are clearly visible and everyone is ignoring it. For me this is something from a conspiracy movie, because I've seen how most of the events went down. I've shown interest since day one and now I'm seeing how they get to write the story and keep on doing the same ****. If there was a moment to oust them and to bring some measure of dignity to the field it is now. So you might say that i'm a bit more emotionally invested than usual as I consider this to be important. I'm sure you know how that's like. Good post, and I do understand what its like to be emotionally invested in a particular topic. That's how I feel about almost all the topics I discuss or raise, for me its almost impossible to separate the emotion from the facts when you want to discuss something

Okay look I am trying to be more understanding towards the offense you guys feel around how you feel gaming journalists have treated you But I'll be honest I am battling with it for two main reasons You guys have never cared about gaming journalists before and what they thought. You guys have always basically felt that gaming journalist are corrupt and there opinions don't matter. In the past I have used various gaming websites as a source of information and been told " LOL...why would you take that website seriously " I have been told numerous times that words don't matter on the Internet and people musn't get offended and people must grow think skins. How many times have I posted links about bigotry on the Internet and expected people to be horrified and the normal response is "its the Internet, deal with it" So I see a weird inconsistency with how some of you apply this feeling of being outraged, and I don't understand it. Maybe you can explain to me now why there is such discussion about what gaming journalists have said...surly they are just words that can be ignored?Comprehension isn't your strong suit. 1. There has always been a distrust of gamnng journalists, see doritopope. The difference between doritopope and catching a journalist having a personal relationship with a developer is that there wasn't a concentrated effort by the whole of gaming press to deny corruption and silence/discredit detractors after one of those instances. 2. There is a difference between "I0wnZU" the anonymous douchebag making empty threats and harassing someone than game journalists using their press as a means to attack people. One is an anonymous being that you can not stop or even identify, the other is in a position of authority to ok influence and inform. Reading about what a terrible misogynist dinosaur gamers are from a gaming website is going to carry a little more weight and authority than some anon in a CoD match calling me a **** bitch and informing me that he would like to **** my fat pimply ass after he uses up my dirty whore mother. Well I am trying to comprehend your perspective but as I said I am finding it inconsistent. But thanks for responding. In response That's a fallacy, no gaming journalist is saying there isn't an issue with the gaming journalist industry. Even the cracked article you posted mentions this. But once again the point is that the focus around this corruption is on Zoe Quinn and her sex life instead of the real issues, see this link from 2012http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/10/26/all-the-pretty-doritos-how-video-game-journalism-went-off-the-rails/ There was very little said about this type of issue in the gaming industry, in fact it went under the radar without you guys giving it a second glance Okay the whole "gamers are white, male misogynists " insult from gaming journalists was a badly conceived marketing strategy which seems to have done more harm than good in the greater cause of gender equality. I don't see it like that but I accept that you guys see it like that. Point taken

I appreciate your honesty, so you aren't really offended. This whole event is more a source of amusement? I can understand that, it has been entertaining. But for me I still take bigotry in the gaming industry and RL seriously. But I understand we all have different perspectives around what bigotry is and how we address it

That's not possible and its not something we actually want from a Western perspective because despite the fact that some countries criticize the USA for imperialism and "interfering in there sovereignty " the world expects the USA to get involved when it comes to perceived military action. Just look at how "weak " Obama has been accused of for not attacking Iran and Syria IMO its important that the USA continues to provide the military capability to intervene militarily in various conflicts because there are valid cases for it.

Okay look I am trying to be more understanding towards the offense you guys feel around how you feel gaming journalists have treated you But I'll be honest I am battling with it for two main reasons You guys have never cared about gaming journalists before and what they thought. You guys have always basically felt that gaming journalist are corrupt and there opinions don't matter. In the past I have used various gaming websites as a source of information and been told " LOL...why would you take that website seriously " I have been told numerous times that words don't matter on the Internet and people musn't get offended and people must grow think skins. How many times have I posted links about bigotry on the Internet and expected people to be horrified and the normal response is "its the Internet, deal with it" So I see a weird inconsistency with how some of you apply this feeling of being outraged, and I don't understand it. Maybe you can explain to me now why there is such discussion about what gaming journalists have said...surly they are just words that can be ignored?

