It's not human nature, it's being a little kid. :P You seriously remind me of me in grade school. I'm not ripping you or anything but if you could take a step back and see how your post sounds to the average person, you'd laugh your ass off. XD

"Patriarchy", in itself, is not a word with a negative connotation. It actually is descriptive. "SJW", on the other hand... derogatory and diffuse by design.

...yes, of course it's a fictional enemy concept. Like "Untermensch".

/edit: Next post exemplifies quite excellently what I mean. All DCT preserves and gets out of the original meaning of "SJW" is the insult. The SJW literally are irrational idiots because that's what SJW means. That's not even "thinking in a box", because a box has three times the dimensions.

I can think of a few.

1. irrational idiots
2. fucktards
3. mouth breathing primates
4. simpletons
5. dumb marks
6. the critically thinking challenged
7. Thinking impaired
8. internet justice brigade
9. pretentious, mindless self righteous pricks
I can go on and the best part is all of these can be used to describe almost any internet asshats be they SJWs, tumblr femenists, fundamentalists. the anti SJW camp, who ever.

This, 100%

Labeling things and giving them name IS human nature. That is the way we are. The fact that you think it is not does not make it less of a fact.
I think I got a better and less insulting term. Social outrage activists. It is longer but hey, at least is not derogatory. And they are a real threat to free speech.

Okay well I'm not human, but then I'm sort of cool with that. :P

Let me guess: the people outraged about censorship, bans and the danger to free speech are not social outrage activists?

We talk about real threats, not about fake ones such as rape culture, toxic masculinity, violence induced by video games, and other claims made by the likes of Sarkeesian and Thompson.

well, the good news is that we know know that Phil Fish is behind gOg's rejection of Hatred. Progress, I suppose. And it makes so much sense!

We can now finally finish the sentence: "The game is good, but we can't. Because Phil Fish said so".

I see. So people are only a social outrage activist if they are protesting about irreal things, AND you get to decide if their assessment of a threat is real.

But if "protesting about a threat that's not real" is part of the description of social outrage activist, how is this new term not derogatory just as well? By design, just like the first one?

The way I interpret "social outrage activist", this thread is full to the brim of them. All these people misattributing the term censorship or trying to tell GOG what they are supposed to do right now, of course that's a kind of outspoken societal activism within video game culture.

So this is what "SJW" means? Heh, I could live with that. Of course, the term would apply to practically everyone who uses it.

I am getting more and more happy that I left the human race a couple of years ago. Never looked back.

Actually no, I am not preserving and only getting out of the term SJW is the insult. Instead I was giving options to people to use for those extremists who they would otherwise label as SJWs even if they really aren't one instead of just using the label SJW because it has been used more as insult then a term to describe those of a certain mindset towards issues they see as needing to be addressed.

Simple, the intent is not to insult, but to provide a name.

And I don't decide which threats are real, it is reality which determines it. It is obvious that in Congo for example rape culture is a real threat, but you never see this people complaining about rape culture in Congo, you see them complaining about rape culture in college campus, which is not real. You see them complaining about tosic masculinity, whcih does no exist. And you see them compalining about sexism and violence induced by video games, whcih science studies made by neutral parties proved wrong (Sorry I am not that resourceful so I don't have the links right here, but I am sure a google search will yield results). Censorship and the like are real threats and you can see them if you compare news over facts.
I am not stating he IS responsible, I am using him as an example. I mean, the guy is as corrupt as a Mexican lawyer.

So I just played Hatred for 30 minutes and this is my... opinion on it:

It's actually better than I expected, gives you the feeling of being in a horror movie but you're the ''monster''. It's actually a interesting conflicting perspective.

Hey, that sounds like a grat idea for a horror game. You are the monster.

And I am not using sarcasm. It could be a great selling point.