>It just looks like they scream REEEEEeeeeeee at anyone being criticised if they happen to be a woman. You just answered your own question. It's a common tactic the liberal media uses for decades to stifle opposition. Everyone who is accused of "wrongthink" from Assange to Trump has been accused of woman hating. Gamergate is no exception.

>>328868 >Why is GamerGate considered to be misogynistic? Because it questioned a couple of feminists.

>>328868 Been said before, but it's all because of who the problems are around. The major players against us are the journalists. Some are women. Therefore, we must be misogynistic. Then they pull bullshit like not allow us to edit our own wikipedia page because the media has been parroting the wrong thing, and when a credible source attempts to set it straight it is suddenly disavowed by wikipedia. All because some of the journalists are women. But they can pretend all they want, as the damage is done. Our distrust in journalism spread by osmosis and now we have a president ready to destroy it. And all I ever wanted was more transparency and to play video games.

>>328868 It's called deflection. EA did the same thing when they were elected Worst Company of the Year. >it must be because we have homosexuals in our games

>>328868 If you're genuinely interesting and are willing to go down the rabbit hole I suggest reading criticism about Saul Alanski's "Rules for Campus Radicals", as it's a literal socialist/progressive/SJW/Identity-politics-idealog playbook for avoiding arguments with opponents, as a "campus radical": You apply a label to your opponents (misogynists) in order to put then in a box and then ignore the box. The next step is to watch some of ex-comrade Yuri's videos who was a KGB agent, who defected after spending years indoctrinating socialist professors like Saul, who in-turn, indoctrinated the SJWs GamerGate is fighting… pic related

>>328896 Socjus types can label people all they want, and then ignore them all they want - but by ignoring them, said people don't suddenly become inactive.

It's a convenient insult. There's no solid definition for a misogynist, so you can apply it to anyone if you try hard enough. The way they use the misogyny label is based on the idea that it's easier to spout bullshit than it is to correct it. Quickly get loads of sites to shit all over Gamergate for misogyny while referencing each other, and you'll get a convenient mob of idiots who won't listen to the other side of the argument. Take that situation and add a "If you weren't a misogynist you wouldn't be getting so upset about being called it" and you have a really convenient and easy logic trap. And this can be adapted to work against anything, you don't have to be able to think to pull it off.

They just use it to silence/shame people that disagree with them because they lack the ability to converse with people that disagree with them since they only hang out exclusively with people that agree with them not just on a social level but on an ideological level. The just repeat it as many times as possible without evidence and if you ask for evidence they will just insult you,google it or give you a non answer,it boils down to this self-righteousness that they are always right even when they are wrong its infected heavily the democratic party as well as the liberal media

Specifically, GamerGate started as a backlash against censorship of discussion about a potential corruption scandal involving a female SJW "game developer" having an affair with a journalist. Furthermore, the most inflammatory of the "Gamers are Dead" articles (that decried gamer culture for being mostly male and marked the "declaration of war" of GamerGate) was written by a female SJW. According to SJWs, anyone who disagrees with or criticises a female SJW (or SJW views on gender) is a "misogynist". Anyone who disagrees with or criticises a black SJW (or SJW views on race) is a "racist". This is because it's far more convenient and effective to label one's political enemies as irrational and prejudiced than to engage with their arguments.