Alright, I skimmed the whole thing this time, but I think the only paragraph worth responding directly to is this one, considering the rest of the post feels like a repeat of it:
Let's be honest: sure, a lot of the people posting could know absolutely nothing about games and could have just commented for the sake of trolling, keeping up the "patriarchy," etc; but it's just as likely (based on the nature of many of the comments) that a majority were in fact knee-jerk reactions from gamers. Getting upset over the fact that I didn't explicitly name every other type of person who might have spewed hate is frankly missing the point and the result of a myopic look at the overall message. Rather than get defensive, try looking at the big picture and debating its merits/lack thereof instead?
I never claimed "every poster was some sort of deep gamer." Clearly not every single person targeting that girl was a gamer. But the ones who were (and, arguably, the majority were) demonstrated something poignant about the state of current gaming culture; namely, that while there are gamers who have moved past the sexism and the justifying subtle sexism, there are plenty that haven't yet. This is only magnified when looking at discussions on actual gaming forums (and for the sake of making sure the argument isn't made again: I'm aware not everyone in a gaming forum is necessarily a gamer; that's besides the point).runic knight said:As said in my last post, this is only evidence of assholes on the web, nothing more. You can not claim every poster was some sort of deep gamer arguing because of how it affected their hobby, yet your claim of divisions is based in that unspoken assertion. I wonder how many were just trolls, or boys-club-y jerks opposing it because it was a women. You are attributing the reaction to a combination of properties of those who make it up. Males+gamer. While there is a rationality to this (the topic is about gender + games after all), this is flawed. Part may be because of gamers, part may be because of sexist assholes who don't actually play and part may be a mix of the two. Hell, some might have been trolls just being jerks jumping on the hate bandwagon, as is kinda common with 4chan from what news has shown. You present it like the wall of hate was a knee jerk reaction from male gamers upset, when it could well have been a wave of backlash from a collective of groups. That is deceptive, and you, like her, come off as disingenuous when presenting it as such.
Let's be honest: sure, a lot of the people posting could know absolutely nothing about games and could have just commented for the sake of trolling, keeping up the "patriarchy," etc; but it's just as likely (based on the nature of many of the comments) that a majority were in fact knee-jerk reactions from gamers. Getting upset over the fact that I didn't explicitly name every other type of person who might have spewed hate is frankly missing the point and the result of a myopic look at the overall message. Rather than get defensive, try looking at the big picture and debating its merits/lack thereof instead?