well, the the escapist was just attacked.

[shrekfan246]

or that Al Gore is just sick of the argument and hit the "off" button. Because that's what this sort of thing needs. Evidence.

Al Gore is too important for that.

He just hired Nixon to do it for him.

My evidence?

Indisputable.

 

[Something Amyss]

I was summarizing your point, you said explicitly, " It's a definition, not the definition."

So, in your own words, what is the definition of misogyny?

If you are summarising my point, why do you keep asking for the definition or my definition? I've explained the irrelevance of my definition, and my point was that there were multiple definitions. How can you summarise that which you patently do not understand?

 

[Skatologist]

Do you even know what the word misogynist means? The dictionary says it means "hatred of all women".

How does hating one, or a handful of awful people, equate to hatred of all women?

Check other sources. Misogyny tends to be used as a shorthand for sexism against women instead of its dictionary definition. Also, feminist theories extends it by listing actions that can be considered misogynistic, including discrimination based on sex, sexual objectification, violence against women, and ,what might be most to the discussion, the denigration of women. I don't like using the word, I prefer sticking by dictionary definitions of things, but I just felt like informing you.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Do you even know what the word misogynist means? The dictionary says it means "hatred of all women".

How does hating one, or a handful of awful people, equate to hatred of all women?

The slut shaming nonsense does.

Quinn is literally irrelevant now.

I disagree. As long as gamergate people keep bringing her up to insult her, she is not irrelevant.

Gamergate has moved so much farther than her.

I agree. There are real issues which they have shed some light on which do matter.

Of course it will move topics. You are literally a month behind the times. Gamergate's racial outrage is a huge part of what it is.

And some of them really are making fake minority accounts. Not all of the minority gamergate accounts of course, which is why people should watch what they say and not be racist assholes, but there is a bit of stupidity on both sides there.

The rest is easily agreed with, so I won't really address it.

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

I was summarizing your point, you said explicitly, " It's a definition, not the definition."

So, in your own words, what is the definition of misogyny?

If you are summarising my point, why do you keep asking for the definition or my definition? I've explained the irrelevance of my definition, and my point was that there were multiple definitions. How can you summarise that which you patently do not understand?

I'm asking for your definition because you say there are multiple definitions which contradict my point, that you cannot claim that GG people are misogynists for hating one single woman.

So what are these multiple definitions exactly?

 

[Something Amyss]

Al Gore is too important for that.

He just hired Nixon to do it for him.

My evidence?

Indisputable.

You deserve an award for your uncompromising devotion to journalistic integrity.

 

[Something Amyss]

So what are these multiple definitions exactly?

You mean, like the one I already gave you?

You already have more than one definition. Since you made up the rest of the claim, what exactly is there to talk about here?

 

[runic knight]

By that loose definition, can you tell me the difference, objectively, to use of "misogynist" between insulting a woman, sending a threat to a woman, criticizing a woman and hating a woman. And do it in such a way that those differences are both noted and that the counterpart to the word, misandry, applies the same to such actions towards men?

You realise we have multiple degrees of assault, murder, and other things, right? You may not like the nature of language, but that doesn't make it incorrect. Whether I can "objectively" point out the difference is irrelevant to the term and whether it encompasses the lot of those acts. But then, asking someone to objectively argue language is a farce in the first place.

Can you objectively tell which version of "literally" someone is using in the phrase "he just literally had a heart attack?"

Indeed, and we call them things like "manslaughter" "First-degree" and so on. We have words and terms that are specifically meant to cover the nuanced nature of our language.

As such, my point is "why do you reduce the value of a word as a specific term by broadening the definition to that it loses meaning?"

All those acts I described could be call "misogynistic" and yet they are very different acts. And one can not even use the claim that it is faster to just label them all the same when the requirement of explaining them requires more effort then calling it like it is in the first place.

Also, it devalues the word further when you attempt to take it from something to all women and loosen it enough to apply to any women. and sadly, I have seen that particular tactic far, far too often. Hell, the overuse of it to attack people and dismiss criticisms is something a lot of people criticize journalists about.

and yes, when you say something like "threat", you are making it about the individual case since no one threatens an entire gender. thus you are trying to take a definition of a person's reaction and motivations towards an individual and insinuate that it was about their gender based only on the fact of the gender itself. To put it another way, you are saying that if it involves a woman at all, then it must represent all women and thus they are not individuals but rather gender first. That is kinda sexist.