Well that is the concern actually, there are many people in Scotland who question the military involvement of the UK in various areas. So it would have been highly unlikely an independent Scotland would have been involved in any UK military missions. And obviously this would have weakened the overall UK military mission going forward

When a bunch of SJWs decided that "gamer" meant "sub-human mostly white males" instead of "someone who plays games". And if you really need someone to explain to you why an op-ed that uses ED articles and anon tweets as proof is bad, you're either being obtuse or a troll. Of course I am gamer, by definition a gamer is someone who plays games. That's me But we aren't really talking about that now, does that article even mention the whole "gamer " furore ? He is just saying some gamers as a way to describe basically everyone in this debate and that's the good and the bad amongst all gamers, I don't think he is playing the old " all gamers are white, male misogynists "

No what idea what you mean? Can you explain further Lets discuss the article, another good quote from it "But for women and men who are less selfish than I am, the continued harassment of women is obviously a bigger concern than an indie gaming sex "scandal." And there's another weird logical disconnect, because the same people who harassed Quinn think they're helping women" For me one of my points has always been that you guys are focusing on the wrong issue, the apparent sex scandal is not as serious as the abuse that women face in the gaming industry. Honestly what is more important to you? The fact that thousands of people felt that crude sexual insults are appropriate or the whole " sex scandal" Orog read the article, you are reasonable person, I would like your input?

The issue being if Scotland had really gone independent then I see Wales and Northern Ireland were discussing this as well and then suddenly you have England by itself. Of course this would have been unlikely but its more the "lets go independent" sentiment that concerns me And the West isn't really divided on key issues, like Russia's interference in Ukraine. Its just typically the same countries that are prepared to send troops to most conflict areas. And these countries are normally the USA, UK and France

No chance, it never ceases to amaze me the types of ridiculous threads you guys will post in support of your perspective. Trust me you will post worst links than this KP, I have confidence in you I'm just joking by the way and I'm not sure why you think this article is so bad, it really covers the core issues accurately? It raises some excellent points. For example it says around point 2 "Even though Quinn's critics are troglodytes disguised as functional human beings, they have a point in the sense that video game journalism does has ethical problems. There's an uncomfortable relationship between advertisers, developers, and reporters, and journalists often find themselves bribed or pressured into having a certain opinion. What does this have to do with Quinn, you ask? Nothing, I'm talking about a story from 2012. That link summarizes a number of questionable practices by gaming journalists, most of which you've probably never heard about because they don't involve an unpopular woman. No guy wants to send sexual threats to a middle-aged man, and lord knows there's no desire for nude pictures of a slightly overweight dude's flaccid **** (which is why I feel safe taking so many nude selfies)" I understand how outraged and hurt you guys feel by how gaming journalists have treated you, you have my sympathies. But why have you guys never raised this endemic corruption before in a such a vociferous way ? Why did it take a allegation about a women having sex with some obscure gaming journalist to galvanize you in such a way? We should discuss this article in detail because I genuinely want to know what is so terrible about it? Read more: http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-ways-gamers-still-suck-at-dealing-with-women_p2/#ixzz3Dj5N7w20

Its basically a foregone conclusion that Scotland will stay part of the UK, I'm very happy and relieved :dancing: Despite jokes from some of our UK members I thought if Scotland had left this would have fundamentally weakened the entire UK and Scotland in the long term. And that's not a good thing for the West, "united we stand ..divided we fall Anyway good news, I'm going to buy some Haggis for lunch as a way to recognise this whole event

Okay I now see where you misunderstand the principle of inclusivity. And I need to explain this to you but I can't right now as I'm about to start an afterhours software change at a customer, I'll try respond later but otherwise I'll comment tomorrow. Think how exciting it will be, you can wait in anticipation the whole night

