Even if you proved that groups opposing GG were a bunch of crazy, unreasonable zealots it wouldn't prove that GG was somehow right, it would just make me want to start my own, reasonable, level headed group that disagreed with GG! And if that group had a membership of 1, so be it, and if that group also had to disagree with extremists on the side opposing GG, so be it also
I'm just calling it as I see it and trying to avoid group-thinking and mob mentality as much as possible

NOW THAT is the kind of mentality i can have a conversation with.

Aint nothing wrong with having different opinions, as long as debate around them is allowed

So much this. SJWs are people who allowed themselves to be consumed by their hatred for their ''enemy''. They are delusional enough to fight under a common banner and against a particular singled out group. Those characteristics alone should be ample to convey what modern groups they are most similar to.
Similar with their idea on minorities. In their world; it is a competition about who can be more tolerant; where their beloved minorities are points they collect or meal-tickets to get them through their hate campaign. Here; we also need to remember the fact that if you call someone an oppressed minority a thousand times; they'll slowly begin to think like that. In effect; SJW preaching of ''Don't hurt my little minority friends!'' are just making actual minorities abandon gaming with disgust or transferring their mass delusions and hysteria onto the next person.

But if you don't think that there's people like that on the GG side also you're pretty deluded
GGers are saying that they're feeling bullied by being called names and being told that 'Gamers' is a dead identity for kidiots, and I get that.
But please understand that, in the world generally, us lefties are feeling under siege also, I compared GG directly to ISIS before and that was a bit crass but look at it this way - UKIP isn't anywhere near as bad as ISIS either (I realise that this isn't a British forum and you may not know what UKIP is - its the UK Independence Party, they give the impression that they're a one issue party - that the UK should leave the EU but they keep being in the press for howlers like this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31846453) but the fact that people I know and pass in the street might actually be considering voting for them makes them, in their own way, almost as scary as ISIS because it's so much closer to home
And there's nothing closer to home to a... go on then.. gamer than the gaming community and to see GG come out of it is, well it feels like a bit of a betrayal, TBH
I also worry how many people, in becoming pro GG and anti-SJW are being pushed towards a right-wing extremist world view, especially when it comes to gender politics - I seem to be seeing more and more links to the 'Men Going Their Own Way' forums around here of late and it's a worrying trend

So, yeah, I do look around the world and I see ISIS and Putin and UKIP and MRA group and, yes, GG and I feel as backed into a corner as you do when you take offence at the neck-beard stuff!

Hope that's rational enough for yous, I don't speak for any particular Anti-GG group, I'm just a long haired, child of the 90s semi-neo-hippy TBH!

The main issue is that it's people who should know better leading the charge on the anti-GG side. It's the journalists themselves consumed with hate and attacking GG. If someone in GG acts out of line it's usually a random nobody. If someone from anti-GG acts out of line it's a journalist leading the charge.

It would be the equivalent of the British royal family endorsing UKIP and calling out for the blood of any who opposed them.

at the same way we can see Stalin and the nazis. "Alter your life view to ours or be eradicated. Do not protect or hide those with other life views or you will be put on the train as well"

perhaps you might understand we see ISIS too. Unless we change our entire culture to fit the politics suddenly forced upon us by some offended individuals they say our culture should cease to exist.

the gamers aren't backed into a corner now, they were backed in that corner ages ago and never allowed to leave. we have always been on the receiving end, except this time the entire world has been indoctrinated to hate us. I myself am a centralist and take no offense in left wing sides (hell here in Europe the liberals are a right wing party).

It feels that they have become so far left they became extreme right. They are so anti racist they became hateful of the cis white male.

the thing is, the anti gg claim they are for peace, yet at the same time they do a downright manhunt for all who disagree with them.

Basically anti gg gives you the medieval choice: The Sword or the Knee

John Birch Society stuff, dragonbeast. John Birch Society stuff once again.

Video games growing up as a medium isn't political.

Change will not be achieved by force nor will the status quo of the medium be preserved by force.

