I can't believe SJWs don't understand basic science. And I am like 70% sure that is not just a joke because I have seen it making its rounds on social media.

Do differentiate, please. I can not spend my first of January picking out all the parts where you exaggerate my argument from 0.1 to 100 in less than a sentence.

The social context and impact of games is objectively best analyzed within the framework of sociology;
the narrative of games is objectively best analyzed with the tools handed to us by e.g. literature theory;
and feminism is one of many valid perspectives on the medium that's only rejected because it may be a little inconvenient to some.

There's ample disagreement within those individual faculties, theories and lines of thought by people with individual opinions, as is the nature of the 'soft' sciences. Yet only armed with the knowledge and teachings will any kind of progress emerge – "progress" as in informed debate instead of the present ever ongoing KiA outrage clusterfuck.

Maybe an individual example can help you get this point across.

Games are violent. It's a fact that ritualized modes and displays of violence are so much more present in games than in any other medium. For this fact, the medium has been attacked by people outside of game fandom. For decades. These people have, for decades, exhibited a deplorable understanding of the findings of sociology, all bent to their will in loops of logic. The weapon of game enthusiasts against those people should and could have been that very same science. Instead, for decades, I'm hearing "I vent my frustration through games".

Catharsis hypothesis? Yeah, sorry dudes, doesn't look like there's much to it. :(

We need an informed player base to argue for academic research in order to defend and participate in the beauty that is games, not the confused, scared to death and oh so insulted outcry of the uninformed consumer. We need an informed player base that understands and reads the studies the abstracts of which it usually just quotes. That analyses details of works of art critically while still appreciating the whole. A player base that actually treats games like art; a treatment that always involves criticial analysis. In short, we need what you, at the time, fight tooth and nail, but will ultimately, thankfully be unable to prevent emerging. You may, however, be able to slow it down, which is a definite shot in your own leg, but I'm certainly not too happy over that fact.

The work of the people who look like gamergate's greatest enemies may benefit the debate greatly, and furthermore influence public opinion about video games for the better. I will continue to critically listen to these people and, most of all, continue to broadly educate myself. And I will hopefully be able to stay the hell away from the perpetual version 0.1 of the discussion as represented in this thread.

We have two ways to describe a strong opposition to the sciences. One of them is amateurishness. The other is religion.

Thus ends the good faith discussion.

The only thing I'm reading in here is that apparently you seem to think that nazism endorsed free thought and welcomed the social sciences, and apparently I'm making a capital mistake, bordering on mind control, in embracing free thought as well as the social sciences.

HINT: You've been thoroughly misinformed. Maybe have a look at the authors the books of whom the nazis burnt and what those authors stood for before embarassing yourself with such comparisons? Start out with Sigmund Freud, Karl Marx, Erich Maria Remarque and Kurt Tucholsky. Oh, oh, no wait, start with Berthold Brecht, read the Caucasian Chalk Circle!! Doesn't take long. Man, the nazis really hated those people. And damn do I know why.

HINT2: Sorry but you're coming across a bit racist. Just sayin'.

OK I exaggerated because I thought you meant the only criticism that is objectively goo for games are the methods you said. You didn't make it clear that you were mentioning the analysis of social impact; since the topic AFAIknew was game criticism in general. Again though; any analysis system is fallible, especially when many of these tools are not at all based on fact, like feministic critique or may be biased, as many socio-psychological tests have been.

Again, you mention something as that is happening currently but completely fail to mention even vaguely what it actually is. Same with informed debate. Please mention one problem you see and we can debate that. There has been no debate whatsoever in GG at large or in this thread (since I started anyway). You don't criticize the stuff I / other GGers post, and you don't post your opinions for anyone to criticize.

As to the example, the rebuttals have been very strong in citing studies. If you're referring to the answer normal gamers have to this criticism; it is really really too varied to tell there is one concrete answer, like venting frustration. By majority, what majority are you referring to? I've seen none at all that say ''I just vent'' as a response to this.