The quickest answer there? Because journalists refused to let it be talked about fairly, people got determined to talk about it, and then started to see the ones trying to shut them up as unfit the positions they had and not up to snuff professionally or ethically.

Except even the Escapist hasn't been immune to the #hashtagactivismoutrage, despite being the place that's kept the discussion open without banning or deleting everything under the sun, so that's not it.

Did I say that everyplace was the same? I didn't and I wish you wouldn't misrepresent what I was actually saying like that. The journalists were attempting to kill the discussion though various professional and personal connections and the result of that was that people got angrier. You can see this happen with the totalbiskit post on reddit for instance where this initially sparked. And before that even with the mundane matt video being DMCA'd by Zoe herself. People don't like to be silenced like that.

Even if you disagree with gamergate itself and everything else, surely you can not refuse basic fact that people became more impassioned because of how this was handled then the story itself ever would have spawned without that reaction from the news media.

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

Do you even know what the word misogynist means? The dictionary says it means "hatred of all women".

How does hating one, or a handful of awful people, equate to hatred of all women?

Check other sources. Misogyny tends to be used as a shorthand for sexism against women instead of its dictionary definition. Also, feminist theories extends it by listing actions that can be considered misogynistic, including discrimination based on sex, sexual objectification, violence against women, and ,what might be most to the discussion, the denigration of women. I don't like using the word, I prefer sticking by dictionary definitions of things, but I just felt like informing you.

How is criticizing one woman's actions sexism exactly? If men and women are equal, then they are equally responsible for their own poor behavior.

The slut shaming nonsense does.

Now there's a cogent point. Thank you for addressing the core issue straight on instead of going in circles like that other guy. Look in the Gamergate thread and ask yourself, how many of these posts are slut-shaming Zoe? I bet you can't find a single one in that massive thread.

Is it truly about slut-shaming, or is GG about corruption in the games journalism industry? You decide.

 

[Something Amyss]

Indeed, and we call them things like "manslaughter" "First-degree" and so on. We have words and terms that are specifically meant to cover the nuanced nature of our language.

Which doesn't matter here. Calling something misogyny doesn't have any less bearing than calling something assault.

All those acts I described could be call "misogynistic" and yet they are very different acts.

If only you had just offered a way we could distinguish them. Oh, you did. So this seems like a non-starter. I'm sorry, you seem to have contradicted yourself.

And one can not even use the claim that it is faster to just label them all the same when the requirement of explaining them requires more effort then calling it like it is in the first place.

Who made that claim? Nobody? Good. Hope we're clear there.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

The slut shaming nonsense does.

Now there's a cogent point. Thank you for addressing the core issue straight on instead of going in circles like that other guy. Look in the Gamergate thread and ask yourself, how many of these posts are slut-shaming Zoe? I bet you can't find a single one in that massive thread.

Is it truly about slut-shaming, or is GG about corruption in the games journalism industry? You decide.

I was there. I got a guy suspended for a week, basically just for calling him out on the fact that he was slut shaming. Yes, the general message is now about journalism, but at the start, no.

 

[kyp275]

I go watch a movie with my little niece that I haven't seen in forever, and I come back to somebody who claims that "the SJWs" are worse than the Westboro Baptist Church. Really? Fucking really? My best fucking friend who pointlessly was sent around the world to get murdered didn't have a funeral because of those arses, and you're comparing people who don't buy into a vast of conspiracy theory bullshit that? Forget about the whole blatant and persistent failure to understand what "freedom of speech" actually means which is usually just frustrating, that comparison may be the single grossest thing I've seen said about this whole month-long fiasco.

I will assume that since the Westboro Church was involved, your friend was in the service. I have not heard of them actually manage to cancel a military funeral as the Patriot Guard riders are usually on top of these things, it is most unfortuante.

That being said, maybe now you understand how some of us feel when people from the SJW camp calls us "worse than ISIS". As a veteran who fought and lost fellow Marines to Sunni militants in Iraq, I found those comments to be offensive in the extreme (I'd like to see Faraci repeat that again to my face or other fellow veterans, though he may want to call for an ambulance first).

Yet what did the anti-GG people say back then? "Oh, he didn't meant all of you" "Oh, it's just a joke!" "it's just a hyperbole!"

Yea, how would you feel if I say those same thing to you now? would that make you feel any better?

