#Gamergate

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.

I understand the point you are making, but at the same time, I can't bring myself to care about the repercussions of what I say, as long as it's the way I feel. It's not like my word alone is going to ruin the entire movement, and besides, something that has been brought up on a few streams, because this has no central figures and it's such a large movement, there is no way to really target anyone to any meaningful result.

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 didn't say anything about killing anyone, I said I'm surprised that they haven't inadvertently killed THEMSELVES and the reason must be because of the widespread availability of healthcare. Not a bad thing, but at the same time, it has some negative results as well, and these people surviving their own stupidity is a prime example of that.

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.

Pants-on-head retarded does not imply mental handicap, it is used in the same way "papayagot" was used in the South Park episode with the biker gang; basically, it has nothing to do with the original slur when aimed at a specific group or with the use of specific pronouns/adjectives, IE:, the fact that I just used South Park as a way to explain why this shouldn't be a moral issue was pants-on-head retarded and I should feel bad for it.

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.

On this I have to fully disagree, I feel like the major reason this is even a thing is because people are now in a twitter mindset; they don't care about research or facts, they care about the first thing they see, buzzwords used by people that are popular, and a small amount of characters as a limit so they don't lose interest. That is the core of what the twitter mindset IS, and that's why there is so much opposition to gamergate to begin with. It's not just people anymore, it's organizations, entire branches of news media and even the government to an extent, nobody cares about researching ANYTHING anymore, they just want a couple lines of polarized comments that are 100% in their favor, have no grey area, and won't make them think about anything; they want to look at it, point and proclaim the other side is made of demons, and relink it to all their friends so they can talk about how evil their enemies are.

How is that different from what I'm doing, you ask? Because I have put hundreds of hours into researching all the claims made by my side instead of just taking it at face value, and have found that most things stated are either true or true enough that I can still agree with the statement made. It's one thing to blindly hate, it's another thing to hate with lots of research to back that hate up, and not just "he hurt my feelings so he must be a bad person".

And yes, I realize you are not advocating mass censorship, I was just responding in a manner to explain myself.