Vault101's guide to gender debates

[Saetha]

I fail to see how they're related at all, with the exception that they both dismantle talking points you don't like. Regardless, I did not engage in the behavior forbidden by rule 3, despite any similarity you prescribe it.

you've labelled other people "feminist" inaccurately

And again, we can debate the similarity of rules 3 and 4 until the cows come home (Though I imagine they're already asleep in the barn by now - at least where I am) It's irrelevant to that fact that I did not break it, mainly because there is no mention of inaccurate labeling in rule 3.

[quote/]And for the record, I'd say I have a pretty good regard of the word's meaning and relevance, considering how I'm a former feminist. Former, partially because of stuff like this, but mostly because of stuff that's much worse.

Which means, ironically, you've yet again broken this newly introduced rule - you made a strawman out of me, assuming I have no knowledge of feminism's meaning or relevance, despite you having no knowledge of me, beyond what I've presented in this forum - which is to say, very little. Certainly not enough to go generalizing me.

I never implied you didn't know the term Feminist or the ideas therein.....I just think you're using it as a blankest term unfairly [/quote]

"Without regard for it's meaning or relevance." Not to mention, again, the beginning of rule 4.

[quote/]
Did I make any mention of what I think non-feminists think? No, I simply said that including one to review your little write-up would've benefited.

which to me seems to basically say that "non feminists" would automatically disagree with me, and that "feminists" would automatically agree with me

also assuming I'm a feminist [/quote]

Sorry that it does. If you want me to clarify - I don't know if a non-feminist would disagree, or if a feminist would agree.

And I am not assuming anything. I've lurked on these forums for well over a year- you begin to remember the more prolific posters. Multiple times you have proclaimed yourself a feminist. As a matter of fact, I recall you doing so in that "Feminists should step off our hobby" thread. I'm drawing from direct knowledge.

Before you interpret this as creepy - I only know this because I read a lot of threads and comment in very few. I haven't paid any special attention to you, just that prolific posters such as Fappy or JoJo - or you - tend to pop up a lot.

[quote/]
No, you said you can only use it under relevant circumstances. Methinks that taking a potshot at people who disagree with you, implying that they just don't know what the word really means, that they need to go look it up

I stand by the sentiment that a lot of people really should and not just use it as a stand in for "those I disagree with" or assume anyone who holds a certain opinion is automatically a feminist[/quote]

And you're welcome to. However, the point stands. It's not relevant.

 

[Vault101]

And I am not assuming anything. I've lurked on these forums for well over a year- you begin to remember the more prolific posters. Multiple times you have proclaimed yourself a feminist. As a matter of fact, I recall you doing so in that "Feminists should step off our hobby" thread. I'm drawing from direct knowledge.

ok for this discussion I'm a feminist

so what do I believe? what do I like? what websites do I hang out on? what do I do in my spare time? what are my favourite movies? what are my political beliefs? what are my favourite games? do you know?

if a girl says she thinks GTA is kind of sexist is she a feminist? if she says she's rather see better character design with less emphasis on boobs is she a feminist? and if so does the entire weight of that label now apply to her?

that thread is pretty much everything wrong with gender debates, and pretty much follows all the "points" I made in my OP

its created two camps the "Feminist" and the "people who have no problem with the way things are", with us or against us, good and evil... I mean it even says [I/]you got last of us...its finished, pack it up were done[/I] <-surely the ridiculousness of that sentiment is apparent?

the only person we should be calling a feminist is Anita Sarskesian...because her whole shtick was a "feminist" look at games

 

[Saetha]

And I am not assuming anything. I've lurked on these forums for well over a year- you begin to remember the more prolific posters. Multiple times you have proclaimed yourself a feminist. As a matter of fact, I recall you doing so in that "Feminists should step off our hobby" thread. I'm drawing from direct knowledge.

ok for this discussion I'm a feminist

so what do I believe? what do I like? what websites do I hang out on? what do I do in my spare time? what are my favourite movies? what are my political beliefs? what are my favourite games? do you know?

How the hell would I? As I've said, I've paid you no special attention.