I see you couldn't resist mentioning Isabella's clothes...you are a naughty boy Nonek....a very naughty boy Yes you right, the objectification of women in games can be subjective. For example I think the lovely Isabella represents a perfectly acceptable female character but for many she objectifies women. I suppose you can't please everyone. But take the latest Duke Nukem game, I played it and thought the female representation in that game positioned women in an insulting and vacuous way Also you are right in the sense a developer can create any game they want with no regard to what people may think. For example a developer can create a game where black people are seen symbolically as monkeys or where only gay people are the targets of a killing spree. But then they must accept the SJ storm that will descend on them and the obvious and understandable criticism that will follow To be aware of what some fans will expect from a game or rather won't accept is not hard to understand. Many development companies already do this as I mentioned, its not a big deal So what you are saying is let market forces decide? If so I utterly agree, that is the only true test of a games worth in the long run. And if a game deals with brave subject matter such as racism and homophobia, like the examples you mentioned, I would positively applaud it for presenting a realistic depiction of the world, rather than shying away from content that is not politically correct. So in summary developers can make what they want, the market will judge them and games are and always have been inclusive to almost everybody. Men, women and children. I'm glad that's settled. Mmmm...you trying to catch me out....you sneaky Nonek. But I don't fall for such stratagems A game will generally live or die through acceptance by the market as obviously this represents revenue generation But you must realize this doesn't always reflect what we are talking about when we say inclusivity For example Bioware would still be making loads of money around there RPG if they hadn't decided to include same sex Romance. Why do you think they decided to include this as a Romance option?

I see you couldn't resist mentioning Isabella's clothes...you are a naughty boy Nonek....a very naughty boy Yes you right, the objectification of women in games can be subjective. For example I think the lovely Isabella represents a perfectly acceptable female character but for many she objectifies women. I suppose you can't please everyone. But take the latest Duke Nukem game, I played it and thought the female representation in that game positioned women in an insulting and vacuous way Also you are right in the sense a developer can create any game they want with no regard to what people may think. For example a developer can create a game where black people are seen symbolically as monkeys or where only gay people are the targets of a killing spree. But then they must accept the SJ storm that will descend on them and the obvious and understandable criticism that will follow To be aware of what some fans will expect from a game or rather won't accept is not hard to understand. Many development companies already do this as I mentioned, its not a big deal

How exactly are you concluding that it's a 'generational' thing in the first place? Is there a recent influx of games that use the Rock Paper Scissors dialogue minigame? And in planescape torment, your toon is immortal, and you end the prologue with the ability to cast resurrection 3x per day. There's a ton of things that are 'old skool' about D:OS. 1)There's no level scaling mobs. 2)The fact that your party members can *die* in the first place. 3) Health doesn't regenerate on its own. 4) None of that quest marker BS. 5) Spells and Abilities have to actually be found in the world. You don't just automatically get them on level up. Just the fact the game doesn't have quest markers makes it pretty old school for me

He uses a prosthetic leg

So what would you like to know about the word inclusivity, I assume you mean in the context of what we ask for when we say " us SJW want games to be more inclusive" ? What I said in my previous post. So what would you like to know about the word inclusivity, I assume you mean in the context of what we ask for when we say " us SJW want games to be more inclusive" ? What I said in my previous post. Short and to the point, no frivolity around your posts. I can respect that Its actually an excellent question Nonek, an excellent question. Because many people assume when us SJW say we want " inclusivity in games " this means a paradigm shift around how games are developed. But the good news is it doesn't mean that at all, there are just some reasonable adjustments that need to be considered Also the word inclusivity is subjective to some SJW but I would say most of us agree on two important points that we would like games to include Less objectification of women in games. There is nothing wrong with the positioning of aesthetics around the female form but it needs to be done tastefully and in way that doesn't make people feel uncomfortable. Also female characters need to have a real purpose in the game outside of eye-candy Also we need to have female protagonists and female lead characters as a choice. Many companies like Bioware and Obsidian already do this but then you get Ubisoft which fails dismally in this regard. This shouldn't apply to indie developers who have limited budgets and purely from a cost perspective may not have the resources to offer male and female characters So that would be main factors around inclusivity IMO. But others are welcome to add more

