Longknife

This gets better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4Lf_rWgZfg Check the comments, you'll see someone link to the celebrinando guy. Spoiler alert: celebrinando linked to himself. He's using this opportunity to promote himself. Appropriately, a comment reads "yes everyone, he is that f***ing stupid."

That is unfortunately a damned good question, as that could be interpreted multiple ways.

Next time someone complains about harassment, remember this well. What's funny is that by the looks of things, this one guy was responsible for a decent chunk of the harassment. If they wished to talk him down, they should've dropped the pleasantries. Reading the transcript and watching the vid, I can't help but feel like they were afraid of insulting Anita while protecting her. They could've EASILY told that guy he's only helping her make money by giving her legitimate harassment cases and giving her a shield to prop up, but instead they were rather weaksauce about it and just kept asking for options.

stap kopying mi pheg i report j00 my bro is mod ur in trubble.

In other news, GGers tracked down and confronted a harasser of Anita. They approached Anita about it and she deleted the message without responding. Yay.

Pretty damn good. The guy should look more into post-modernism, that's pretty much the philosophy of these guys. It is simply: - Rejection of reason - Rejection of empirical knowledge - Rejection of theory - Sceptisism to concepts - Everything is a construct of something else - Personal truths through personal emotional experience, not objective truths through logical statements - Critical theory, "the end of all theories" Now, doesn't all of that sound familiar to this whole debacle? And I quote: That doesn't sound REMOTELY like these guys... :C

And when she combs her hair with her fingers, that's your cue to whip out your junk.

Did this redditer also post to kotakuinaction or how did you find that post...?

It's interesting that this was actually posted in another subreddit entirely, and that the people there already have a suspected name. I might post there myself and just see what comes of it.

We need a screencap with a name. If we get that then holy **** is this warped. I already doubt it though based on the person covering their tracks and saying the message is gone, and that they had just enough time to conveniently post it word for word but not actually screencap it. To truly investigate it, demand a name of a mod from the person, then just confront the mod and ask about it. I'm sure you'd be able to tell from their reaction and personality if it were true, and a liar would probably bail or claim they forget the name.

Or Brussels. Infact, my mistake. Let's just call the Germanic and Scandinavian-based countries too screwy to notice women. Pretty sure the Latin-based countries are quite fond of women. Side-note, is it still a thing that in Amsterdam, the Japanese and Polish tourists stare at the prostitutes and react to them, and the other tourists and locals stare at the Japanese and Polish tourists and react to them?

Really she'd be quite pleased with any country in Western Europe as we're all too screwy to notice women. ...Except for Italy. Don't go to Italy. ....Italy will notice the f**k out of you. If she thinks New York is bad, she will have a mental breakdown in Italy.

And by god that b**** better listen if I start speaking to her about how her pavement is unangemessen laut §43b der ZPO, or by god I'll write her up a letter and force her to visit one of our terrible bureocracies!

Or they could import we Germans. We're too pissed off about people not adhering to our anal retentive tendencies as well as far too practical and capable of questioning meaningless pleasantries that get parroted so much they lose meaning, and therefore we're incapable of greeting strangers and acting friendly.

I have to speak out on this. Being raised by a single mother, I'm well aware that yes, this is an issue. What this doesn't address is that this whole discussion refers to "on average," and much of her citations come from businesses or business-relevant organizations themselves. I would be willing to bet money, for example, that you'd be less likely to see wage discrimination amongst higher paying jobs such as psychiatry or amongst lawyers, but I'm sure this also means a woman who works in a "replaceable" position with a restaurant or tech support is going to receive lower pay. The 23 cent that dicusses is a national average, and I would argue that this actually means certain regions of the country and certain jobs are actually discriminating far more ($1.50 less per hour, for example) while some don't at all. This does not invalidate the claim as it actually means that for certain positions and certain regions of the country, this is actually more important of an issue to tackle. Not long before GamerGate started I actually stumbled across a study where employers were admitting that they will pass over hiring a mother or a would-be mother (woman who would like to have kids) to get out of paying for maternity leave: businesses are logical by design, and sadly this means they sometimes wish to get back that money they might lose via maternity leave and the like. Having said that, I personally wish this were the issue feminists WOULD focus on, and not stupid bulls*** like how big are the **** on Princess Peach. And while I may disagree with some of the methodology Sommers proposed in this video (or didn't propose in some cases), I still can appreciate that we need to look at things realistically and not sensationally. However, from experience of being raised by a single mother, partly in a more old fashioned and conservative culture, I've experienced for myself how she earned about ~$2.50 less than male counterparts with similar qualifications, as that issue came up when she would later sue her employer for firing her right before I was about to get an expensive surgery their insurance didn't want to cover. And no, those guys weren't just ****, cause her current employer now also undercuts her, though thankfully not as drastically.