Leigh Alexander is a bully who makes jokes about destroying peoples dreams, I'm not sure why you'd defend her

Funny how nobody on the pro-GamerGate side says the same things about that Milo guy from Breitbart, or InternetAristocrat, or Davis Aurini... apparently, being a "bully" is okay when you're supporting the "right" agenda.

Funny how everyone on the anti-Gamergate side continues to refuse to call out Leigh Alexander.... even after getting buried by all the records of her bullying others. Apparently, being a "bully" is ok when they're supporting the "right" agenda.

 

[Ilovechocolatemilk]

The slut shaming nonsense does.

Now there's a cogent point. Thank you for addressing the core issue straight on instead of going in circles like that other guy. Look in the Gamergate thread and ask yourself, how many of these posts are slut-shaming Zoe? I bet you can't find a single one in that massive thread.

Is it truly about slut-shaming, or is GG about corruption in the games journalism industry? You decide.

I was there. I got a guy suspended for a week, basically just for calling him out on the fact that he was slut shaming. Yes, the general message is now about journalism, but at the start, no.

So would you agree that GG is not about slut-shaming for the same reason the civil rights movement is not about a poor old woman not being able to get a bus seat?

 

[shrekfan246]

Al Gore is too important for that.

He just hired Nixon to do it for him.

My evidence?

Indisputable.

You deserve an award for your uncompromising devotion to journalistic integrity.

Well, I am on The Escapist.

As we all know, only the best, most hard-hitting and critical of journalistic investigation happens here.

And my evidence for that is the thread I made the other day about Final Fantasy XIII getting a PC release. In which I totally didn't admit that I really really really don't like that game.

...

I can source myself in these circumstances, right?

 

[Something Amyss]

I can source myself in these circumstances, right?

If Psychic Taco can, I think you can.

 

[runic knight]

Indeed, and we call them things like "manslaughter" "First-degree" and so on. We have words and terms that are specifically meant to cover the nuanced nature of our language.

Which doesn't matter here. Calling something misogyny doesn't have any less bearing than calling something assault.

it has baring in a conversation about the definition of a word, especially since you brought up how assault has levels and I pointed out that not only are there specific terms for various levels, but also that "misogyny" has no quantifiers at the moment, just a blanket statement.

All those acts I described could be call "misogynistic" and yet they are very different acts.

If only you had just offered a way we could distinguish them. Oh, you did. So this seems like a non-starter. I'm sorry, you seem to have contradicted yourself.

I asked you to use the word that would describe all examples (misogyny) and then show me how one would use it tactfully so as to get the point across for each idea (a threat, an insult, etc).
Basically I asked you to use the word in such a way that it didn't seem like just a blanket label meant to insult and defame the one labeled it. Care to try again?

And one can not even use the claim that it is faster to just label them all the same when the requirement of explaining them requires more effort then calling it like it is in the first place.

Who made that claim? Nobody? Good. Hope we're clear there.

It was the only thing I could see as rational as to why anyone would take a specific word and bastardize it like you do, well, outside of cheap rhetorical tricks and underhanded shaming of people but I didn't think that was why you wanted to use in the same way a lot of journalists are being criticized for now.

But please, save me the effort of having to guess then. Why do you use the word that means a specific outlook to a group of people and instead try to shoehorn it into meaning any negative view or interaction towards a member of that group?

 

[Sleepy Sol]

It doesn't matter what 'side' did this. The person or group that did it is an asshole. That's about all we should surmise out of this.

Just keep it cool. You were being silenced, but that doesn't mean the 'sjw brigade' or whatever was clearly behind it. Again, makes the tin foil hat that much more noticeable.

As it is now I'm wearing about a quarter of a tin foil hat. Nice fashion accessory.

 

[irishda]

Actually, they gain the perception that it's being perpetrated by the anti-GamerGate side in an attempt to "stifle" discussion, thereby "proving" that they have something to hide or whatever else.

It's a pretty scummy thing for either side to do, but forgive me if I don't immediately believe that the "SJWs" are the ones guilty without any actual evidence.

Their people has doxxed, hacked and threatened people in the past. The Email dump has them pressuring Greg Tito into censoring discussion on GG related issues here, it was them.

Remember everyone, ONE guy telling Greg he feels the thread is basically harassment means the saucer people have DDOSed the site at his behest. We're through the looking glass here people...