The change of the medium, however, is inevitable, regardless of direction.

Gamers are in a corner, yes. But it is the same corner video game marketing has put them in thirty years ago. That corner is a cage. Most gamergate currents do not recognize that. The corner is a stereotype that applies to less and less gamers. The corner is shrinking, holds less people than before, that's what you feel "cornered". But it's a good thing the corner shrinks at all.

Whoever wants to remain in that corner can stay there, no problem. Games will still be made for the corner the industry has created for itself in 50 years, no doubt about that. What I mainly see as the problem is gamergate attacking the people who are building and enjoying their own corners.

backed in a corner as in the media try to beat down on us times and times again. We have always been on the receiving end of all shit and we just had to bow our head and succumb. Its all we could do, its all we were allowed to do.

Now our medium has to be changed forcibly and we are given the option of the sword or the knee: Change your taste overnight, or face the wrath of the media.

And I am convinced girls have been far more opposed to gaming girls than boys have ever been. What evidence do i have? Personal life experience. Same thing goes with studies. In school if a girl dares express interest in science other girls go "eww how can you care about something THAT boring". And "you play games? what are you a weirdo?".

And yet the media ignores this completely. Its the always the patriarchy, always the males (especially cis white males).

"The change of the medium, however, is inevitable, regardless of direction." Then are we not allowed to try to prevent that direction being one in which gaming is seen as practically raping people?

'Anti-GGer' are er... (avoids the 'g' word) 'people who play computer games' too you know! The only people who care what Wu and the Stardock CEO are up to are people who care about the hobby, one way or the other!
In what, specific ways, BTW, are you personally afraid that gaming will change? Spell it out for me, please

Dude, we're not US citizens... aren't you German or Finish? Where the heck did you study 50s and 60s USA history? Do you actually think most here even know you're being condescending other than from having context on you as 'text author'? At least if you say KKK a majority will actually get it from the 'text'...

Now, if the growth of games is expected to be in politically correct ways, and favoring narratives of social activism, then what else do you call it if not political? Fantasy? Inclusion? Social Justice?

Hopefully it will never get to actual physical violence, but the language of dehumanization, demonization, and coercive tactics - be they of threatened violence or ostracism are obvious all around. And you know what really helps get us there? The feeling of moral superiority you so obviously know and enjoy.

The change of the medium, much as it may pain you, is going to be driven along two axis which can already be seen:
1 - more casual, more fundamental gamification, return to arcade, rogue likes etc... in other words the opposite of the narrative heavy, cinematographic gaming that was trending up for the last 15 years or so
2 - VR, social online communities, the return of simulation genre, a lot of almost pathological experiences from porn to psychadelic. You see this today already from Minecraft to Euro Truck Simulator, via Papers Please.

So you are the ones trying to shoehorn gaming into a specific political through, albeit in a conflicted fashion as the ones that are sincere articulating what they like to play (Idle Thumbs since that's something we have in common) are feeling the pull of the 2 axis I mentioned.

The not games stuff will be around, and will likely have its own scene, which I expect will happily say they are an art form with formal aspects related to gaming, while considering themselves as not gaming - kind of like tv advertisements are not cinema but share formal aspects, though the art / consumer relation there is the opposite. Talented devs regardless of their politics will find ways to communicate messages through gameplay mainly in the simlike sandboxy experiences, also as chrome involving the more gamey games. And none of this is to say AAA won't exist, just with mostly entertainment driven narratives, as today.

aside from the fact you cannot trust the majority of what internet journos say, there are some changes I am not looking forward to

Well yes and no. Gaming has evolved. It always has, always will. But the evolution has always been a steady, natural one and one in which developers could use games to share their vision.
Now it feels a sudden and drastic change is being forced upon gaming in which artistic freedom is second to political correctness.
And in this it even feels as there simply is no correct solution.

Simply displaying females in swimsuits can (and will) be seen as degrading, even if the game is filled with males wearing little more than a loincloth. Artists must, while creating, forcefully change their own vision to that of someone else or else risk attacks from political and social activists.

