SJW is not descriptive, it's insulting, so 'admitting to being a SJW' is just another gamergate fantasy.

For funsies, I investigated the Fire Emblem Fates case a little bit. And boy it is a wonderful exemplary case when it comes to gamergate reality construction. Evidently "SJW" now means "opposed to diversity". Now, I have seen people perform that leap of utter idiocy a few times. But, in all seriousness, whatever "SJW" meant yesterday, forget about it. Let's just use a new definition so it fits Fire Emblem Fates.

Yesterday's "SJW" was the fantasy of people who violently demanded that developers put an LGBTQ agenda into their games. In the Fire Emblem Fates case, the term "SJW" somehow seems to describe people who censor LGBTQ stuff from Japanese games.

Sacrebleu. Man, those stupid SJW make no sense at all, yet AGAIN.

I am absolutely enamored with the way the argument flows here, as it once more shows "SJW" to mean absolutely nothing. It's the ultimate label devoid of any kind of meaning besides maybe "person I don't like". There's literally zero fixed ideology attached to it, the perfect versatile fascist enemy figure.



The first info about the Fire Emblem Fates stuff I found was on thegg.net – known for the most ludicrous of conspiracy theories (see the Tale of Tales/Sarkeesian bribe absurdity they still have online, to their embarassment). However, as their website is so funny, I stuck around a bit to see how far I could get with this source.

Apparently one Alison Rapp, proven to be of female gender (oh noes!) and wearing a hipster nose ring (double noes!), hence clearly being one'o'dem, has made some precaaaarious statements on twitter concerning education in game culture (she's for it, sadly) and xenophobia in so called progressive US culture (she somehow manages to think it's there although clearly US media is generally perfect before SJW fuck it up again). And there have been some femimimisms from her, I must report. Scary femimimisms you should shield your children's eyes from.

The frequented gamergate website has no idea what position Rapp holds exactly and whether she has any kind of influence on actual gameplay decision making (she's been with Nintendo for only two years and only as a marketer, so how about no influence at all). Rapp's outspoken sex positivity and her embrace of the Japanese culture will not play into their judgement, even though the proposed cuts mainly concern homosexual content – content which Rapp would certainly advocate for whenever she could.

So Rapp is pro LGBTQ, which makes her an SJW, and SJW are known to censor LGBTQ stuff from games, so evidently it must have been Rapp who censored Fire Emblem Fates.

The finest hour of gamergate reasoning. :p




The most hilarious thing I found on thegg.net was some kind of history about the 'petting minigame' "censorship" issue. The first source to report on the cut and deplore it was kotaku and, to be more precise, Mr. Nathan Grayson (name spelled correctly here), who would be gamergate supporters' enemy no. 1 if gamergate made no difference between male and female targets.

So when in January it looked like Nintendo wouldn't cut the minigame – some random gameFAQ users had said so after all – thegg.net calls Grayson and kotaku liars immediately, adds a whole lot of screenshots as "proof" and litters their website by discrediting the only source they had as of then (emphasis in bold by me): Two updates on the same day, several screens scroll. Fuck Kotaku, man.

Needless to say, the section is in no way transparently corrected when Nintendo confirms that, yup, exactly the cuts Grayson had been reporting would be applied. You may search an apology to kotaku until judgement day. Instead, thegg.net "authors" follow up with an impressive amount of social justice outrage about social justice warriors.





TL;DR:
kotaku protests against those cuts,
gamergate supporters protest against those cuts,
real gamers as opposed to gamergate supporters protest against those cuts,
LGBTQ gamers and their friends protest against those cuts,
and the female developer targeted by gamergate supporters at Nintendo USA very likely protests against those cuts, internally, as well.


But gamergate needs enemies to thrive... many, many sneaky enemies. And that's the only takeaway here: Enemy definition is far more important than the issue at hand. Judging from the ggnet article, just about 20 times more important.

Please mention your recent usage of the following words in the context of this post :

Imbecile
Bigoted
Harasser
Uneducated

Also, initial conversation / debate = finished?

Oh, the shaman fusions, that made Katt even sexier, when fused with the right shaman she would look slightly demonic and gets completelly naked, but again, nobody cares. Of course the official artwork confirms it all. Anita Sarkeesian would love to put her filthy hands on that legendary character.

