LootHunter: Ah, so you mocked and laughed at people for not sharine you beliefs. Good. Now we know what a person you are.
I mock people who took what was historically considered the hobby of excluded and sidelined individuals, and used it as a platform to abuse, sideline and exclude individuals. Absolutely.
Are you going to say "But you're not showing tolerance to intolerant people!"? :D
LootHunter: If "Save the Princess" storyline is typical and boring, it doesn't mean it promotes rape culture and women discrimination. Because THAT is what people like Anita Sarkeesian tell in their "criticism".
See, that's the problem with constant exaggeration for effect- People initially say "They want to ban our games!" over and over as an exaggeration, and then eventually the audience actually starts believing them. "Rape culture"? Really? Says who?
Anita DOES provide an argument that the constant barrage of "Save the princess" storylines and the like contribute to a culture that objectifies women (literally making them the object of winning a game). You might disagree with that assessment, but it in no way is calling for the game to be banned or censored, or even saying it is an irredeemably bad game.
I take it you're translating her comment about online communities in general (I couldn't find her reference Youtube anywhere in her speech) where she says "It's not enough that they put band-aids on the problem areas, that they need to completely re-imagine what their systems look like, in order to build sites that actively deter online harassment, that make it harder to do this." as "She's asking to censor Youtube!"? Because I read it the exact opposite- censoring and banning people would be the band-aid. But I guess nuance is no fun, right? It doesn't make cool headlines.
Following this, you share with me a blank document, a bunch of images that could be taken from anywhere (that don't even support your point), a list of archive.is links that appear to be blocked for me, and finally a video someone uploaded to make fun of people for playing a game?
How about this, instead of trying to drown me in a low quality info-dump, pick the one most obvious, best case (someone unequivocally linked with...I dunno, SJWs or whatever, who explcitly calls to ban or censor games) right from the original source, that proves your point? If someone wants to ban or censor games, that's what they want, they're not going to hide that, right?
Because what you got right now is "evidence" the same way that 4chan's mountains of nonsense was "evidence" of a Pizzagate conspiracy. I mean, it might be a cool psychological trick ("Hey, if there's 5000 points here, but most of the ones I've individually looked up are weak, but there must be SOME truth to it, after all, where there is smoke, there is fire!"), but it doesn't hold up to reality.