Its just annoying that everyone is saynig "what's in SJW?". If you genuinely do not know what these SJW people are than watch this vid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhmOx0zThGg

"If you genuinely do not know what these SJW people are then be grateful and move right along. Nothing to see here."

Fixed it for you.

So people like Sargon and Thundef00t should just ignore these people rather than give them attention?

Works for me. In fact, I have no idea who they are, or why I should care. People waste far too much time and effort on this kind of bullshit.

This was my opinion at first.

Than I saw Australian K-Marts and Targets removing GTA 5 from the stores because of "Violance against women"

After being told many times from these kinds of people that they are not gonna ban our games :P

(Music Chime) BLALULULULULULELU!

MANAMANAMANAMANAMANAMANAMANAMANA FATMAN AND SLOBBIN!

This is for OP Must watch!

If that is true, then it may be a form of revenge: Somewhen, somewhere the "losers" were treaten bad in real life by female assholes, and now that's their answer.
(Just saying neutrally.)

Just to balance the story a bit, these two articles has something to say on the issue.
If anything, that study seems to prove what sort of exaggerated claims one can make with a small study...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/07/21/more-terrible-journalism-erupts-over-new-video-game-sexism-study/
http://nichegamer.com/2015/07/re-used-halo-3-study-completely-skews-results-to-frame-sexist-agenda/

I mean it's kind of an oxymoron? wouldn't an asshole relate to the plight of women?

what?

who said that?

I don't know what any of that means.

THIS!!! in spades!

VERY IMPORTANT AND A VERY MUST WATCH

About this video

Feminists and other leftists are useful idiots who serve only to destabilise the society. When the goal is reached, they will be "lined up against the wall".
1984 interview with a former KGB agent and Soviet diplomat, Yuri Bezmenov.

Your social experiment has some major flaws.
1. The researcher should not impact the outcome of the experiment. You have some history here and you may get downreps simply because some users don't like what you say in general (it's something that shouldn't happen and you can't do anything about but it still possibly impacts your experiment).
2. The researcher should not suggest the outcome of the experiment. 'Come at me' suggests that you expect to be bashed \ downreped.
3. I'm a white heterosexual male and I accept female gamers just as I accept any other people. Still I don't need to announce it anywhere. I find it kind of natural and strongly suspect that most people feel the same. I find it strange when someone believes it to be something unique.
In conclusion, your experiment proves that:
- People in general don't like when someone exposes their worldwiev and makes a big deal out of it.
- People in general don't like when someone starts a topic that will probably lead to a flamewar (with strong suspicion that the flamewar is OP's intention - see: point 2).
Your experiment doesn't prove that male GOG users generally don't accept female users \ gamers.

Fuck women!






















...and populate the Earth!

look dude i don't wanna take the wind out of your sails or anything but

1) The first thing you linked is an opinion blog. The crux of its argument is that the report does not literally say "losers" or explicitly say men made "frequent, nasty" comments and that this study reveals "only a glimpse", which is kind of how science works. On top of that, the study actually does provide numbers on death threats and other such "nasty" comments, and also explicitly breaks these down, including an analysis on comments that would qualify as hostile sexism versus simply negative, neutral or positive. The study itself gives that it's not perfect and only had so much data to utilize, which is every study ever.

2) The second thing you link, from "nichegamer", hoo boy. Read their about me.

"We’re a website run by true gamers who love games. We have no room for jaded biases, politics or social agendas. We’re independently owned and answer to absolutely no one when it comes to what games we cover, and the way in which we cover them.

We’re proud to be based out of Philadelphia – the birthplace of American freedom, although we cover games from all over the world. We are committed to bringing you original content, insightful opinions and the full and accurate news without any fluff or agendas."

But the actual article is a desperate clutching at straws. It cries foul over the study being conducted in 2012, and that the game was old in 2012 (never mind that studies take time to process and I'm not sure why they even mention the game is old). It then argues that they didn't say "we obtained from the original data" rather than "we played", except the study actually fully divulges where the data came from and how they observed it.

Then the article comments that men were not examined for sexist comments. The study, however, gives that the only vocal players were all male. I can only assume nichegamer is now confusing homophobic with sexist, or just didn't actually read the study hard.

Nichegamer then complains that the article is not controlling for age, nationality, location or ethnicity, although how you're supposed to control for that in xbox live halo matches is beyond me. They complain that the authors of the study didn't examine players who didn't talk. Considering the study is specifically about talkers, and not people who have [I]no meaningful way to communicate[/I], why is this a shock?

Nichegamer then wanders into a personal anecdote about their college professor, and then complains that this study only found a small number of players making sexist comments. That's not what the study was about though. The study was about negative comments in general, with sexist comments specifically a subsection - and the point was still that it tended to correlate with players who were worse, and more often when the researcher "speaker" messages were said in a female voice.

Then it cries foul over the study mentioning ranking and using kill/death ratio in a cooperative game, except that if you actually take the time to read the study, it discriminates between people who aren't killing much and people who are actually dying often. This is something they should know if they actually took a stats course.

It complains it draws conclusions about "low-status males" in society, when the study is discussing status [I]as it applies within the game[/I]. The article ends on a defiant declaration that the data was manipulated to make people appear sexist, then narrowly focusing on specifically sexist comments rather than the apparent fact that those who spoke with a female voice tended to draw more negative comments in general, but the study is entirely forth-coming about the results, the limitations, and so on.

I would ask you to consider that nichegamer, whether they realize it or not, are in fact pushing an agenda of their own without actually realizing that they are. In fact, looking at their editorials, I would say that their bias is readily apparent.

shit fucking... can't you idiots stay in your containment topic???