But I get what you're saying, I think. You're saying that the response to these allegations against games from the sociologist sphere is proper critique through sociological tools and proper response to feminist critique is proper critique through feminist analysis and so on; to ascertain whether those allegations are true or not. Is that what you're saying?

Kinda tempted answer; but how many people became professional truck drivers after play Euro Truck Sim? Or how many people became farmers or city builders or blue hedgehogs? Sounds to me like a pretty satisfying answer to that allegation.

So I don't understand the next part. What are we fighting against? And what is emerging?

You say they are ''soft sciences'' and then say opposition to those is irrational? Science means getting the same results from the tests conducted in identical terms. By virtue of that alone, feminist critique falls because it is based on principles and patterns formulated from American or British or whatever few countries its present in society.

All that aside, what are these problems then? You say there is a lack of information from many gamer's part. But I don't think you understand that I and I'm sure plenty of other people don't understand what you're referring to at all. Like, all what you're saying is abstract and referring to some attributes gamers / games have that is negative and you say will improve if properly implemented socio-feminist-narrative tools to critique them. But I don't understand what problem or negative attribute / attributes you're referring to and hence find it a nightmare to understand the argument you're making.

It was factually incorrect. Completely. And you didn't even say if I was right or wrong in it. Lying means willful concealment of truth. If you didn't know the facts when typing them, please so and I will gladly take it back and apologize. And you missed the part where you tell me if I was right in my assumption.

Either way, share the negative aspects you think exists, and actually start a debate, since I can be well informed gamer as you put it if it demands it, and what you mean by a stagnant discussion.

I have no idea, I haven't been in this thread for months.

Just stop #.

Would make things so much easier.

Your posts always bring a smile to my face because they are proof that even after all those years we still need to be vigilant of a strong militaristic Germany because there are still Germans like you who will believe any dogma they are fed by the "authorities" which in this case is radical feminism/SJW's. You are so quick to label anything "offensive" and "hate speech" that needs to be purged or silenced.... like a good ole book-burning. But at the end of the day it also makes me sad that you believe the drivel you are fed.

It's not about GG or anti-GG but about saying no, to bullying and censorship in ANY form. Call it out where you see it no matter who does it and don't defend those who do the bullying no matter what.

If you want to look at Gamergate in a fair and balanced way then I highly recommend this YT video - please, keep an open mind! (I didn't make it or have any connection to it).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2p9EtRg1cs&index=286&list=PL1BVotoZCm3sHPAOjfSh6jls7M2mJyMXe

Christ on a pogo stick, I really hoped not to see this shitbiscuit of a thread on the front page any more in 2016. And this is still fucking going on. This thread is like Rob Liefeld's career. Ugly and should never have lasted this long.

You need to educate mate. Quit hating, knowledge is truth, the more know.

Oh I agree, I wish Journos would Ethics again & repressives would stop trying to appropriate gaming culture. Ie make devs fearful of making the games they want

It's a circus, friend. Care for some more popcorn or cotton candy? Oh look, they're bringing out the dancing monkeys who juggle balls in their mouths.

Wikipedia's showing it's flaws again in its year in review signpost from 30 December 2015. Also another part of it was mentioning a "gender gap" in wikipedia which is odd as everyone is an editor not a sex.

Wait. Are they claiming pro GG people made constant edits to the GG article? But Ryulong was an anti and he messed things up so much he ended banned.

lol Wikipedia turning into Buzzfeed.
EDIT : some people did a fact based analysis on wiki degrading : [url=https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~halfak/publications/The_Rise_and_Decline/halfaker13rise-preprint.pdf]https://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~halfak/publications/The_Rise_and_Decline/halfaker13rise-preprint.pdf[/url]

oh btw... not so related but tonite at evening news i heard some folks here in my country saying cheek-kissing women coworkers to greet them on working day was sexist as it was an obvious difference of treatment from male coworkers...

well, i'm not sure all those fine ladies are ready for my hugbear spinebreaking embrace i used to welcome my work fellows with... but, sure, if you feels like it is less offensive and discriminating, i'm fine with it and i happen to know a very competent kinesitherapist if needed.