Chronic masturbators? Seriously though I fail to see what inclusivity measures need to be included for games to aid minorities, colour blind mode is a very nice addition, as is a game that can be played mouse only for those whom are movement restricted, subtitles are good for the deaf, but all these are already being implemented to some degree. The wife has no problem playing games, except with poorly designed and insulting caricatures like Isabella (and fairly much all of the other poorly written characters) in Dragon Age 2, dragging quality down. And she does not mind playing as a man, an alien, a robot or a woman as it is escapism. I'm curious what more is needed? The fact that women now outnumber men in some forms of gaming says to me that it is inclusive already, are they overcoming hurdles to do this? It would be nice to see more ethnically diverse worlds, and that is something i've long hoped and campaigned for, though obviously not at the cost of the worlds internal consistency. In a dark age or medieval setting where there is no magical transportation, and the average man or woman rarely ventures beyond the local market town, ethnic diversity will not be as feasible, except at seaports and recognised trade-routes. Crossroads of the world such as Byzantium, where one can see a great mass of peoples from all over the world, drink in foreign cultures and become lost in the bustle and pace of the exotic. Or Rome where all Christendom comes in pilgrimage, traders come to partake of the legendary wealth and emissaries from far distant lands arrive to politic and spy. I'd be curious to hear what inclusivity measures are needed. Hi Nonek "waves" I see you have descended from your anti-SJ fortress to ravage and desecrate the land of people who believe in equality in gaming But I'm impressed you were able to dismiss Isabella without mentioning her attire, so that's progress....you getting there So what would you like to know about the word inclusivity, I assume you mean in the context of what we ask for when we say " us SJW want games to be more inclusive" ?

I didn't even think about that and I have no issue giving it away to someone. I'll find out how to give it away. There is no point in it being wasted because I won't play the Beta

Okay that makes sense, thanks for the feedback

Sup All I am one of those who is basically avoiding any news about the game until its official release so that everything is exciting, I respect all the people who are studiously partaking in the Beta and identifying bugs and effectively making my final gaming experience more stable. So kudos to you all, good work I wanted to ask something that I don't think will ruin the narrative for me and that's around party interaction. Does the Beta include getting to know what motivates your party members and who they are? And also I know Romance isn't part of PoE so if the Beta does contain chatting to your party members has anyone noticed the lack of Romance options is a negative factor in the overall party interaction? Or is this not really a big deal in the greater scheme of the Beta?

I don't think its unreasonable what the Ukrainian government is trying to do. There objective is simple, "" to route out any stinking Commie sympathizers who want to drag Ukraine back to the benighted days of Communism " And there must be certain Putin apologists who need do to be identified and removed from interfering in the destiny of Ukraine which is to align itself both politically and socially with the West? You can see the logic Zora?

Just out of curiosity, why do you assume the person didn't read the article when making that comment? Though I can't recall that I've ever bothered to type it out, that's been my response to a lot of the articles I've encountered. I'm all for equality, but honestly, ranting at people and demanding equality isn't the way to get it to happen. It turns off people like me who are for "the cause", but don't want to be associated with it because of the insane rantings of the hardcore (heck, sometimes, just for a moment, it makes me hope the whole thing fails, just because I get really sick of being told how horrible I am and how easy my life is because I'm a straight white guy, and I don't want the ranters to get the satisfaction of success.) Edit: Meant equality, said inclusiveness. Late night posting = bad. I used the wrong word, I should have used "people don't really try to understand it", not read it So some people will gloss over an article about some SJ development and assume its some kind of guilt trip or personal attack on them and not see the big picture. And this applies to certain people from the SJ side who also don't seem to respect a dissenting opinion