Imagine a painter whose paintings go to an exhibition and the curator says: your painting is not socially correct. It does not have 2 orange stripes on the left side there and a blue circle on the top. If the painter doesn't add those, he will face assault from blue and orange activists, even if he uses them in his other works.

There is nothing against the painting that do have those lines and circle, but can it be seen as reasonable to hate upon every painting that doesn't have them?

Also, people like Wu have in their following gathered people who know nothing about gaming but feel the need to feel offended at everything.

What i find scary is how quick her following turned on her the moment she dared converse with the other side. THIS annoys me. That the antis simply seem to be against discussing the matter.
At least you are open to listen to the points of the other side fever, appreciate it

I'm afraid games will get blacklisted and banned and censored for their content based on biased and unfounded attacks. Such as GTA V being removed from Targets and Walmarts in New Zealand and Australia on the basis it is specifically encouraging violence toward women.

I'm afraid that game developers will be attacked and maligned because of their opinions. That their games will be attacked and maligned because certain people with an agenda want to marginalize those developers. Examples include people like Brad Wardell who apparently did not sexual harass anybody, yet a whole lot of people who have only heard through their own echo chambers and twisted and distorted stories how he's guilty. And as such find ways to attack him and his games through whatever means they find handy. Or other developers who came out supporting aspects of Gamergate who also come under attack and find their games unreviewed merely for that reason.

Personally, the way it should be is people make the games they want, people buy the games that appeal to them. I'm fine for different people enjoying different types of games. The problem is when certain people find it necessary to attack other games. When people with undue influence in the industry prop up their games and get stellar reviews for flawed games. The same things that I don't like with big publishers throwing their weight around intimidating reviewers into only positive reviews (while ignoring the negatives) is happening with indie games and this new found "political correctness".

And let's also be fair. Anti-GG has a whole bunch of people who have jumped in just for the political correct, feminist, transgendered or whatever angles they care about, even though many of these people don't really give a shit about games at all.

And also being fair, the GG side has gathered supporters who have been fighting against many of these same movements. Conservatives, MRA's also many of which don't actually really give a shit about games,

Wasn't it recently shown that one of Anita's and Wu's recent internet harassers is some guy with an anti-feminist agenda who seems to have followed it into Gamergate.

The point being that any movement when it gets notice has taggers on who try to use and coerce the movement in a direction of their other goals...

You know the "funny thing" is that's actually a similar feeling what had me leaned toward the GG side in the first place.

I couldn't care less about the rumored or real sex life of some random Indy dev, and I never had any hope concerning the "ethics" of those who pretend themselves game journalists, so when I first heard about GG I didn't care at all thinking it was just another Internet drama that everybody would have forgotten two weeks later.

But that's when, some weeks later, I saw the ridiculous amount of hatred, bigotry and even harassment from some members of the anti-GG side, especially some prominent ones... to have that come out of the gaming community, well it feels like a bit of a betrayal... and that's what got me to start caring about this whole affair.

I also worry how many peoples, in the name of defending a certain vision of "social justice", will radicalize themselves, insulting everybody that doesn't share their vision calling them all sort of name ending with 'ist or 'phobe, not to mention jumping on throat and shaming/insulting developers making games they disapprove of.

At the same time it's only by attacking Anita, Wu, Quinn etc. that's made them into living martyrs to rally around instead of internet pundits and small time developers
I actually found this one while looking for another but it goes well right here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6264-Anita-Sarkeesian-The-Monster-Gamers-Created

And I'm still not sure this is exactly the one I was thinking of but here you go:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7290-Objectification-And-Men

If gamers just got over themselves years ago and allowed their games to be critiqued and realised that female characters were objectified beyond their attire and did something about it, we would be guaranteed sexy, skimpily clad female characters as long as they WERE characters it the truest sense and not objects; without overreacting and creating monsters and martyrs everything would be fine!
But now *shrugs* maybe you guys HAVE invited puritan zealotry but its the bed you've made for yourselves and you'll have to sleep in it...