No girl wins: three ways women unlearn their love of video games

This I understand. I differentiate based on sincerity. It’s easy to “no true Scotsman” feminists, but you don’t oppose GG by aping their tactics and being exactly “anti”.

How does threatening anyone benefit women, exactly?

Right, my mistake. You didn’t say that anyone who likes a particular cartoon is a probably a pedophile, you just said that anyone who publicly discusses liking a particular cartoon probably embraces and enables pedophiles.


Any movement without a “central committee” has issues with “no true Scotsman”

I don’t know how sincere (or non-sincere) some people are in their claims (especially online, but it’s not like I’m a line of sight telepath during physical interaction)

I think admitting that feminism is pretty damn diverse and includes people I (you, we, etc) are bound to partially or almost-fully disagree with would be more productive than declaring feminists who support unlikable movements/ideas/etc. “un-feminist”

The hell I know.

I’ve had people write me that I’d change my opinion on an article and would generally be a “better person” if I got raped.

I have not a shred of an idea what kind of stuff goes on in the head of anyone claiming “feminism” and PMing shit like that (might be a rather dumb troll, but honestly, at this point anything might be some kind of trolling :confused: )


Sometimes I feel like I grew up in some weird paradise, because while it was poor, highly racist, and in many ways highly sexist, there was a pretty even mix of boys and girls in shop class.

1 Like

I don’t know, and I was wondering that when reading about a female gaming journalist who sided with Gamergate, only to get hersef, her family, and her friends doxxed, death threats, rape threats, you name it. And I thought to myself: wait a minute, if one of the shitty things about Gamergate was the rape and death threats against women, why on Earth would you fight against Gamergate by issuing rape and death threats against women?

Somewhat interestingly to me (if for no other reason than as a reminder that none of us are perfect, so stop being douchenozzles every time someone does something imperfect), she was prompted to do so because of something an Offworld regular contributor had written, a description of gamers that, to her, read like a description of autism, and it resonated with her because she has an autistic daughter.


Honestly, these creeps are low enough to dox one of their own and blame it on “anti-GG”

That said, doxing represents your average GG tactics, whereas it would not be championed among people not in that group of MRAs and pro-mra “feminists”.

1 Like

and pro-mra “feminists”

Why the scare quotes on “feminists”, anyway? Are there No True Feminists who care about the rights of men as well as women?

1 Like

MRA’s don’t “care about the rights of men”. They care about the privilege of men being able to hurt and harm women. It’s up to you if you think being able to rape women is your RIGHT as a man, because that’s LITERALLY what MRAs have argued for. Mind you, I’m not for policing the term of “feminist”, but let’s not act like “MRA” means “Caring about men”. It means “hating women”.


I think it’s part of “strike up/strike down” reasoning, where the problem arises not when you’re HARMING PEOPLE, but when you’re harming unapproved type of people (with “undesirables” being fair game)

1 Like

Now, let’s say I stated that feminists have argued for the genocide of men. Or, let’s say that I say that feminism is transphobic by nature. And by some measures, that could be true. Does that mean that that’s what feminism stands for?

Because really, I’m sliding dangerously into a territory that’ll get a person banned from the BB BBS. But that’s sad, because I can say the exact same thing you just said, about feminism, and I’m sure you can see in a nanosecond that it’s bullshit. No, there really are people who are into the MRA movement that care about issues like circumcision, the Women Are Wonderful effect and the nurturing-mother gender role having an effect on lawmaking, and so on. There really are people out there who aren’t content to wait for feminism to fix gender roles, and want to fix the inequities, from a male perspective. And why? Because honestly, take an issue like having the cops called if you’re a guy, taking your daughter to the park, which you can do because you’re smashing those gender roles and you’re staying home with your kid instead of it being your wife by societal default. You know what? You’re more likely to get an earful about how dangerous men are than you are to get a shred of sympathy. And feminists are baffled at why guys aren’t content to just sit down and shut up while the women fix the gender issues…

And that makes them bad apparently. Don’t let the virulent idiots fool you. Paul Elam is to Men’s Rights what Andrea Dworkin is to feminism.

Having said that, I only identified with them for a short time, because man there are a lot of whiners in the MRA movement.


Do you have proof of that? Actual proof, not just one or two people.

I mean, if you were going to say “feminism has a racism problem” or “feminism has a transphobia problem” - I would AGREE, actually. Wholeheartedly. Because… it does?

But seriously, the MRA movement is even more racist. And has even more transphobia problems. And is, of course, massively, massively sexist. If you think otherwise, I’d love to see some evidence. But I doubt I’ll get it, considering you previously have defended bigoted harassment before.


Heading off-topic.

Ok, so, you don’t think advocating rape should be legal is sexist.

Not surprising, coming from the guy who thinks telling abused children to kill themselves isn’t harassment.


It would be nice if there was a consistent and coherent classification of “feminist branches”, because frankly, navigating several orthogonal classifications (“waves” are orthogonal to “radicality” and specific issue-stances like trans-inclusiveness or sex/BDSM/porn positivity) and a whole truckload of not-quite equivalent definitions of same terms is harrowing (how many definitions of, say, “objectification” even exist? I can recall up to four, but I don’t know of a source that would conclusively enumerate them)

I don’t think one can really say that “feminism” as a whole has a trans-exclusion issue. Mainstream feminists will just recoil in horror and say that it’s a TERF thing and beneath them, TERFs (and their allies) would agree, and you’ll be stuck at that.

And I think that’s potentially a problem, even if specific TERF issue appears to be resolving through natural selection

1 Like

I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I think you need to go back to 4chan.

I’m talking about the time you said reddits that targeted kids - in particular, black, trans, female, and disabled kids - for harassment were OK, because those kids were “dumb”, and when I asked for proof that they didn’t harass others (because I have a LOAD of proof that they do) you ran away and didn’t reply at all because you knew you were advocating for a hate site that openly advertises itself as a friend to GGers and white supremacists.

Why don’t you go back to reddit, or did they ban your favorite Nazi subreddit?


I don’t like MRAs. I don’t like Gamergate. But seriously, this guilt by association and No True Scotsman stuff is bullshit. People find themselves on different sides of arguments. Some good people are convinced by innocent sounding statements that bad people say to legitimise their hatred. This may even be more likely to happen online, where the tribalist effect is exaggerated by the fact that you can find shitty people who hold almost any argument. On some other website in another part of the internet, people are probably bringing up examples of the shitty behaviour of anti-GGers to prove that Gamergate is being unjustly criticised by hypocrites, while the fact that some GGers try to self-police and call out abusive comments by their own shows that at its heart, it’s a peaceful group. I’m not even trying to claim that the main arguments of either group is valid. It’s just this “you have some sympathy for the views of group X. Obviously we both have the same picture of the essential and marginal issues, so you must support all of the ideas and actions of the worst people in this group”. It’s a way to dismiss a particular person who probably doesn’t actually look like your narrative, but it’s no way to have an adult discussion. If you focus on the trolls, it’s not surprising you can’t see anything else on the other side.


There you go. Now you can go make a new thread, and reply there with proof of your original outrageous claims which you never bothered to back up, but please stop pretending you don’t know what I’m talking about and calling me a liar.

1 Like

Go start new threads, so I can be more specific when I ban you all for pointless bickering.