Okay, thanks for the heads-up. I'll keep that in mind

Well if you'll give me a second, I've got a rather large wall of text I think you should read. Allow me to give you a hypothetical: I'm disabled....that part's not hypothetical, that's true. I was born with one leg and have been disabled my whole life; having two legs would feel as alien to me as having one leg would feel for you. Being disabled and seeing as we're at least decently uncommon in most regions, there's this effect where oftentimes if people hear touching stories or news stories involving disabled people, they get forwarded to me. You may have heard African Americans complain they get stupid comments from white people when they're the one black friend. It sorta functions like this. Bladerunner? Yep, I've heard of him, and not on my own or because I care, but because everyone says "LOOK LONGKNIFE A DISABLED GUY WHO RUNS FAST, YOU CAN TOO!!" Ok one, no I can't cause those costs thousands of dollars and I don't have that, two, if you did some research you'd know those regularly get banned from races for making disabled guys run inhumanely fast with comparatively tiny effort, and three, who the HELL said I have this dream of running fast wtf?? The recent story about Kanye West? Yep, got that too. Nipped it in the butt early and posted a blanket statement response on my facebook (which I rarely ever use) to stop them. So as you can see, I too can get involved with "discrimination" or "stereotyping" or whatever you wanna call it. I put it all in quotations cause I wouldn't exactly call it that and I see no reason to freak about it. Now let's say, hypothetically, that I were to tell you all of that DID bother me and that I find it utterly disgusting how under-represented disabled people are in video games. You think the representation of female protagonists is barren? Try the disabled. I could easily compile a list of female protagonists that's by no means small (Samus, Lara Croft, Faith, Kazooie of Banjo and Kazooie, Bayonetta, etc etc), but you'd struggle to name a single disabled protagonist. And let's be real here. There is a serious struggle amidst the disabled community. But it's not the one you'd expect. And I think it's one YOU'D be wise to listen to and hear out. So now for the hypothetical. Let's say I came to you claiming I was mortified by what Kanye West did and that I think we should ALL boycott him. After all, that jackass made a spectacle of two disabled people right? What an ****, everyone with common sense should boycott and shun the guy much like Ceelo Green is being boycotted for his rape comments, and anyone who disagrees simply doesn't understand, sympathize with and respect the disabled community enough. We don't have a fancy word like sexist or racist (proof of how discriminated against we are!!), but if there was one, it'd apply to Kanye and anyone that refuses to boycott him. I get the sense that I could say the above paragraph to you and you'd be behind me 100%. Or hell, maybe you even read it and thought it's a good idea with extremely valid points, hypothetical or not. Here's the problem.... When you lack a personal motivation where the situation effects you directly and on a personal level, there's this element of not knowing how much is too much. You cannot accurately judge the difference between "equality" and "entitlement." You can, but if you do so and you get an angry, entitled disabled person screaming at you for how hateful and discriminatory you're being...? You'll likely back down and take his side and adopt his stance. You dunno if he's right about you or if he's actually entitled. So, in fear of being discriminatory and with an attitude of loving everyone and wanting equality for all and knowing equality is the right thing to do, you adopt his argument and do as he says. So how do you know when you've wound up being a shield for an entitled person who's self-interested and doesn't actually care about the cause beyond how it can benefit them personally? Someone who doesn't only want equality, but rather wants their group to have an advantage and to get more, and all that only due to self-interest and the fact it'd profit them themselves? (aka if they succeeded and got their group special recognition, these very same people would turn on their fellow members of their group to try and argue they THEMSELVES deserve even more special recognition) In all due respect, I think that's your problem. You mean well - NO ONE is doubting that or saying you don't (cept 1 or 2 who I'm sure could possibly read this post, calm down and apologize to you before agreeing with me. Maybe, who knows) - but the way you're taking the stances is rather....blind. And you may think to yourself: "well my methodology isn't perfect, but at least this way I assure equality!" That's just it: you don't. I'll wrap this up with some real life and relevant stories. True stories that actually happened and affected me life. Some time after I was born, my mom had an encounter with a disabled man in town. The disabled guy was well known. Why? Well he was stuck in an electric wheelchair and largely paralyzed (could move his mouth somewhat and anything above), and more importantly, he was a f***ing ****. He got jollies out of being **** to people or even ramming them with his wheelchair, but often times even the victims themselves would LET HIM out of pity for him, or a distorted belief that it's ok to be an **** cause you're disabled. Well one day this guy tried rammed his wheelchair into my mom for whatever reason and she was understandably pissed, but of course only walked away. (say of course not because he's disabled, but because most people would walk away and not start **** or pick a fight) Later that same day, she happened to see him out the window of a cafe trying to ram another