Because as we all know, “empathy” and “decency” is when you publish a hit piece against a small startup of fewer than a dozen people for not having the proper demographic breakdown within said group of fewer than a dozen people...

Is this seriously the sort of thing that passes for journalism at Kotaku nowadays? “Indie dev with fewer than a dozen staff doesn’t have any womxn” is the sort of thing i would expect to see from a blogger on ResetEra, not from a mainstream games publication.

It’s hilarious that you actually think humans might have undergone some significant evolution between 1953 and now. Like, do you even know how evolution works?

“You do not get to blame a group to which anyone belongs through no choice of their own: race, gender, sex, sexuality, health/disability, etc.”

If your spouse goes to the police and says that out of the last 300 times you’ve had sex, time #47 specifically was rape, but it was 10 years ago and there is no corroborating evidence, do you think you should be sent to jail?

How about "bullshit"?

Or they are saying that two conflicting testimonies really don't count for much unless one of them has some corroborating evidence. 

You need to consider all of the posibilities. It is also possible that the accuser is lying, or actually believes they were raped when in reality they weren’t.

False equivalence. There were hundreds of Holocaust survivors willing to testify against the Nazis, which is much different than a he-said she-said scenario. When your entire body of evidence consists of a single testimony that cannot be corroborated, it’s a different situation altogether.

I’m pretty sure that the burden of proof for a felony conviction (in America, at least) is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. I *highly* doubt that a single testimony is enough to meet that standard, whether the crime is mugging or rape or anything else.

It applies universally to anything and everything in which humans are involved. This is no exception.

“and if pointing out that Group A of people can collectively be bad somehow offends you, you need to evaluate why. Because you’re either guilty, or cowardly, or stone-fucking-stupid”

That’s literally exacty what their doing though. Survivors of the Holocaust are called “survivors” because if the Nazis had had their way, there would be not have *been* any survivors. On the other hand, most (if not all) campus rapists don’t want to murder their victims, so the victims can’t be said to have “survived”…

Sort of like when feminists accuse women who don’t share their experiences of having “internalized misogyny”?

Everybody has personal bias and tends to see behavior they dont approve of as the result of some great societal corruption. For white supremacists it’s “degeneracy”, for Christians it’s “society’s rejection of Jesus”, and for feminists it’s “misogyny”.

Nah, i think you’re just ovaryacting. No need to get hysterical about every little thing.

It’s possible that someone does actually know your own mind better than you do. To deny that possibility is both arrogant and ignorant.

The problem with “mansplaining” is that it’s based entirely on subjective experiences. Most men treat women the same way they would treat other men, but some women can’t handle that and want special treatment.