Like "ethics in games journalism"? So can we agree a lot of these guys are legit unstable?

6:35 "I'm well liked." God damn does this woman ever stop lying?

Source?

This goes beyond the movement to basic customer reactions. For example IGN has been rather neutral on this, surprisingly. I say surprisingly cause they'd be one of the firsts on everyone's list for writing paid reviews. But now it seems they're willing to take this opportunity to reflect and fix that. While I'm willing to give them a pass in the sense of the GamerGate movement in that I won't be encouraging their advertisers to jump ship....I'm still not motivated to read their stuff. I might click an article from IGN if it's relevant to my interests, but I know they write bought reviews so I always take their stuff with a grain of salt and actively avoided their reviews in the past if I could. Should I, for example, feel compelled to now go out of my way to read articles written by IGN or Totilo in support of their actions during GamerGate...? No, screw that. I'm still your customer, I still need motivation and you still have to sell me on the idea you provide a worthy service. If your article interests me, I might read, but I'm not going to be playing sides and supporting certain journalists on the principle of them partaking in positive actions (or rather, neutral actions) during GamerGate. We are the customers, plain and simple, and our motivation to read things written by the standard old names is currently at an all time low. Their problem, not ours, and we should not be expected to keep their boat afloat. Even if GamerGate actively told people to make efforts to support his work, I doubt it'd work, because in that sense people care more about personal motivations.

In high school, I inadvertedly won a prize for writing poetry. The story was that the teacher gave an assignment to write a poem in just one hour for a grade. The assignment was completely sprung on us. Me personally, I did not see how you could possibly be creative in one hour's time, so after 30 minutes of brainstorming and landing nothing, I decided I was out of time and to write a poem about the stress of being forced to write a poem in one hour. Teacher loved it so much she showed it off around the school and submitted it in contests and stuff. Whelp, poetry is one of those things that's considered romantic, so if you can write poetry, apparently you're a charismatic, creative and sensitive soul who can easily swoon any girl you want off her feet. I regularly began to get approached by guys at school asking for critique, advice or help writing a poem for a girl they liked. The stuff I saw was...not good. A lot of the cliches, like "ur eyez r lyk two pools of bootiful watur" and stuff, a lot of nothingness phrases like just repeating "I need you, I want you, I love you, I long for you" over and over in an attempt to create impact, and for me? The number one crime was they never personalized it or made the poem actually about her and what they ACTUALLY like about her, but stuck to the cliches they'd heard on TV shows as though they were some sort of standard that must be included. You could easily take a poem Jon wrote for Stacey, take it and say "don't worry Jon, I'll write you a better one," then give him the one Bruce wrote for Shawntell the next day while giving Jon's to Bruce and the two women and the two men would never suspect a thing. It was bad. Alongside that, I also got people just deciding "poetry = good with women" and asking for advice with women. It didn't help that I kinda WAS good at talking to women and getting them to open up to me, but I was by NO means some player who dated every hottie on the block: I did not date period in high school. Just did not see the desire to and didn't help I was an agnostic in a highly religious town. (and when I got older I also realized I have commitment issues of sorts, lulz. I'm not some sleaze who cheats on women but I am VERY careful about commiting to anyone; I wanna know them DAMNED good before I do) Nevertheless, they came for me for advice and another pattern I noticed: they all asked vague questions like "what do women want?" They seemed under the belief there was some universal answer that would unlock the key to getting a girlfriend, whether it be a big ****, telling them whatever they want or wearing Axe Body Spray. It kind of amazed me that they seemed to view the other gender like a different species rather than...yknow another