That “free speech” is trotted out selectively. That for a lot of people it’s ok for a white guy to advocate sugar-coated genocide, but it’s not ok for black people to demand equal treatment by the police.

But you can appreciate that’s a minority view, right? I mean, if people won’t allow a mosque to be built in their neighbourhood, you really think they’re going to be cool with that? 

Lol. No it doesn’t. Ya dummy.

Sounds jawesome to me.

Seriously, if they can custom tailor ads to me, surely tracking who watched it should be doable, right?

If you say so man.

Are you really claiming that there is nobody that identifies as GG that participates in harassment?

“well aside probably team compatibility” could easily mean “well all the men here will get distracted by a woman so we can’t hire her” or “surely he’d be more comfortable with his own kind.” It obviously could also mean “we don’t want to hire that guy cause he seems like a prick” which is fine, but I just wanted to…

Sexual assault statistics would beg to differ.

So if you’re identifying as a cretin, does that mean you participated in the harassment? Because “cretin” was specifically referring to the people that did.

It seems like Gamergate’s arguments basically boil down to “my free speech (to have problematic elements in games) > your free speech (to discuss those elements).”

You’re not wrong.

I’m always fascinated by what people will step up to defend and the way they articulate it. “I’m not a fan of Trump, but...” seems like a common start to these discussions.

I mean I get choosing to orgasm to death. Dying of black lung because “mexicans” makes less sense to me.

Discuss.

Well, that’s your prerogative, but I think the whole “innocent until proven guilty” concept gets extended far beyond the intent. That’s to keep people out of jail without ample evidence (obviously in theory, not reality), but it has no value in the court of public opinion.

Next step: a sore dick.

Thank god we cleared that up.