Which one?

Condescending for your obvious feeling of superiority, as in acting as if you're above the rest, not replying directly but via a reply to my reply instead? And now implying I'm using words I don't understand... :)
Or disingenuous for your dishonest reply implying either that you don't know what is meant by anti-gg or that anti-gg does not even exist?

Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, the above are just my opinions...

Anyway, again trying to take this out of the personal realm, where it shouldn't belong.
Interesting how you immediately assume political arguments must be irrational... no wonder how radical tactics become legitimized with that mindset.

Trigger warning: Sarc (you did double down on the condescension...)
News flash: rational discussion over political hot topics is possible! Suggest you try it some day, you only need to set your ego a bit aside ;)


Edit: You actually did reply directly with your later edit. Thanks and sorry. When I posted earlier you hadn't. Anyway I'm leaving the above unchanged as the disingenuousness is imo itself condescending, I only added the other point as a bonus factoid so to speak...

Even more so, the main figureheads of the movement don't even associate with gamergate. Sommers, Yiannopoulos, Baldwin, Aurini, etc. But still they try to tell me what gamergate really is about. Sorry, not eating that shit up.

The "title" SJW is, of course, ironic.

Please consider for a second why you knew that. Because "Social Justice Warrior" is a term created to be derogative, just like "nig***". And of course it is needlessly politically charged, originating from a plutocracy/theocracy with an extremely narrow, all right wing political spectrum, where any derivative or compound of the word 'social' bears a negative connotation.

Calling oneself "Social Justice Warrior" challenges that shrivelled mindset and self created enemy concept, because users of the term are well aware that no one would really want to slap that label on themselves.

Keep that in mind.

Sarkeesian and Quinn talk about harrassment in the first place... not gamergate. Unless of course you think of it as the same thing. Of course, I'm uncertain how Quinn could ever NOT oppose that label. It WAS created by Baldwin as a pure slutshaming attempt, that is not a point that can be debated in any sensible way. What Quinn actually did - also, not to be denied - was to ask for a new label under which game ethics could actually be discussed, one that wasn't created with the sole intent to put a stamp on her head, one not created by a shit person.

That request was denied, and I still find that telling.

Sure, the swastika originally denoted the sun and could denote something entirely else in the future. But for now, anyone who slaps a swastika on their clothing is creepy to me. It's the very same thing with the gamergate label. It keeps going as gamergate. Even if it was pure philantropy at heart right now (which it isn't), people would still keep using Adam Baldwin's burgers and fries tweet as the basis for their movement "about journalist ethics". That happens to be alarming to proper people.

Gamergate discussions center around who said what on twitter and tumblr, around feminism and the SJW, around the Sarkeesian Effect documentary, around 'professional victims', around who insulted, harrassed or doxxed whom and who didn't, around games that may or may not be games or the degree of diversity that is acceptable in a game. All that has zip to do with the "journalist ethics" bla bla. Actual game industry ethics are hardly ever touched on. And god forbid some gater starts to state goals for gamergate again, because the last ones I've seen proposed straight out fascist control of the press. Like, be "apolitical" (apolitical as defined by gaters) or lose your job. Dark ages man, dark ages.

Tim Schafer makes a single joke mentioning gamergate, the rage machine is going full speed, gamergate supporters are calling him racist, and that's about all I ever get when I search for GDC on youtube.

That is gamergate. That is what my hobby has become.

And that's all of it, that's the goal. Ruining my fucking fun, that's all gamergate has achieved up to now.

It is not a secret why the article was protected. In the first place, gaters trying to spin the narrative in their favor; later, feminist editors were banned from working on the page. It will continue to be protected, hopefully.

Obviously, I need a thousand lines to get that single point across. ;)

But I find it really cute how John Bain advises gaters to get back on that topic, drop the SJW conspiracy nonsense and focus on the video game industry. Teaching gaters how to be gaters. While they certainly know best.

oh dear, comparing GG to the NAZIs again huh.

you see, had tim made a joke about GG, noone would have given a shit. GG gets harassed like shit all the time so whatever. His mistake was attacking the notyourshield. That was the mistake

also, about your fun.
don't forget that pro sjw and fem freq writer jonathan mcintosh literally said games should stop being fun. All gg wants is fair reviews and play their games, without any gender politics being crammed down their throat and being given the label
"Sexist fat neckbeard jobless virgin"

gamers have been harassed like that for ages and noone gave a crap. Anita gets a threat, and everyone tries to burn down gaming

but i feel like i'm discussing with a wall here

I question the usage of a misogynist label for a movement that supposedly isn't misogynist, for more than half a year.

That is all.