I'm not sure where this is coming from. You seem to be taking out your general frustration with these debates on me. And for the record - just because I mentioned that "Feminists get out of gaming!" debate doesn't mean I agree with it. I haven't even commented in it. I looked over the first few pages because, again, I read a lot of threads here. Frankly, I think it's a bit stupid because, if nothing else, the OP seems to think that enjoying video games and being a feminist are mutually exclusive states. That's obviously untrue, but I don't see any reason why I should bother pointing that out. Many others already had, and they would all probably argue the point with more passion than me.

So it's great that that thread's an embodiment of what's wrong with gender debates. Not sure how that relates to me, though...

 

[Vault101]

How the hell would I? As I've said, I've paid you no special attention.

rhetorical question

you don't and you also can't assume what those things would be for those whom you call "Femenists"

[quote/]I think it's a bit stupid because, if nothing else, the OP seems to think that enjoying video games and being a feminist are mutually exclusive states. That's obviously untrue, but I don't see any reason why I should bother pointing that out. Many others already had, and they would all probably argue the point with more passion than me.

So it's great that that thread's an embodiment of what's wrong with gender debates. Not sure how that relates to me, though...[/quote]
because you were doing something similar

lumping everyone else under the label "Femenist" weather they identify as that or not

and when you bring that into it, it becomes political, it becomes [I/]scary[/I] it becomes a debate on the merits of the Movement [footnote/]a whoooooooole other debate best reserved for people who know what they're talking about..ie: NOT most people caught up in gaming forums[/footnote] rather than a debate on the games themselves

 

[Padwolf]

Omg Vault, this is the most one-sided argument I've ever heard. It's like you've not done any reading whatsoever, so all your arguments are invalid. I can't believe this! How do you sleep at night with your feminist man hating ways? HOW VAULT HOW?!

I'm sorry, I'm late to the party...

This whole thread has made me laugh quite a lot. It's a good guide and one I wish all people would follow. Especially the part where people actually should know what feminism means. Not enough people around do and it really puts a dampener on every single discussion there is on the subject. It makes me sad and makes me run away from the discussions.

 

[the December King]

the well known classic "Snake"?

your argument is void

...

I'm still surprised that my opinions got dismissed, because I'm a snake.

...

This is blatant specism!

 

[Saetha]

How the hell would I? As I've said, I've paid you no special attention.

rhetorical question

you don't and you also can't assume what those things would be for those whom you call "Femenists"

Certainly, I can't deduce the favorite movie or foods of someone simply because they identify as a feminist. Saying I can't deduce anything about them at all is silly, and smacks of the word "feminism" being a useless descriptor.

Meaning - if calling yourself a feminist presents nothing about who you are or what you think, then the word would've never been invented. "Feminism" is a philosophy, and thus, saying you subscribe to it means you hold certain beliefs. It's literally why the word exists in the first place - I mean, imagine if I said "I'm a car mechanic." You could then ask me what I like about fixing cars. And I could then get irrationally angry, tell them that I actually scoop ice cream, I just call myself a car mechanic, and then invent rules saying that no one can comment on what car mechanics do or do not do, because I'm tired of people assuming I work on cars.

It's absurd. You can't say that the word feminist doesn't denote anything about what a person thinks, just as I can't say that car mechanic doesn't denote anything about what a person does. These words exist for that very reason.

[quote/]I think it's a bit stupid because, if nothing else, the OP seems to think that enjoying video games and being a feminist are mutually exclusive states. That's obviously untrue, but I don't see any reason why I should bother pointing that out. Many others already had, and they would all probably argue the point with more passion than me.

