I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Again, it isn't a deliberate misunderstanding. Let's assume your version: he's calling for the social and physical abuse of anyone who disagrees with him on their "position on GG." Do you understand that that's no better? That's exactly the same as assholes on the "pro-GG side" who call for bad things to happen to…

Jesus God, I hope not. She made me hate practically every scene she was in in BG.

That's *you*. Can you honestly not comprehend that your subjective take on something - particularly something you already have a "side" in (and please, don't try to say you don't - your comments are fairly self-explanatory) - might not be the same as someone else's?

Uhm, no.

Sorry... I read his twitter posts for the first time (in a Guardian article, actually) and I think that it makes him sound like an asshole. "Ultimately #GamerGate is reaffirming what we've known to be true for decades: nerds should be constantly shamed and degraded into submission" is what he said. You can try to…

Wait. What? What the FUCK are you talking about? Religion is a group that you choose to be part of. You're just picking two extremely negative examples (ISIS and Nazi) to color the analogy long before you make it. That's the entire reason Godwinning in an argument is tantamount to losing the argument - mention of…

I honestly don't feel that video games are "male spaces" (in fact, quite the opposite, and I find it funny that something that has historically been a geekspace where guys COMPLAINED about bro culture is now viewed as a bastion of bro culture).

He actually pointed out that characters that ask you to speak to old flames are NOT the case he's discussing. So your entire post is invalid here.

What in God's name are you *talking* about? You're inventing a set of extremely implausible scenarios basically to fuel a "US pays the piper" fantasy.

Stupid article.

I think you misread what antblanche said? Because he/she is right. Rape is determined by consent. Someone under the age of consent cannot give consent, and hence sex with them is always considered rape, even if they say "yes please" and sign on the dotted line.

No, that's part of the same bullshit mantra that this entire website rails against. To then passively condone it by intimating that this is somehow less than rape is bull. Hell, they aren't even being charged with rape.

Not quite sure why I'm surprised with your error (or even IF I am, frankly), but the age of consent in Pennsylvania is 16. Meaning, if she was 16 and he was 22, then it was not considered rape, either "rape rape" or statutory rape, for that reason. You can go ahead and update your article.

Only one use of the word "rape" in an article about two people raping someone. It's not even in the headline of the article.

Is this a joke?

Is it just me or is he giving off a very Andy Kaufman-y vibe?

WASPs already do. Jussayin'

I love how badly this is backfiring. Were you expecting everyone to be up in arms, rather than talk about how they or loved ones also have this actual condition? Or is ableism okay when you think disability runs afoul of your view of feminism?

Is your friend also in Sweden? Or are you just an asshole ableist?