Please watch this, specially Vain, who is claiming the game was not censored by SJWs because it has LGBT themes, remember that for SJWs representation is only allowed when they like it, and helping a character overcome its insecurities about homosexuality by temporarily reverting genders in its mind and making it realize that what matters is love and not gender is wrong.

https://youtu.be/qqP_TJWL3no

Ok this is something I find to be a constant theme across these people's arguments : its ''Japanese culture'' that won't be understood in the US''. Look at the argument closely. Aren't we supposed to have a unified view about what is and is not okay that is not ''culture'' based?
Its just like saying ''gay marriage and gay rights clash with our culture but not those in the US so the US has them but we don't''. What happened to considering and treating each culture equally?

And of course, they label what they do not understand from an artistic perspective as influence of ''Japanese culture''. To me that borders on racism that they say that kind of stuff while probably knowing fuck all about Japan and its culture.

Scared people, that is what they are, fear makes people to constantly try to push others to accept their idea of the World, at any cost. And this is why the Gender topic matters.

It is bigoted and imbecile to discriminate Transexuals the same way it is to discriminate other sexual inclinations that frankly speaking don´t hurt anybody, lets use brackets here, "weird" sexuality practices, who didn't practice some spanking? ah! but oh my god slapping an ass in SFV is SO DANGEROUS ... puritans..., it really reminds me the people that use to say that homosexuals are disgusting and a sin not only to God but to nature. How many "scientific" studies we had in the past about the non-natural behavior of homosexuals? I think this should make you think which kind of people you are becoming twisting Science.

Recently it was an imbecile feminist in Spain, yes imbecile and feminist, because both things could BE or NOT BE related, that said talking about anal sex, that it was an action of pure patriarchy, because a man want to do it to the women, but they would never accept women fantasies like using an Strapon on men, seriously lady? Do you think every single straight men would not like to try something like that with a woman or even a transsexual that would be aesthetically appealing for them? Because hey people, wake up, sex appeal came with attraction...

I totally understand that people that felt oppressed for sometime develop serious mental problems, but living inside a bubble is not going to help anyone, a bubble of ¨safe zones¨ and ¨artificial constructs¨, you will always meet someone that will hurt you my friends, sorry, this is the real life, and it hurts sometimes. Not because you meet the wrong people in your life, you have the right to hate everybody else that not think like you, treating them as potential harassers, stop living in a bubble, I would not mind to have sex with a handsome/beautiful transsexual, or even have a more serious relationship with one or even introduce her to my parents.

And talking about changing our bodies, I would like to point how bigoted is to censorship every sexy representation of biologically real women, saying how bad is to represent people from their appearance, because what it only matters is THE SOUL, the INSIDE (Again PURITAN prejudices) and at the same time defend any radical body change of transsexuals to became aesthetically women. So, it is appearance what it counts... yes? not? SOMETIMES? depending on which areas I can WHINING all the time?

So hey, lets not have any logical approach to anything, just take all the fearful people and put them together, people afraid of asking questions outside and inside them. Make our cause a totalitarian one, we do not want any opposition (censorship comments on your Youtube channel or collect blocked people on Twitter?), life need to be easy! I am a millennial boy or girl! I deserve to change the world with my Smartphone! my mind is supreme, my insights will make Twitter tremble! lets twist language, scared of the differences, lets change the meaning of words and create new ones, until the new ones will trigger someone else again! Lets twist facts, they should be beyond ideologies and necessities, but who cares! Lets go to the hospital and when the doctor would ask us "gender please?" for any medical reason, yeah! feel triggered! and LIE about it, even if your life is threatened because oh! SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS, twist biology interpretations in the name of WONDERLAND, lie to ourselves thinking that THE FORCE and our MIND can change the physical world, sure, good luck I repeat, when problems will arise... not enough with this, lets patrol as moral police and censorship every single small thing that trigger us, if tomorrow a study would find a very polemic difference between men and women, black or white, instead of accepting this difference as a curiosity, a natural richness, we will silence it, in the name of the political correctness.

Is blatantly and utterly SAD, that these people is only achieving to make enemies both in their opposition and in people that always agree with them.