So it's great that that thread's an embodiment of what's wrong with gender debates. Not sure how that relates to me, though...

because you were doing something similar

lumping everyone else under the label "Femenist" weather they identify as that or not

and when you bring that into it, it becomes political, it becomes [I/]scary[/I] it becomes a debate on the merits of the Movement [footnote/]a whoooooooole other debate best reserved for people who know what they're talking about..ie: NOT most people caught up in gaming forums[/footnote] rather than a debate on the games themselves[/quote]

I was doing something similar? Where? Because I denoted non-feminists and feminist critical persons as separate from feminists? And as I said about that, I don't know if they'd agree with you one way or the other. I never grouped people under the label whether they agree or not. Quite the contrary, I specifically said "feminist," meaning only those who see themselves as feminists would be subject to it. I never pointed at someone and went "YOU, sir or madam, are a FEMINIST! I now IRRATIONALLY HATE YOU for being a FEMINIST." I never engaged with anyone in this thread but you, much less told them they believed in a philosophy without any knowledge of whether or not they do.

And that's great that bringing up feminism shifts the debate off the games themselves - but we're not debating games here. Going off the last few pages, we're making up rules and then snarking at people who dare to criticize them. Thus, bringing up the merits of feminism does nothing to shift the discussion off of games, since there was no such discussion in the first place.

 

[QuietlyListening]

The point is that there's no value in calling someone a feminist or trying to set up a feminist boogeyman that wants to do XYZ horrible things.

As Vault said, statements like "feminists want..." don't actually address the issue but shift the argument over to the definition of an ideology.

More productive would be to say something like, "I don't support the idea that all white men should be removed from games, and that only women and minorities should be the protagonists."

Phrased like that, you'd probably be met with something like, "I agree. I don't support that either. Now do you think that women and minorities are underrepresented as characters in games?"

And hey! We have a debate about the creative direction of an artform as opposed to a mud slinging contest where we try to put each others in a box so we can shit on them.

 

[carnex]

I feel like that would be an even worse misuse of a label since the whole MRA thing seems rather specific and easyer to pin down

Ehhh...It can go either way.

The Men's Right's Movement dates back quite a ways, and doesn't necessarily just mean internet sociopaths who respond to any mention of women with "but men are X too!" Complaining about MRAs could easily be seen as the equivalent of complaining about feminists or "Tumblr feminists" or whatever, even if it seems like a more unified front (in fact, it scares me that when the "reasonable" MRAs talk about the "good" movements, they tend to be ones which have policies of inequity, like preventing marital rape laws...I'm not even kidding).

I've been guilty of this myself, and I'm trying to be mindful of it. The fact is, labeling them as MRAs just isn't necessary and is possibly even harmful. Remember the thread about a new name for harassers? The answer there is the same here: it's usually better to just call an asshole an asshole.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not exactly joining the Men's Rights Movement or anything like that, but....it's not conducive to a discussion.

MRA movement has one advantage, it somewhat graded itself.
- First there are people that refuse to classify themselves within MRA movement, usually least extreme. It's Karen Straughan and similar people.
- Purple pillers are both MRAs and non-MRAs that observe red pillers and soak in message but still engage in traditional relationships. Almost never publicly present ans such. A bit more extreme
- Red pillers - now theese are fill force MRAs that observe women with intense distrust. Mostly avoid relationship. Even more extreme
- Men Going Their Own Way - huge overlap with red-pillers but people within have other motives too. Kicked out Pick Up Artists and don't want to associate with them. Never engage in long term relationships and more than weekend is long term relationship for them.
- True Forced Lonlyness - people who feel that they are forcibly ostracized by female gender. Well, don't even want to comment.

- Herbivore men and Hikikomori - these don't have any interest in women or MRA's. Don lump them in with those above.
- Pick Up Artists - also do not mix with MRAs. They are womanizing bachelors and most of them support feminist movements as it helps them pick up women.

That's just a useful guide.

 

[Vault101]

]
Certainly, I can't deduce the favorite movie or foods of someone simply because they identify as a feminist. Saying I can't deduce anything about them at all is silly, and smacks of the word "feminism" being a useless descriptor.

so at what point would YOU call someone a Femenist?

let me ask you again if someone criticises a game for being sexist are they a feminist?

