Are you just willfully unable to support your slanderous accusations with any evidence or are you just too lost in your hatred for Wu, Sarkeesian, and Quinn?

Are you just willfully unable to support your slanderous accusations without any evidence or are you just hopefully lost in your depraved hatred for Wu, Sarkeesian, and Quinn?

Oh, and you never addressed my accurately showing how Sarkeesian's Bayonetta critique was correct or how you erroneously cherry-picked that critique to unsuccessfully disprove Sarkeesian's arguments...what a shock.

No, we HAVE established that Sarkeesian DID do research and effectively used it as supported evidence. Now you're completely shooting down everything I have to say without any shred of evidence. How do you expect me to take this discussion seriously when you're ignoring everything I'm telling YOU?

I didn't dismiss it because the blogger was biased. I dismissed it because the blogger was biased and made fantastical, unproven speculations tied to highly questionable "evidence"...and I was right to do so. It was definitely naive of you to use that biased blog with fantastical speculations as evidence for your…

I didn't lump you in with Gamergate. I correctly noted that all of your arguments, points, and criticisms align with gamergate and their stances. That disproves your claim you're an unbiased participant. However, since you object to being lumped in with gamergaters, you at least recognize being associated with them…

No, we did establish that Sarkeesian did research and effectively used it as as supported evidence. She used at least 5 games as evidentiary support for most of her arguments. How do you expect me to take this discussion seriously when you ignore everything I've proven to you?

I didn't dismiss it SOLELY based on the side of the blogger...and you know that. I legitimately stated that a clearly biased blog with unproven speculations tied to questionable evidence is NOT solid evidence proving gamergaters did not doxs Ms. Day. And that is absolutely correct. And a "typo" is hardly proof Ms.…

I didn't lump you in with gamergate. I correctly noted that all of your points and defenses were pro-gamergate and aligned with gamergate's main stances. If that insults you, then at least you acknowledge that being associated with gamergate is not a good thing. So, you're making progress.

Firstly, we've already established that Sarkeesian did do research and effectively used it as supported evidence. Secondly, your'e the one who is cherrypicking now by focusing on only one of her examples. Even if everything she said about Bayonetta were incorrect, it wouldn't mean the rest of her work was. It would…

Yes, "proven" is DEFINITELY a stretch. You seem like a level-headed guy, so I am absolutely stunned you would take the speculations and suppositions of a pro-gamergater as evidence, much less proof, that a gamergater was "framed" for doxxing Ms. Day. If you truly value research and evidence, dude, you would scoff at…

As i said above, of course it's researched and legitimate. She chose perfect video game examples from her research and used them to effectively back up her assertions. So your criticisms are not legitimate. If you have a problem with all the examples she used, please lay them all out and say how each of them fails…

That wasn't my point. My point is she never complained about female characters like those, and even said she approved of characters like those. She made it perfectly clear that she had no problem with female characters such as those dying violently as long as they weren't just "damseled" or sexualized female NPCs…

People are lining up to protect women who are "TERRIBLE PEOPLE" huh? Please tell us who these "TERRIBLE PEOPLE" are and what makes them so terrible.

Nobody, including Sarkeesian, wants to eliminate sexy women from video games. She would just prefer they not be used as NPC's to be killed and degraged, or have women's exaggerated sexiness be used as the markers of their gender.

Which side is Heidegger?

She never posits herself as a professional; she posits herself as a critic, and she is one. Also, legitimate, valuable criticism from an amateur source is MUCH more valuable than illegitimate, erroneous criticism from a professional, no?

If that happened, that would be on the critics shoulders. If the "good" people in gamergate who truly only care about "ethics in journalism" started a hashtag only devoted to that, and neither participated in or allowed misogyny and/or harassment, then its critics lopping them in with gamergate would be clearly wrong.

She doesn't cherry-pick anything. Using cogent, effective examples to support one's assertion of a trend is not cherry-picking; it's providing effective evidence.

Again the "unbiased" inquisitor makes unfounded defense of gamergate. It was NEVER proven that a non-gamergater doxxed Ms. Day. Your spreading such lies just further entrenches you within gamergate's numbers.