Unrelated kinda, but a Black man actually once wrote a book named "Nigger" that was pretty good. I read it in college. It was about the history of the word, what it means, when and why you should consider it powerful or not. It was very interesting. Context matters with words, it's always embarrassing when my students refuse to say or write "nigger" even in a scholarly context.

Anyway...

I do agree there is way too much labeling on both sides. There's also too much exaggeration on both sides. It's the nature of internet debate.

I'm not a fan of labels, but admittedly I'll always carry a few that I both like and hate. They're something that goes through life and in culture and we do deal with them, and sometimes we simply use them to show differences between similar, but vastly different things.

I use the term Social Justice Warrior as a line of separation from Social Advocates. I tend to view that Warriors take things a step too far, willingness to use the stuff that they hate because they tell themselves that the ends justify the means. And I'm not going to lie, it's very easy to fall into that trap, it's very easy to start losing that compassion that people would argue that Social Justice is supposed to carry.

Social Justice isn't something new, hell it's a part of Christianity and in some of the teachings of Christ (At least, how I have viewed them), and it's nothing new, you help the people who aren't able to pull themselves up so that we can all better ourselves. That's not a bad thing inherently, in fact it's a fairly noble thing.

But back from my short blurb. I simply choose to leave a line between the two so when I say one thing, it becomes obvious who I mean. Social Justice can be taken too far, too seriously, used as a rocket launcher when it needs to be a helping hand. It can be used for exploitation and oppression, it can take ideas people wouldn't have problems with and use them for censorship and abuse.

Actually, Here, that's an article written by the guy who was trying to push trigger warning labels on The Great Gatsby and King Lear. He explains some of the trappings better then I, and maybe explains why I use SJW as a label.

I kind of look like that hardcore one - I mean, glasses, beard, headset :) But I had to google Red Ring of Death.

I guess that's something for us older people now. ;)

That ad campaign deserves it. That was a bit silly and ill-advised, especially now and heck, I remember a couple people where it sounded as if the Sims wasn't so casual.

That's how I see it as well.

I've said many times that I agree roughly 90% with the points they try to make, but they just way overdo it on the frequency, hyperbole and viscous attacks on people who don't agree with them fully. They actually drive people to the opposite side of the fence by being so intolerant of discussion and disagreement. I had to stop going to Rockpapershotgun because despite agreeing with most of their views I was just tired of getting hammered on the head by them every day, and tired of their smug attitude about it.

There are also crazy sexist maniacs on the other side making violent threats and spouting nonsense like "women should know their place" as well. Extremism has no brand loyalty, it exists everywhere on every side of ever debate. I'm against extremism in all forms, I think it's our responsibility as humans to talk things out and find common sense middle-ground.

That's exactly it for me too. I generally dislike the sexualized way women are portrayed in videogames, but the attitude and fanaticism with which so-called SJWs approach it rubs me the wrong way.

Gamergate now has Andrew Auernheimer on board. There is much rejoicing. And I thought the Yiannopoulos guy was ideological baggage enough.
http://weev.livejournal.com/409913.html

They really could have kept him in prison a little longer.

Good lord, that new Verge article is horse shit. Utter horse shit.

No, I'm not going to link it. They don't deserve views. Just... ugh. Worst thing I've read since that awful "Gamergate STFU" rant that showed up on Gamasutra a few weeks ago.

It's really hard to get past the "anger" part and to the "constructive discussion" part when garbage like that keeps popping up.

Granted, that rallying cry at the beginning struck me the wrong way.

Whatever, read this one instead.
http://www.firstpersonscholar.com/we-will-force-gaming-to-be-free/

It's less forcing games to be free, and breaking the stranglehold ideology has over the news that covers it. The Tropico review is a perfect example, the writer essentially disliked how the game gave them options, and they CHOSE (Key word here) to act like a typical dictator, only looking at it at the end with a sort of horror that they blamed on the game. Another player on the other hand, doesn't need to lock out elections, doesn't need to assassinate political rivals, they thrive by building the city up, but that's a bit tougher, just like in real life.

I'm not doing this for some grand motivation of freeing games, and I don't think a lot of people are either. We simply want ethics to rule over ideology, we want something in place to prevent people promoting personal friends and being unprofessional. I don't want to see journalists pushing personal agendas when they're job is to inform us, because that's what blinds people.

I think game developers can make the games they want, can hire who they want, can do whatever they want short of being unprofessional about what they do. But I also think that the people running the news sites are going to cherry pick what pushes their agendas, or what they can get out of it, and that scares me more then anything.