[quote/] I mean, imagine if I said "I'm a car mechanic." You could then ask me what I like about fixing cars. And I could then get irrationally angry, tell them that I actually scoop ice cream, I just call myself a car mechanic, and then invent rules saying that no one can comment on what car mechanics do or do not do, because I'm tired of people assuming I work on cars.[/quote]

this depends...if you took it upson yourself to deicde tham Femenist meant "I want to destroy all the games" as some people honest to god have (just scroll back a few pages and see the outrageous stuff people have come up with) I'm sure people would be pissed




[quote/]I specifically said "feminist," meaning only those who see themselves as feminists would be subject to it. I never pointed at someone and went "YOU, sir or madam, are a FEMINIST! I now IRRATIONALLY HATE YOU for being a FEMINIST." I never engaged with anyone in this thread but you, much less told them they believed in a philosophy without any knowledge of whether or not they do.[/quote]
in your very first post the way you used "feminist" described a homogenous group of people who all thought the same thing and were the only ones criticising games

[quote/] but we're not debating games here. Going off the last few pages, we're making up rules and then snarking at people who dare to criticize them. Thus, bringing up the merits of feminism does nothing to shift the discussion off of games, since there was no such discussion in the first place.[/quote]
obviously no...this thread is purely meta...

but it happens in the general discussion, I mean for fuck sake we have an entire thread titled "should femenists step off our hobby" implying no one ever had a problem or obsevered games that way until the Femenist army moved in

 

[JimB]

I think the point being made (as you well know) is that a woman can have an abortion without the father's consent, just as she can have a child without the father's consent and sue for money to support it. This is an imbalance, whether you wish to acknowledge it or not.

Okay, so let's reverse the situation. Let's say a woman can't get an abortion without a man's consent. This means a man can force her to carry to term a child she doesn't want, and presumably can dictate many behaviors related to her health in order to ensure that the child is born. The woman has lost control over her own body and autonomy, and she has gained no reciprocal control over the man's body and autonomy. Would you consider that an imbalance?

 

[Saetha]

]
Certainly, I can't deduce the favorite movie or foods of someone simply because they identify as a feminist. Saying I can't deduce anything about them at all is silly, and smacks of the word "feminism" being a useless descriptor.

so at what point would YOU call someone a Femenist?

let me ask you again if someone criticises a game for being sexist are they a feminist?

No, and you really ought to stop trying to trap me into saying something just so you can pick it apart. I never said that, I don't think criticizing something for being sexist automatically makes one a feminist, and I'm not entirely sure why you're bringing this up to me. You seem to want me to make an argument just so you can tear into me for making it. Well, sorry, I'm not here to be your personal strawman (Woman. Whatever)

[quote/] I mean, imagine if I said "I'm a car mechanic." You could then ask me what I like about fixing cars. And I could then get irrationally angry, tell them that I actually scoop ice cream, I just call myself a car mechanic, and then invent rules saying that no one can comment on what car mechanics do or do not do, because I'm tired of people assuming I work on cars.

this depends...if you took it upson yourself to deicde tham Femenist meant "I want to destroy all the games" as some people honest to god have (just scroll back a few pages and see the outrageous stuff people have come up with) I'm sure people would be pissed [/quote]

That's great, but again, this does not relate to me or anything I've said in this thread. I don't think feminists want to destroy all games - literally two posts ago I scoffed at the idea that "feminist" and "gamer" are mutually exclusive. Why are you coming at me with this, exactly?

For someone so upset about people generalizing feminists, you sure are eager to tar me with the same brush as people you've debated with in the past.

[quote/]I specifically said "feminist," meaning only those who see themselves as feminists would be subject to it. I never pointed at someone and went "YOU, sir or madam, are a FEMINIST! I now IRRATIONALLY HATE YOU for being a FEMINIST." I never engaged with anyone in this thread but you, much less told them they believed in a philosophy without any knowledge of whether or not they do.

in your very first post the way you used "feminist" described a homogenous group of people who all thought the same thing and were the only ones criticising games [/quote]

Actually, I didn't mention games at all in my original post. I certainly didn't say anything about them criticizing them.

I'll say it again - if you're going to get mad about generalization, why are you doing it to me? This is the second generalization you've applied to me, by the way, after the "People who criticize feminism just don't know what it's about" schtick.