person, though this time he hit the curb and tipped his wheelchair. He was stuck there, helpless. After some consideration my mom decided to go pick him up and put him back on his wheels. After doing so, she asked "are you ok?" His response? Though he struggled to speak, he managed to piece together a nice "f*** you" before speeding off again. This guy, luckily, was kind of a point that had influenced how I was raised. When I was born, my mom was freaking out cause I was missing a leg and she didn't know how to raise a disabled child. By mere chance, she one day awkwardly approached a disabled couple that would later be my Godparents. Both were paralyzed from the waist down and one would later work under the Clinton administration in disabled rights (and passed away somewhat recently, RIP :C). When my mom approached them asking for help, at first they looked at her like she was crazy, but then realized why she was asking. When she asked how to raise me and what to do special for me? Their response? "You don't." You don't do anything special for me. Sure ok, if I'm in a wheelchair one day and kindly ask that you get the door for me, sure, but don't go thinking omg I'm disabled so that gives me a pass to be as lazy as I want or whatever. Be realistic about it. Best advice they could've given. I was raised in such a way that, well, just last week I met friends of friends and it took them DAYS to realize I was disabled. What finally gave me away was we had to walk down a ridiculously steep slope that had everyone uncomfortable from walking on it, and I had to warn my friends in advance that I wasn't sure how my prosthetic would handle it and so I'd need to take it slow. I don't go screaming and crying if someone takes my disabled parking space cause I know I can manage. I DON'T need it; save it for another guy who does. Likewise the bus system for my town expects people to surrender their seat to those who need it more and sometimes someone will notice my leg and offer. No, I don't need it, I'm fine. Me standing is probably about on par with you standing, so I feel it'd be unjust if I took that offer unless I truly am in pain that day. The above-mentioned struggle within the disabled community? It's a struggle that so many of us grow up to be spoiled **** BECAUSE we're constantly given special treatment by people too afraid to have an opinion and say "I'm not discriminating, you're just being an entitled little ass." I've seen it so many times and it's sad. So many disabled people grow up lacking confidence, spoiled rotten or expecting special treatment because people give it to them. The pity and attention feels good and yes, as kids who don't know better, they feed off of it. You're just as capable of hurting a disabled person by enabling a personality-damaging trait to develop by pitying them as you are capable of hurting them via neglect. Humans adapt. Charles Darwin never said the strongest, the smartest, or the fastest survive. He said those most capable of adapting to their scenario, their living conditions and the hand that life dealt them are the ones that will survive and flourish. As such, yes, the disabled adapt to be disabled. I've gotten multiple looks for how fast I am on crutches, I've found I've got a surprising amount of upper body strength from them, and I can carry mutliple bags of groceries home and up stairs...on crutches. For you? You'd fall on your ass and hurt yourself, but this is my life, so I've adapted. People need to recognize that and realize just because the situation seems tough for you doesn't mean it's tough for the disabled person. Try to be objective with it. Ask yourself if you think they truly need the help or if it seems like it's being used as an excuse. If they ask you to open a door ok, but if they ask you to go buy their groceries....? Motherf***er if you can't buy your groceries cause you're in a wheelchair, then you're dumb as rocks, you can't adapt and you deserve to starve to death. Tell him to buy his own damned groceries. And just for clarity, no it's not outrageous if a guy on crutches requests help carrying groceries up stairs. :D I'm more daring than others and don't fault others for not trying. I often don't learn to run with new prosthetics because the advice on learning how to run I'm given is "JUST GO AND U'LL FALL ON UR FACE A LOT BUT DUN WORRY U'LL GET IT" and I think "yeeeeah screw that, it's not like I need to run that often in a day-to-day scenario anyways..." And the Kanye West story? Everyone asks me how offended I am. The truth? When I heard someone took off their leg and waved it in the air to show him? Lucky bastard!! I wish I got handed a free excuse to take my leg off and wave it around. You ever seen how much people freak out due to that? It's fun as hell. Used to stick my leg out the school bus window for that exact reason until I got told that's too dangerous and had to stop. I promise you the two disabled people at Kanye's concert was ok, and the disabled community does NOT need nor deserve a free pity party because some idiot forgot we exist. So yeah, please, take that all as a lesson. Take it as two. Take it as a lesson that you cannot and will not fully understand minority groups you're not involved with, but you can't let that lead you to adamantly defend ANY minority who screams discrimination, because some of them ARE infact just entitled and using their position. Likewise, sometimes protecting a person like that actually harms them. It encourages bad habits and bad personality traits which eventually robs them of more than they realize; guess how many friends disabled wheelchair d-bag who would ram people had? He had about as many as he had functioning limbs. ;P I get you want gender equality. A LOT of us do. But this? This isn't it. You want gender equality? Go ask