not him but
craft beer
rooms full of embarrassing childish stuff that you call 'the den'
crossdressing
getting mad about videogames

not sure if i belong in this thread but good luck twitter fans

Rusty_Gunn
Easy. Concepts like honor, respect, duty, and curiosity. They aren't excursively male traits but they have been generally treated as being masculine, and they are very good traits for anyone to have. There are even games that help promote those ideas. I might love playing FPS and other kinds of action games, but I also get certain satisfaction out of negotiating with the Master in Fallout, or saving a little sister in Bioshock, or just talking your comrades in the Mass Effects games. Gunning down hordes of enemies can be fun, but it's good to have other options, and opportunities so you don't get bored with the experience.

While I do not drink though I do like brew.
Hold on right there! it's pronoun is "Man cave" my legos, transformers, various female action figures & my 'Puter is good shit & I'm lord of it. :P
Nah, I don't even have the body suitable to wear a kilt
for me it's getting mad about those who only want to force video games to be for a very niche group of people who don't want games instead of putting out something & let the market actually decide.

It's funny you mention those since those are the very concepts those against gamergate are against

Honor
AGG: "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets"

respect
AGG: there is no respect, if you don't agree 110% with the group you can become a "good target"
https://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2xu488/why_is_everyone_talking_about_brad_wardell/
About the least "GG" link I could find about that

duty
AGG: journalists don't have a duty to their audience

curiosity
AGG: "listen & believe"

Options: that's what I want as well & IMHO what Gaters want as well

here's a snippet that curdles my blood
"Today, videogames are for everyone. I mean this in an almost destructive way. Videogames, to read the other side of the same statement, are not for you. You do not get to own videogames. No one gets to own videogames when they are for everyone. They add up to more than any one group.
On some level, the grim individuals who are self-centred and myopic enough to be upset at the prospect of having their medium taken away from them are absolutely right. They have astutely, and correctly identified what is going on here. Their toys are being taken away, and their treehouses are being boarded up. Videogames now live in the world and there is no going back.
I am convinced that this marks the end. We are finished here. From now on, there are no more gamers—only players."

Dan Golding - The End of Gamers

It's biased because of its source. That site has a very definite "leaning", but regardless, even the quote you give doesn't say what you initially claim. He never even implied there was anything wrong with that scene in Absolution, not at all. Instead he was pointing out how the new game will just be more grounded with fewer off-the-wall missions...

As to Anita and being unethical, let's see...
Using clips from YouTube videos without credit....
Claiming to have played all the games she mentions, yet she gets things wrong about many games that anyone who has played them wouldn't...implying strongly that all she saw of the game was the YouTube clip...
Cherry-picking and generally misrepresenting games to further her premise without regards to the truth...
There is a nice start...

Not a journalist, but as a media presenter slash critic she has used other people's work, in the form of video and artwork, without permission or attribution, and then tried to obfuscate the issue by claiming harassment (?!) when the creator seeks said attribution.

Aside from that, Anita has been the subject of articles by people who have exo-professional relationships with her that do not have the proper level of disclosure (i.e. I'm writing about Anita but I also donate to FF/her patreon. See? DIsclosure is not difficult!). The fault here doesn't lie with Anita, but she certainly benefits from it.

That's without getting in to the nitty-gritty of her intellectual dishonesty by cherry-picking data that backs up her hypothesis.

And I would like to point out that my beef is mostly with journalists who, perhaps, need another go at Ethics 101, but it always seems to be people like you that bring it back to Anita and Zoe, rather than people like Nathan Grayson or Ben Kuchera.

Yes you should have honor, and respect me.

When I show none and disrespect so I can steal other people video clips.

What! How dare you ask me to be honorable and respectful, only you need to be honorable and respectful. I can insult you without facts because that is my privilege. How dare you insult me with facts.

That is harassment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edyIhTIir_c
Francis knows what's up.

Well i was just about to link that one too, and he's not the only one

I know Boogie likes to keep neutral on the whole gg, so I will respect that, even though he also seemed very critical of the UN talk outcome. He did address some of the concerns that GG has had since very early on. After all, while other things caused gg, I'd say the "gamers are dead" articles were the thing that really made gg take off.

So since some of your points to my post have already been addressed by other posters I will focus on the two points still not addressed:

- Here is the video where she states herself that it can be harmful for her perspective of feminism if women make their own choices, around 2:20 she starts talking about it. You should watch the whole video it is quite......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHDbZ2hHtlg

- John Stuart Mill wrote a book about Utilitarianism, right. He also wrote a book "On Liberty".

The link points to CHAPTER II OF THE LIBERTY OF THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION.

In my opinion that book should be mandatory in schools for everyone, I am half through it. If she would be really interested in proving her points to be true, she would engage in discussion. First to ensure for herself that her assumption/theory is true and second to refute the arguments made against it. That would be a scientific approach.

An existential quantifier means only that it exists and that I won't argue against, but is it significant? She says yes, others say no. She assumes intent by the developers without any proof for it apart from so called "internalized misogyny".

<span class="bold">Brave New World</span>

Pretty dumb to claim you know what books I've read. And I already said I'm in no way associated with GG.

You argue like my 4 yo daughter who also denies basic facts ("Dolphins are fish!!") because it doesn't suit her world view at the time. Or like a religious nutjob: "If you have read the Bible you would be forced to believe it!!"

But you are right on that one: But confirmation bias leads you to grabbing straws when you look for arguments supporting you basic premise, and to ignore and deny arguments that contradict it. And that's exactly what Sarkeesian does.

What has that to do with his book "On Liberty"? Some examples may be outdated, but if you would read the 2nd chapter you will understand that what he wrote is as actual today as it was back then.

thats a bid questionable when they claim they take so long and need that money so they can "play the games"

The fact they often lack own footage seems to indicate they did not play it themselves, since recording with fraps is easy (for such short skits the free version would do, and with 400000$ they can afford the paid version no problem)
neither is it their job or anything close to smart to constantly shit on their readerbase.

And if only they would actually do their job and inform themselves before writing

In fact Quinn is not even that relevant. Aside from latest UN related events, she has done literally nothing. That is why she as called a Literally Who by GG.

MaGo72
Alright, let me ask a different question that gets the same point across. What does John Stuart Mill have to do with video game criticism.

dragonbeast
Have you ever edited a video before? I have, and it can be a pretty painstaking process if your an amateur, and if some better program comes or is available your going to want it in order to make your videos better. Plus there's the possibility have to recut the video because it doesn't quiet work.

And in terms of shitting on there reader-base. It might be undesired, but it's not illegal, and sometimes it might justified. Especially if that reader-base is toxic.