[quote/] but we're not debating games here. Going off the last few pages, we're making up rules and then snarking at people who dare to criticize them. Thus, bringing up the merits of feminism does nothing to shift the discussion off of games, since there was no such discussion in the first place.

obviously no...this thread is purely meta...

but it happens in the general discussion, I mean for fuck sake we have an entire thread titled "should femenists step off our hobby" implying no one ever had a problem or obsevered games that way until the Femenist army moved in[/quote]

And for the third time - how am I to blame for what others think just because we are critical of feminism? Also for the third time - don't get on me for generalizing when, in doing so, you generalize me yourself.

 

[Vault101]

at the risk of dodging the question I want to go back to your original post....

"Nooo, feminists don't want to censor anyone! We don't want to silence anyone! We don't to shut down discussion!

We just want to write up an arbitrary set of rules that obviously favor us with no input from non-feminist or feminist-critical persons, lay out these rules on a forum, and demand you abide by them before engaging us in debate, and basically tell you to sit there and nod your head and lap up every little line we feed you! That's all!"

this was were I took issue

[b/]you immediately put my OP in the "Feminist camp"[/b] you immediately decided my OP was a "feminist" piece and therefore was the banner for your "group" of Feminists, you created "Feminist camp" and "non feminist camp" and reducd the entire debate down to those two sides

you should have replaced "Feminists" in your OP with ME...because "I" was the one saying those things, I never claimed that my post [b/]was using any Feminists theory or ideas[/b] my

post was my OWN opinion and it may very well aligned with a lot of Feminists ideas but unless I specifically said this was related to feminism, feminism the political ideology and not "feminism the incredibly basic idea that men and women are equal" then you should have left out your "group of femenists"

and that was the entire idea of rule 3 and 4....to stop people creating homogenous bogeywoman in their heads

and to stop what we've been doing for the past 3 pages....a round and round loop of talking about what feminism is...now if this were any other thread that would have just been pointless BS (pointless BS I designed my "rules" to cut out) but since this is a meta thread that's fine...even if I kind of had to loop around and go full circle to make my point again...that might be my fault

[quote/]
"Nooo, Vault doesn't want to censor anyone! you don't want to silence anyone! you don't to shut down discussion!

you just want to write up an arbitrary set of rules that obviously favor us with no input from people who disagree wih you or Vault-critical persons, lay out these rules on a forum, and demand you abide by them before engaging us in debate, and basically tell you to sit there and nod your head and lap up every little line we feed you! That's all!"
.[/quote]
you should have said THIS^ because with all that dripping sarcasm you weren't criticising feminist's when you wrote that...you were criticising my post,but instead you used my post to adress a vauge group of "feminists"

I may have identified as "Feminist" ....not by outright saying it but by a vague statement (in the should Femenests step off our hobby thread) it might have been more accurate to merely point out "being feminist and a gamer and not mutually exclusive" instead I said without outright saying it "I won't step off your hobby'

my point is I'm hesitant to use the word "Feminist" in regards to myself or to what I say...NOT for the reasons I'd say most people use [I/]I want to distance myself from negative stereotypes[/I] but because I put more weight on the word, and I believe it requires a little more knoweldege than "men and woman are equal" my understanding of it in an academic sense is rudimentary at best

so...I ain't gonna bring it up unless I absolutely mean it

and many would gladly call themselves femenists based on nothing more than "men and woman are eaqual" and that's perfectly fine

but if youre gonna criticise feminists criticise them...not slap their name on my arguments to do it

 

[Saetha]

Snip

It's great that this is the "idea" you had when creating rules 3 and 4, but one cannot be blamed for not getting the idea, and instead drawing their own conclusions based on the incomplete information you provided.

And if you did not want people to drag feminism into this, you shouldn't have done it yourself with the preface to 4. That preface should've instead been used to explain why you, specifically, don't want anything there to be labelled feminist, rather than take potshots at people who disagree with you and then go on about how using the word feminist makes things political.

Again, perhaps your rules could do with some revision.

And you really shouldn't generalize people at all, especially when lecturing them on how they shouldn't generalize others.

