#Gamergate

I'm not a public figurehead for it, and I don't feel it has anything to do with gamergate itself anyway, it was a sweeping statement that a LOT of people that should be dying from natural causes are not any longer. The intelligence needed simply to exist without inadvertently killing yourself is no longer a factor in our society, and those people are easy to point out particularly in conversations online because it's very hard to unconsciously or even consciously censor oneself online, even if you AREN'T pants-on-head retarded. The worst of this will be found on twitter; for many people like this, twitter is the very first thing they go to in any circumstance, before thinking about it and almost at the same time they register it, hell, sometimes they bring up the page and start typing before they even finish the thought entirely. Stupid inane pomegranate like "someone just looked at me funny on the bus" or "I'm having coffee at starbucks"; because they are now used to posting without any thinking involved, it's no wonder that these massive errors in judgment are now commonplace.

So I spent a while thinking about how to reply to this in a meaningful way. I think that you know that I'm not a SJW supporter of any kind or particularly trying to censor you. What I posted was meant as a reminder of part of why this movement struggles with public perception and that your comment, in my humble opinion, skirted and possibly crossed a line.

1) You may not be a public figurehead, but it appears from your participation in this thread that you consider yourself to be a supporter if not outright member. When dealing with a crowd movement, there exists a double edged sword because every member's opinion matters regardless of their perceived authority. Others in this thread have complained about the misrepresentation of the GamerGate movement because it has been coopted by extremists who fuel the allegations of sexism and misogyny. This shows that your opinion matters.

2) There are a lot of things I could say about this point of view, but I'll constrain myself to the topic at hand. Perhaps you can admit that your open eagerness for this person's death is out of proportion with her actions. She may well be incompetent and reprehensible, but death seems well beyond reasonable discourse. I think one of the problems with the GG movement is the lack of interest in reform. We've seen a number of variably neutral parties come down on either side for perfectly understandable reasons.

3) Your use of the word "retarded" is not only inaccurate but also a disservice to genuinely mentally handicapped individuals. This isn't a major point since it's a common occurrence, but it seems counterproductive to, even inadvertently, bully a group when advocating the SJWs stop doing the same to you.

4) "Censorship" is far from what I'm advocating and I think you know it. My polite attempt to remind you of the perception of you comments followed by your cry of "censorship" is analogous to the repeated misconstructions of GG supporters which are immediately labeled as misogynists. It is no more difficult to "censor" yourself online than it is do to in real life. You just have to remember you're talking to people- real people. I'm not asking you to stop having personal opinions or even stop expressing them; I'm merely reminding that there is a time and a place for everything. I suggest that a thread devoted to GG does not benefit from advocating social Darwinism.

5) Whether or not people post inane things on social media is immaterial to this discussion. You're letting your personal opinions and politics cloud this discussion by turning it into a rant.

not that i necesarily disagree. but with SJW -everything- does.

I'm not saying that we'll ever please them or even talk nicely, but I'd like to keep this a discussion and not some sort of reactionary rant. I think you know what I was getting at so feel free to check the above since I'm not sure I clarified my more moderate position accurately.

I ran across this article while looking for something else entirely. I hadn't realized that I missed the end of GG. It would be funnily inaccurate if it didn't actually reflect the public opinion at large. Instead, it's just disturbingly dark.