human, just with different hormones. It was the attitude of wanting to study a new species rather than looking to improve communication skills, which is what they should've been looking to do. A little psychology helps too, cause pro-tip: women want sex just as much as you, they're just a lot better at pokerfacing it and not letting their hormones do the thinking for them. A lot of them thought sex was some kind of chore for women...Though this little tidbit of info isn't exactly relevant here as I doubt this is the advice those dudes on the streets need. But yeah, some guys can be amazingly bad with women. I guess the stress and worry of it all just psyches them out so hard they begin viewing the scenario as this being a different "species" (or something that feels like it) that you need to impress, when in reality it's just you interested in finding another human being with common interests so you can both be happy together long term. I can't really judge cause I was raised by a single mother myself, and supposedly we're God-tier at talking to women (for obvious reasons), but yeah, it's a simple reality that every type of person exists and will always exist, and that includes the guys that are socially awkward with women. There are women that are awkward with men too, they just luck out slightly above their male counterparts in that men are typically considered pursuers, so the awkward women don't feel pressured to try and make a move. Just on a side-note, I found it funny that I do actual think there's a paradoxial "truth" to a "universal" secret to winning over women, that being power. Toyed with this idea just to humor the idea so many guys approached me with, and realized you'll really struggle to find a woman that's not attracted to power. The problem is this in and of itself is not exactly universal and is a vague, abstract concept, as "power" for some women can mean intelligence, for others it can mean physical strength, for others it can mean charisma, and yes for some it's as crude as wealth or the ability to provide. Hell, several might not even have a clear grasp of what they consider powerful and they just feel it in the form of attraction. You can see evidence of this little theory of mine in that many stupid things men do, such as trying to show off how good they are at a sport or game, or having a drinking contest with another guy is supposed to be a display of power. And dunno how much you all talk to women and/or sleep around, but it's no coincidence the vast majority of women are submissive whereas the vast majority of men are dominant. (no I do not ask men these kinds of questions, that'd feel hella gay. I ask the women) Part of the reason I "oppose" feminism (I'm not exactly against it, I just don't consider it's goals realistic or superior to society now and therefore it's pointless) is because I know plenty of women who would be more than happy living their lives in support roles or being submissive. Even on the subject of rape, seldom few people would admit it out of respect and a fear of being judged, but rape is a common bedroom fantasy. Not saying that means society condones rape (or that any of the people who entertain said fantasy would realistically enjoy it or be incapable of treating the real thing seriously), I simply cite that as an example of just how submissive women can be and how ridiculously hard it would be to change that fact of life. But I digress, point was women are seldomly not attracted to power. This doesn't really help though as while having power can definitely attract women, you simply may not qualify for the type of power the girl you fancy actually values. Likewise, this is about attracting them initially, not about actually being and remaining compatible. Take those women who view wealth as power for example; you'd better believe they'd divorce you if you two don't have anything in common and another powerful guy more in line with her personality comes along. Or I personally have had women compliment my intelligence and tell me they fancy me because of it, but I simply COULD NOT go through with it because the woman was sadly annoyingly unintelligent in my opinion: having to explain things to someone over and over gets VERY old for me, and would never fly for what's supposed to be a partner in my life constantly at my side. If all you're after is sex then hey there you go I guess, but personally I think that's a rather miserable little goal to strive for in the long term.