 

[Vault101]

It's great that this is the "idea" you had when creating rules 3 and 4, but one cannot be blamed for not getting the idea, and instead drawing their own conclusions based on the incomplete information you provided.

aplogies....it did take me this long to finally explain my point better

 

[Grampy_bone]

snip

Lots of strawmen in here.

"this isn't about questioning weather or not something might be sexist, that's a discussion worth having, this is about strong denial"

"This really is not political, the issue of female representation in games is a very basic position and shouldn't really be controversial"

I disagree with both of these points, that the issue of sexism in games is a discussion worth having, or that feminism is not controversial. This is what is known as "begging the question," a fallacy. I don't think sexism in games is a valid discussion until the person bringing it up proves why it matters and why it's more important than free speech, freedom of expression, and artistic license. If the people attacking games were making this point as part of a personal critique that would be one thing, but they make it a point of social order and morality. I contend that people cannot seize the moral high ground without fighting for it first. Feminists consider this point a given since their ideology tells them they always possess moral superiority, and thus get irrationally upset when you question their assumptions.

"do you feel that buy insulting your favourite game/movie/book/erotic fan fic that they have insulted a part of you?"

I don't feel personally insulted when feminists insult games I like, but I do feel personally insulted when feminists personally insult me... which they do whenever I question their ideology. As soon as you say anything mean about feminism you are immediately labeled a misogynist. This is a pure ad-hominem attack. Feminists are the ones who go apoplectic when they receive the slightest criticism; this is because feminism is both inflexibly absolute as well as internally inconsistent. Feminists are among the most belligerent and intolerant folks you will ever meet, but because their ideology is about "equality" and "good for everyone," the more you point out their belligerence and intolerance the more belligerent and intolerant they become. This is known as "cognitive dissonance."

"a push for better representation is not and will never be a "threat" to what we hold dear, and if you enjoy projects made from the heart with compelling and diverse characters this should not be a worry

It's ironic that someone would make this claim a week after a large number of media outlets ran articles condemning gamers, arguing they should be expelled from the subculture, and demanding all further games be made according to their personal tastes. I wish I had made that up, but it actually happened. People may point out that it didn't work and now those journalists look like fools, but consider the following hypothetical situation:

Someone's friend comes to your party, gets incredibly drunk, and starts waving a gun around making crazy demands. The gun isn't loaded and they don't hurt anyone, and end up passing out is a puddle of their own vomit. Now, even though they didn't do anything strictly illegal, and even though no one got hurt, and no one probably will in the immediate future, are you justified in banning this person from all future parties you may hold? Of course you are.

This is what feminists have done: i.e. they have made atrocious asses of themselves, ignored all boundaries and rules of decorum, waved around various weapons, made threats and demands, and generally been as unpleasant as possible. Feminists just don't seem to think the rules should apply to them. The greater gaming community is perfectly in their rights to not invite feminists to the party anymore.


Now I have some of my own strawmen arguments which I will refute:

You're generalizing! Not ALL feminists are like that! Feminism is about equality! Argle bargle blurgle hurgle!

The idea that one is not allowed to generalize is a falsehood. Consider cats. Every cat is a unique and special snowflake, but does that mean we can make NO valid generalizations about cats? Of course we can. While humans may be more diverse than cats, feminists certainly aren't. We can look at common feminist behavior, examine the inflexible and inconsistent feminist doctrine, and make completely valid assumptions about feminists as a whole. For example, "feminists oppose patriarchy," is both a generalization and completely true. Saying "you're making a generalization" is just a debating trick to marginalize an argument without refuting it.

What it comes down to is that regardless of what they say feminists don't help anyone, they just shit all over everything. They do not come bringing peace, but the sword. Feminists are more than welcome to be gamers as long as they play nice with everyone else. But I see no reason why we should tolerate a bunch of belligerent jerks in out midst telling us over and over again what horrible pieces of shit we are.

 

[Silvanus]

I don't think sexism in games is a valid discussion until the person bringing it up proves why it matters and why it's more important than free speech, freedom of expression, and artistic license.