Using Science as cheaply as some of you do, we could say that every every force has an equal but opposite reaction, the more extreme and radical would be this witch-hunting, the more extreme and more strong people like Trump will become, you got an Anita Sarkesian, a cheater and a con artist, and suddenly it grows up Nero from nowhere, a stupid ultra conservative homosexual (more contradictions huh?). If you are incapable to see how connected are Sarkesian and her exaggerations (because flaming the right people is a door for money) with the appearance of a radical opposition "Hero" in the other side, you will be condemned to be part of them.

But Hey! Logic, and analysis is outdated, nobody likes moderation.

I think I'll pop in and leave this link here:
http://www.vocativ.com/news/286848/dark-net-trans-teens/

I did not read the whole article (Pinkie promise I will read it later) But I will upvote your post here, because I think this is actually something useful, a useful bit of information and something I actually think is benefical in the gaming community. I mean, in video games we do not care about the player's gender, and often we address them by the gender of their avatar, something I think is benefical to trans people who pick the avatar of their gender identity. That is actually quite a good thing, and helps people grow used to the whole thing. Video games with character customization would actually benefit transgender people. I think we can handle both topics.

And from the same website... And this is exactly what I was talking about

[i]In order to fight extreme forms of female genital cutting, a pair of American gynecologists is suggesting a controversial compromise: rather than an outright ban, allow ritual surgical “nicks” on young girls’ privates. Such procedures are banned in most Western countries, but the authors say that allowing them would not only be culturally respectful but also serve to prevent more extensive surgeries.

“While laws enacted in [Western countries] make procedures that alter a female’s external genitalia illegal, they may in some instances worsen health outcomes by driving the practice underground by sending female children to Africa or by inviting circumcisers to the West,” they write in a paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

Female genital cutting, also referred to as “female genital mutilation,” is often done on young girls in an attempt to control sexual desire and has impacted an estimated 80 to 140 million women worldwide, most notably in Africa and the Middle East. It encompasses a wide range of procedures, from the removal of the clitoral hood to the excision of the labia and clitoris along with the stitching together of the vaginal opening. The most extreme forms can result in infection and death, as well as loss of sexual pleasure. In the case of the genital “nick” proposed by the authors, it would mean a small cut of the vulvar skin that doesn’t remove any skin and has no effect on sexual pleasure.[/i]

For the shake of cultural respect! PC Culture creates a non invasive no effect on sexual pleasure "female genital mutilation", and in WONDERLAND all this magical traditional folks would accept this ¨nick¨ because they are respected and they will understand, yes, that they would not care at all about women have sexual pleasure... because the female genital mutilation was never done for put women out of sexual pleasure... it was a cultural thing we cannot understand...

And just when I was saying that stupidity is infinite...

People who are seen as different being excluded socially and turning to video games. Is that really so rare?

Actually, that's not really what this article is about. The idea is that the player is playing a character who matches her (or his) gender identity, allowing her to essentially be herself, even if only in a virtual world.

I think that might have been a reason some people, when playing Super Mario Bros. 2 (Super Mario USA in Japan), would play as the Princess. Of course, said princess also has the ability to float in mid-air, which nobody else has in that game.

Rather who they'd like to be.

The princess was so ridiculously overpowered with her floating ability that I didn't use any other character when I was still young.
It's like the ultimate noob-character and therefore maybe a bit insulting to girls because of her unfair advantage since most girls will choose her without knowing that they are getting an easier game with this one. In "Doki Doki Panic" (the original game that was cloned as Super Mario Bros. 2) the floating character is female too.

I finished "Super Princess Peach" too not long ago and although it was quite a good game, it was extremely easy because she was overpowered there too. Seems like "games for girls" are intentionally made easy.

Actually, when it comes to speedrunning the game, the princess is not used in the standard route. Toad is used because he does not slow down when holding something. For some stages, Luigi is used instead because his high jump allows for some skips.

There is, however, a princess only category. (There's even a TAS of that category.)

I may be missing something, but why is it "article" worthy? choosing the sex of the Player Char is not a new thing

The thing is that is IRRELEVANT.

Why every single game should give these options to the players? Some people have serious empathy problems to be a man and play as a woman? be a woman and play as a man?

Using videogames as a way to find the REAL YOU, is in my opinion, far from being a healthy resolution. No wonders people that believe this is good can have such big problems with pixelated representations.