It must be a very sad place where you live in. I (or people here) never had any issues with people greeting you or approaching you. Maybe because a lot of people here are tourists asking for direction or something. But in general I don't have this fear of insane people around every corner. If normal looking people greet you politely you respond politely. I did run into a few crazy people on the streets, but those were the one that talk to themselves and you wonder what they are doing on the streets and not in a loony bin. That video looks so staged it's hillarious. Again just to clarify, obviously you can pick up on people who have different motivations (tourist, lost or confused person, someone who needs help), but I just said that as general advice for visiting big cities. I would agree with the desire to not respond to those people though. My mom used to greet people like that and she got followed by the crazies CONSTANTLY until people finally told her to stop being an idiot and acknowledging them. Wasn't saying "omg be paranoid at all times," it's just generally a good idea to seriously size people up and unless a practical motivation is obvious (business, requesting help, etc), best not to acknowledge in bigger cities. And again that's exclusive for bigger cities, not everywhere else. Is your mom hot? It may explain why guys were following her ? This is going in my signature.

I think you've completely missed my point. I'm saying that if feminism as a collective would merely come forward and define itself and the terms it's so fond of, it would be very very very easy to seperate themselves from the radicals they wish not to be associated with. They could point at their own doctrine and easily explain how these radicals breach it and therefore don't represent them, but this doesn't happen. Feminism is decades old, and yet it's never done this, with various branches and beliefs springing up under it, but with every single one of them all preferring to make the term "feminism" their own. At this point it feels like a very petty and childish battle over a shiny title they all seem to want, and I question why they don't either come together to define it properly (and inadvertently weed out radicals from using the name by doing so) or just walk out and coin a new term for themselves unpolluted by radicals. You may draw a parallel between that and GamerGate and how some have asked GamerGate to change its hashtag to denounce the harassers. But GamerGate actively HAS denounced it's harassers and radicals. There's evidence of this in multitudes of ways. Comparatively, Sommers and Anita denounce each other, but there is no feminist "hub" that throws it's backing behind one or the other, so one does not seem more valid than the other. And through it all, while sensible people can recognize that no, you don't define a group by its radicals, the fact of the matter is that the name "feminism" is currently being dragged through the mud....and this is not the first time. There's a reason Emma Watson mentioned that she's noticing women are becoming ashamed to be known as feminists. This is again yet another side effect of feminism not properly defining itself and all its terms: it allows the radicals to freely trash the name by making it their own. Finally, he wishes to call me ignorant of feminism so this is my fault. It is not my duty to educate myself on YOUR ideologies and YOUR way of thinking. My tone might be different if, for example, let's say David Pakman interviewed Sarkeesian and asked what feminism means to her and I blatantly skipped that video, but this is not the case. None of them have made an attempt to teach, only use the name as a convenient shield and weapon. Again, this is what separates GamerGate from the feminist side. And no, I would not consider feminist frequency to be a lesson in feminism both because it can be blatantly misleading and dishonest, and because while it sometimes does s fantastic job of teaching real feminism tropes, it doesn't do anything to try and explain the perceived meaning behind them. It falls flat as "this is the smurfette principle. It exists BECUZ PATRIARCHY." Ya ok. Don't get me wrong you can draw your own conclusions from such things....but that's kind of the problem with feminism: everyone seems to be drawing their own conclusions and opinions, all under the guise of the same cause, and typically with the end result of hysterics and smear campaigns.

That's exactly the problem. Because as much as you'd like to believe your definition is universally understood and adhered to by all women, it gets interpreted 20,000 ways and isn't even fully agreed upon, which results in the entire movement effectively being a free ticket to call others misogynistic at this point. Just yesterday McIntosh and that guy that loves Hitler were accusing Sommers - a feminist - of being anti-feminism and pro-misogyny. As I said, it's literally a free ticket to make hysterical claims that pull on people's emotional strings. That needs to stop, and until then, good luck to ANYONE carrying that title asking to be taken seriously.

It must be a very sad place where you live in. I (or people here) never had any issues with people greeting you or approaching you. Maybe because a lot of people here are tourists asking for direction or something. But in general I don't have this fear of insane people around every corner. If normal looking people greet you politely you respond politely. I did run into a few crazy people on the streets, but those were the one that talk to themselves and you wonder what they are doing on the streets and not in a loony bin. That video looks so staged it's hillarious. Again just to clarify, obviously you can pick up on people who have different motivations (tourist, lost or confused person, someone who needs help), but I just said that as general advice for visiting big cities. I would agree with the desire to not respond to those people though. My mom used to greet people like that and she got followed by the crazies CONSTANTLY until people finally told her to stop being an idiot and acknowledging them. Wasn't saying "omg be paranoid at all times," it's just generally a good idea to seriously size people up and unless a practical motivation is obvious (business, requesting help, etc), best not to acknowledge in bigger cities. And again that's exclusive for bigger cities, not everywhere else.

Again I just wanna say this not so much in regards to this issue, but a little (important) life knowledge: there ARE cities where it's typically a bad idea to respond to a stranger saying things as simple as "how are you." I'm not talking a guy with some flyers to pass out or someone obviously trying to promote a product or whatever, but some random person chatting you up. This applies to both men and women. There's sadly some unstable people out there and you simply don't know what'll trigger them, so it's best to ignore them. No eye contact, no vocal acknowledgement, no nothing. Just keep walking and if you feel followed or in danger, head towards someplace you feel safe. While I actually do have respect for the modest and humble efforts by that Hollaback group, I also think it's still a truth that this issue cannot universally be weeded out so long as mentally unstable people walk the streets. I would dare say those men who followed her (and maybe one guy that was dressed very odd) do not count as good evidence of "harassment" in my mind solely because I question their stability. They could've easily acted weird towards anyone, but attractive people unfortunately attract crazies as well and thus have to cope with them more. You have made an interesting point, maybe in some places you just cant take the chance of greeting someone back because they may be mentally unbalanced and will misread your intentions? This probably isn't common but it is a valid concern Well I come from San Francisco, and we're pretty well known for our diversity. We house everyone, including loons like Anita. Little known fact (which I wish was more known because IMO this is the most beautiful true story that humanity as a collective has to offer) but San Francisco once had an emperor: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton I can't really speak for other major cities, but I do know the Bay Area is an example where yes, we house the crazies so people know to be "on guard" around strangers. I would definitely imagine New York to be similar in this regard, and I'm sure there's plenty of other cities around the globe that would practice the same habits of being careful who you talk to or acknowledge.