Why must criticism be at odds with those freedoms? Most people criticise things all the time without wanting to limit freedom of expression. You're criticising somebody right now, and so am I, and neither of us (as far as I know) wants to limit the freedom of expression.

You have a double standard.

If the people attacking games were making this point as part of a personal critique that would be one thing, but they make it a point of social order and morality. I contend that people cannot seize the moral high ground without fighting for it first. Feminists consider this point a given since their ideology tells them they always possess moral superiority, and thus get irrationally upset when you question their assumptions.

Their ideology tells them this? Is there a definitive feminist handbook of which I'm unaware that lays this out, or are we just generalising?

Someone's friend comes to your party, gets incredibly drunk, and starts waving a gun around making crazy demands. The gun isn't loaded and they don't hurt anyone, and end up passing out is a puddle of their own vomit. Now, even though they didn't do anything strictly illegal, and even though no one got hurt, and no one probably will in the immediate future, are you justified in banning this person from all future parties you may hold? Of course you are.

This is what feminists have done: i.e. they have made atrocious asses of themselves, ignored all boundaries and rules of decorum, waved around various weapons, made threats and demands, and generally been as unpleasant as possible. Feminists just don't seem to think the rules should apply to them. The greater gaming community is perfectly in their rights to not invite feminists to the party anymore.

This is just getting absurd, now. Firstly, the vast majority of feminists I've seen around here are not making "threats and demands"; they're just criticising things, which is something we all indulge in. You're doing it right now; so am I, in response to you. Secondly, you're also appealing to guilt-by-association; tarring a broad international movement of millions of people with the same brush, because of your experience with a relatively tiny subset within the gaming community.

That was also an example of colossal false equivalence-- equating the behaviour of internet feminists with the behaviour of somebody threatening those around them with death. There is a gigantic lack of perspective here, especially considering that so many don't use any threats whatsoever. Anita Sarkeesian has threatened nobody. Vault101 has threatened nobody.

 

[Silvanus]

I don't think sexism in games is a valid discussion until the person bringing it up proves why it matters and why it's more important than free speech, freedom of expression, and artistic license.

Why must criticism be at odds with those freedoms? Most people criticise things all the time without wanting to limit freedom of expression. You're criticising somebody right now, and so am I, and neither of us (as far as I know) wants to limit the freedom of expression.

You have a double standard.

If the people attacking games were making this point as part of a personal critique that would be one thing, but they make it a point of social order and morality. I contend that people cannot seize the moral high ground without fighting for it first. Feminists consider this point a given since their ideology tells them they always possess moral superiority, and thus get irrationally upset when you question their assumptions.

Their ideology tells them this? Is there a definitive feminist handbook of which I'm unaware that lays this out, or are we just generalising?

Someone's friend comes to your party, gets incredibly drunk, and starts waving a gun around making crazy demands. The gun isn't loaded and they don't hurt anyone, and end up passing out is a puddle of their own vomit. Now, even though they didn't do anything strictly illegal, and even though no one got hurt, and no one probably will in the immediate future, are you justified in banning this person from all future parties you may hold? Of course you are.

This is what feminists have done: i.e. they have made atrocious asses of themselves, ignored all boundaries and rules of decorum, waved around various weapons, made threats and demands, and generally been as unpleasant as possible. Feminists just don't seem to think the rules should apply to them. The greater gaming community is perfectly in their rights to not invite feminists to the party anymore.

This is just getting absurd, now. Firstly, the vast majority of feminists I've seen around here are not making "threats and demands"; they're just criticising things, which is something we all indulge in. You're doing it right now; so am I, in response to you. Secondly, you're also appealing to guilt-by-association; tarring a broad international movement of millions of people with the same brush, because of your experience with a relatively tiny subset within the gaming community.

That was also an example of colossal false equivalence-- equating the behaviour of internet feminists with the behaviour of somebody threatening those around them with death. There is a gigantic lack of perspective here, especially considering that so many don't use any threats whatsoever. Anita Sarkeesian has threatened nobody. Vault101 has threatened nobody.