corporations why women get paid less. Go confront them about their admittance that women who want kids are less likely to get hired. If you really wanna tackle the issue and want a practical solution, the largest and most significant frontier where gender inequality is actually a real thing is the work world. Video games? Specifically when it involves messages spouted by people like Anita? Yeah, this isn't it. I'd be willing to bet the female protagonist quota in video games exceeds that of female protagonists found within movies or gender-neutral (aka not My Little Pony, GI Joe or shows geared towards one gender) TV shows. And more importantly, the very group so fervently spouting this feminist dogma has been caught in lies. MULTIPLE TIMES. It's time to sit down and think it through and realize if you want to support feminism, this isn't the way to do it. As I've said before, if anything Anita & Co. are HARMING feminism by making the word become synonymous with "dishonesty" and "zealot" for an entire community of people, and I'm sure that the less intelligent members of that community COULD actually learn the wrong lessons and develop into sexist individuals because of it. Ever seen a racist black guy who became racist BECAUSE of all the times he was targeted by racism? I have, it's one of the most tragic things in the world cause you wanna sympathize but at the same time the guy's a ****. They exist and it happens. And it could happen here too, with some men or gamers concluding that women are all selfish liars that seek special treatment and attention, and if they don't get it they'll try and ruin your life. Please, don't be a part of that and don't support that. ;P The side opposite to them is by no means perfect either, but it is in my opinion the more logical choice. I avoid dishonesty like the plague, regardless of the party's gender, race or other status. That's an excellent post, thanks for sharing. You've raised some good points. I'll respond generally I believe that human beings in a modern world should conduct themselves in certain way that doesn't offend or hurt the feelings of others, especially if they are in the public limelight and have been made successful through a career like music which is dependent on there fans. Like Kayne West . How people should conduct themselves may seem subjective but its not that difficult to understand what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. So for example what Kayne West did was completely insensitive but did he know the fan was disabled? It doesn't seem like it but he does need to apologize for obviously creating a very embarrassing situation. But to he honest I think Kayne West is completely self absorbed and narcissistic. He is a celebrity who cares primarily about one thing, his image and that's fine if that's the legacy he is concerned about. I admire someone like Angelina Jolie much more who has done really good work by using her celebrity status to raise awareness to various causes through the UN You right that I am not a minority in the sense I am not gay, a women or black and I personally have never been the victim of real and sustained bigotry. But does that mean I can't empathize with people who are discriminated against or be opposed to it? I have first hand experience with homophobia and racism and I have seen how humiliating and harmful these kinds of feelings can be . These forms of bigotry are real, there are people who wake up every day who have decided that because of someone's sexual orientation they are automatically a lesser person who doesn't deserve the same respect as a "normal straight " person. And there are people who think that the colour of persons skin automatically means they aren't as intelligent as a person with white skin, And there are people who think that because a person is a female there are certain areas in society and conversations they must stay out of. I am opposed to any of these generalisations that are ultimately based on one thing...." a dislike of a certain person because they are different to you". Its as simple as that, there is no proven genetic difference that automatically makes someone inferior. Its because they are different to you and so some people feel the need to undermine that person because they are different. And I will continue to be opposed to this type of perspective Finally I have said several times that I think Anita is doing the greater cause of gender equality more harm than good because she is confrontational and tends to incite people rather that educate people. But the issue I have is the generalisations we now see on forums like this where the words " SJW " is loosely thrown around as an insult whenever someone wants to dismiss anything that is related to any issue about relevant social justice transformation. For example someone says " we need more inclusivity in games", instead of people actually taking the time to read the article we see comments like " typical SJW rant" So people are demonstrating the exact same behaviour they say they are opposed to, they are painting all SJ initiatives with the same brush. They are doing the same thing that they say they dislike Anita for where she says things about "all gamers " and makes generalisations. They aren't interested in looking at the individual case but they just dismiss it So end of the day most of us seem to agree the gaming industry needs to be more inclusive on certain levels. I think the disagreement is how do we achieve it, personally I believe constant awareness and visibility is necessary because normally people don't change there minds about the status quo unless there is pressure. Because for most people they believe that the current situation is fine. In other words games are inclusive enough. And this is where we have a disagreement of opinion