Well said.
I'm used to being harassed and seen as some nerd who never have gotten into adulthood because he is playing games just for fun, but this whole gender politics agenda stuff in gaming is fairly new and spreading quite aggressively thanks to all the official shaming of artists and the few honest critics that don't give a shit and just want everybody to be free to do as they please, and yes, I was against shoving political agendas into games before as well, all the military and non-military games that clearly showed america's army as the all-time heroes annoyed me too up to a high degree and now people like Anita and her mob are making a lot of money by criticising and influencing stuff they have no clue about and people actually think they would do this for some other reason than money.

By the way, here are some nice reads:
http://www.historyofgamergate.com/articles

I wonder why there always has to be a label, but in general I agree, although it would most likely be called #gamergate by the opposition anyway in order to denounce it from the very beginning.
The problem is, that the people who are the real threat to freedom of expression, equality and honest journalism (Kotaku, RPS, Feminist Frequency, etc...) simply have no shame themselves.

See? That's what I was talking about two pages ago... You're so busy fighting over the definition of gamergate, its meaning and its goals, that you forget what you wanted to discuss xP Just say what you want to say and don't bother to identify yourself with some undefined group. Problem solved.

Seriously... I stopped asking people what all this gamergate stuff is about, because even declared pro-gg folks can't give me an answer without arguing about it.

How on earth do you reconcile these two statements? Gamergate sprang from Quinnspiracy stuff, sure, but a lot of people (myself included) weren't even involved back then. Did you not see the Topsy spike in traffic using the GG hashtag after the Gamers Are Dead articles? How can you accept that a symbol can change its meaning while refusing to absolve GG of Quinnspiracy stuff despite the sharp influx of people completely unrelated to any of that?

"Things can change their meanings, except for this thing I don't like even though they no longer have anything to do with one other." Seems kind of petty to me.

Talk about a catch-22—if GG doesn't do that, it gets accused of being unfocused and having no clear goals, but when it does, that explanation is used as evidence that it's unfocused (or even more frequently, that it's not about journalism in ethics, because apparently you can't be "about" something if you ever talk about anything other than that one thing).

Derek Smart eats a ham sammich; http://t.co/kEOTtewm22

Thing with Anita is though, and I've probably said this before, that her original 6 Feminist Frequency videos were about tropes and feminism in the media GENERALLY, she barely touched on video games at all, she even went after the geekdom heartland stuff like Star Trek: TNG and you know what? no-one batted an eyelid, she could have gone on creating them from now until the end of time without there ever being a 'geekgate' or whatever
It's only when she turned her attention to video games that everything went nutso bananas and I think, if nothing else, gamers need to ask themselves why they won't allow computer games to be analysed and critiqued to that degree, like ever other entertainment medium is everyday in every media studies dissertation in the world!

Yeah, once Anita discovered that there was a boat load of shit to stir up and money to be made she stayed right where she was but don't hate on her for stumbling on a goldmine - ask yourselves why the goldmine was there to find in the first place!

Because people have given up on Hollywood etc... a long time ago and The Star Trek people most likely didn't even notice this Anita character while gaming is most likely the most important hobby for most teenagers and beyond including especcially all the (offline) calm and shy people that have been bullied in one way or the other their whole life and only want to be left alone. Chasing them and hitting them in their last homeground is nasty.
With attacking gaming you piss off a lot of very different people and some who have been trampled on too much already.

You'll get some answers to this here.

BTW: Have you noticed who often is the bad guy in modern hollywood movies?
The nerd! Watch "The Green Lantern", "Captain America", etc... the young or old nerd virgin is mostly the villain and a weak minded pawn at the same time who gets beaten up by the quarterback on steroids.
Notice that those movies are made from a nerd territory: Comic books.

Gamers have been through this before. Games HAVE been critiqued and analyzed... and that's where the constant attempts at censorship began, way back in the early to mid 90s when the various political groups on the left and the right realized what a booming industry it was. Before the money started flowing and gaming was a back room hobby for D&D nerds, no one gave a shit about game content or setting any kind of standards and practices. The money showed up and all the horseshit came right along with it.

So if gamers seem defensive about their hobby, it's because they've been through the dog and pony show before. This is not the first time people from the outside have barged their way in and demanded to alter/limit/censor or change the gaming hobby itself... nor will it be the last.

Yep, gaming has been heavily bombarded especcially in big markets like Germany and the USA as the presumed cause of killing sprees in addition to all the casual censoring (no violence for Germans, no erotica for Americans, etc...) for decades and it's getting worse:
Now the capitalistic neo-feminists have been teaming up with the usual bullies too, great.

Anita is not Jack Thompson

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/9865-Gaming-Needs-To-Get-Over-Jack-Thompson

I sincerely believe that Anita is NOT pro-censorship, I am AGAINST censorship and FOR Anita's rights to express her opinions and to attempt to 'educate' without being harassed - I see that as a form of attempted censorship in itself!