Are games going to change in 10 years? Yes. Are more women developers and female characters going to come forth? Yes. But we can let this happen naturally, we can encourage people to make their own games, or characters. We can encourage more people to get into the skill sets needed.

But you know what else we can do? We can trust the GAMERS, the CONSUMERS to make the choices that are best for them. And time and time again, I see people complaining like they want us to be mindless sheep, and to take what we're given like it's a gift from god.

I'm replying to myself, hmm, is this the online forum equivalent of talking to oneself? Oh well ...

I would again humbly ask you to please consider sponsoring this project. I'm in no way affiliated with these guys and don't necessarilly agree with everything they have to say, but if you weigh up the overall situation we all find ourselves in you will understand the realization of the "It's Time" factor. This is fairness.
@StingingVelvet You claim to be Devil's advocate, but I'll take this statement at face value "There are also crazy sexist maniacs on the other side making violent threats"

I'm no fan of extremism myself. But ... Examples? Aside from Anita Sarkessian's claims of being threatened which have been all but disproved. Not to play down the genuine horror of violence, but statistically the "crazy sexist maniacs" are a tiny minority - the overwhelming majority of both men and women are good and decent human beings and yet time and again this is what is focused on. It's destructive and dehumanizing.

But the problem isn't that there is bias on the different sides of an argument - of course eachside is going to have bias for their own team, if you will. Take a few steps back and look at the bigger picture and you will see the real problem. The problem - and it is a problem - that is mostly being overlooked or at least given secondary status is the fact that the extremist (for want of a more accurate word) side is the one being given (or at best just happens to have) the loudest voice.

If you are anywhere in the "first/western world" and you do a quick straw poll you realize that today most people are really pro-feminist in the true sense of that word and I would consider myself somewhat of an "old school" feminist. But what's happening now? This is a forum full of gamers (I hope that term hasn't morphed into something derogatory) so I presume everyone has seen at least a part or some of a Feminist Frequency video by Ms. Sarkessian. I will again presume that most people on this forum are reasonably (if I may use that word without offending) well informed about computer/video games. Therefore, you will realize that Anita Sarkeesian's presentations are an example of the manipulation of facts and of video game gameplay etc being used by those claiming to be feminists fighting what they perceive to be sexism in current computer games.

Here is a great example of the manipulation and alleged dishonesty being practiced by so called feminists claiming to be against sexism etc in PC games https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuRSaLZidWI&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A

An honest and healthy debate about sexism, gender bias etc in games (or any other aspect of a person's life) can't be had if people can't get accurate information. The situation is further exasperated by the fact that the "mainstream" media have picked up the Sarkessian style argument and run with it - and man (is it OK to say that?) have they run with it!

So when you add these facts together you will understand that until the bias of both the "mainstream" media and some "alternative" media can be countered by more reasonable balanced views from authentic feminists as well as people "on the fence" and from genuine gamers who know that they are being most unfairly and dishonestly misrepresented, most people will not have the information they need to understand what is going on. That is why documentaries such as The Sarkessian Effect need to be made.

And because this is not just a problem restricted to gaming it is impairing the individual's ability to make decisions that will affect their lives for years to come. Dishonesty, hate, prejudice and "professional victim-hood" are destroying the possibility of a fair discussion in our society and not just in the gaming community.

Interesting article on the controversy: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/10/twitter_is_broken_gamergate_proves_it.html

I found the part about Twitter particularly interesting, specifically because I suspect this wouldn't have been a Twitter issue if discussions hadn't been systematically killed off elsewhere.

Also, Sara Mayhew's been tweeting a lot of sense, choice quotes are and [url=https://twitter.com/saramayhew/status/519998752153956352]2.

I can't disagree with Twitter being broken, it's painfully obvious that trying to create anything of substance involves half a dozen tweets and by that point most people ignore it. The conversation threads are horrible, and it's way too easy to just let yourself get angry because it takes less work.

I do find the tweets rather interesting, and speaking of the behavior, I also noticed that GaymerX basically got bullied to go from a neutral position to calling Gamergate a hate movement, while all Gamergate has basically just wished them the best and moved on. I don't know if that's changed in the past few hours, but I'm disappointed in how far some people are willing to go.

There was another person, an author, who found themselves having to now deal with Amazon withholding royalties due to mass plagiarism reports, I will see if I can find the tweets, but that's an overall shitty thing to do.