The movement hasn't been shaped by voices within, and I think this is ultimately where I disagree with you. This movement was shaped by voices from outside, voices which hijacked the narrative in an effort to advance their own agenda...

You don't seem to realize that until the media is willing to commit to giving the moderate voices a platform, the "us vs them" mentality and the big lines in the sand will remain. As it is, we're being beaten over the head by how awful and vile these threats are (which is obvious, too, y'know) while at the same time…

And yet when any moderate member of Gamergate speaks out, calling for the big wide brushes to be put away, they're immediately attacked, marginalized, and relegated to the "ignore" pile quicker than you or I could say "double-standard." It's happening in the comments in this article!

They're the "defining voice" because commentators like you and the wider media have carefully constructed a narrative that they're the "defining voice." But it's not true at all, despite how savagely some want us all to believe it—and so long as they continue to push the same straw man, you'll push the radical …

And yet it seems one example of one developer who happens to have a penis was enough to support the argument. Double-standard much?

I can point you to comments I made on another article like this where I was reminded, in no uncertain terms, that feminism is a defined movement. There's an uber double-standard being perpetuated and I'm going to call it out when I see it.

You asked what the payoff would be from this hypothetical corruption. I gave you the answer.

Remember this comment when a radical feminist threatens a man. Or remember this comment when a radical Islamist kidnaps a Yazidi woman.

Dear "We're tired of Gamergate" Kotaku,

Take a moment to reflect on how incredibly sexist that statement is...

Lots and lots of eyeballs. In this business (advertising) eyeballs are money—lots of it.

Media: Mission Accomplished.

I'm about 6 hours in and I'm loving it. It's very charming.

I was worried it would be too much like its predecessor. I'll wait for a sale. Thanks for the review!

Not everyone who subscribes to feminism or identifies as a feminists holds to that definition; some would argue it has a smaller scope, others that it is larger. There are modern feminists, radical feminists, libertarian feminists, etc.

That post is a model for why there's so many GG voices crying out "Stop lumping us in the with lunatics! They don't represent us or the movement!" I basically agree with everything you said. /hi5

This is what the appropriate response to this kind of behavior looks like.

I can't. And this is the part that really, truly bothers me about the whole thing: the anti-GG folks want to say that GG is not centralized, it has no unifying voice. Yet at the same time, they fail to recognize a) that because it has no centralized voice, you shouldn't be centralizing its character, and b) feminism…

The big problem, at least from my vantage, is that the vocal pro-feminism voices (a la Sarkeesian) spend more time critiquing the industry as it is without proposing a vision of the future. Saying "There needs to be less scruffy white men" is not the same as, "We recognize that there's a big audience for scruffy white…

At least you own up to it. +5 points!