Sometimes you learn more from the question being asked, than the answer received.
Believe it or not, I tried my best to make it unbiased.
Nope. I was looking for an option - "GTFO with social justice". It's a stupid "first-world problems" construct made by people who won't just bloody grow up. When the Illithids overthrow the human race, these dolls will be the first ones we'll execute. (Not usable for food)
People who are calling those who call out SJWs "evil" can never say they are non-partisan, so I hope none of you people pretend to be.
People who call others "SJWs" are definitely not non-partisan either even though they frequently claim it. I usually won't accuse people of being "evil" because the word itself doesn't mean much to me as an atheist. However, I will certainly question their lack of basic human empathy when they show such disdain for ideas like social justice.
Evidence to support your claim? You are making a lot of assumptions in that post and I see nothing to substantiate it.
As for being a cashcow, have you looked at GamerGate? It was a massive cashcow for many people within the movement. People like Davis Aurini, thunderf00t, Sargon, Mundane Matt, etc... Many GamerGater supporters profited from it.
Are you asking me to throw my friends under the bus? No, that would not be happening. But I don't mind using other examples to support my claim:
Feminist Frequency's(edit: Founded by Anita Sarkeesian) revenue was $18,000 in 2013, and in 2014 it soared to $400,000 without any sort of advancement in the organizations structure. Perhaps just a coincidence?
And I fully agree that Gamergate is profiting off this as well. Both sides are making a profit. I never said that they were not.
Youtube is a massive cash cow, for both youtube itself and the people who make videos.
Perhaps I should reiterate my original statement: I am not against the LGBT community, however I am against people who exploit them for their own personal reasons. I am fully AGAINST SJW's and Gamergaters as a whole.
Wait, what? Wow, I hate to tell you but your logic train just went off the rails and killed a bunch of innocent bystanders who were just waiting for a ride. So let me see if I understand your argument correctly... You are claiming that because Anita Sarkeesian received a ton of donations in 2014 when the whole GamerGate ragefest was happening, that somehow proves she is a con-artist? Ummm... The only thing that actually proves is that she received a lot of support that year. She only wanted like $6,000 for her kickstarter campaign and ended up making a lot more than that. The whole reason for the campaign was so she could make a series of videos, which she did.... Then she received more donations when the GGers started harassing and threatening her. How is that a con? Explain how she conned people.
And yes, both sides have made money from the controversy but you specifically targeted only ONE SIDE in your OP, which is dishonest.
"Perhaps I should reiterate my original statement: I am not against the LGBT community, however I am against people who exploit them for their own personal reasons. I am fully AGAINST SJW's and Gamergaters as a whole."
Wait, you're assuming motive here and then trying to present it as a fact. If you want to say you THINK people are doing that, its fine. However, saying that people ARE exploiting the LGBT community for personal reasons, then you are presenting it as a fact, which requires evidence. If anyone is using people, I THINK its GamerGate using a small number of minorities as a shield to hide behind so that people won't call them racists and sexists, at least that's what I believe they thought. They were wrong if that was the case. Its like when a white person says something racist and then tries to deflect criticism by saying "I can't be racist, I have a black friend!"
I stand up for LGBT people and other groups all the time and it definitely isn't for personal reasons. I do it because I have empathy and care about issues like equality. It seems to me that you may be projecting your own thoughts on other people. Just my opinion.
@abentwookie "People who call others "SJWs" are definitely not non-partisan either even though they frequently claim it. I usually won't accuse people of being "evil" because the word itself doesn't mean much to me as an atheist. However, I will certainly question their lack of basic human empathy when they show such disdain for ideas like social justice."
You are wrong on a couple of counts:
1. I can dislike those who I perceive to be an SJW AND uber-conservatives or people on the other side who are also unable to listen to reason. That would make me non-partisan.
2. You can question whatever you like. You are not the arbiter of morality, although I'm sure you like to think you are. It means absolutely nothing to me what your perception of the situation is. All I care about is rationality and reason, and finding the best way of diplomatically resolving an issue that benefits the largest amount of people. Your idea of social justice is too militant and zealous for logical thinkers to get on board with. As I stated before, the problem is not social justice, it's how and where people are looking for it. People like yourself are fighting the wrong battle against the wrong people, and that is why your peers are failing miserably.
Trying to shut down an argument by calling anyone that disagrees with you a "bigot" is the easiest way of making your whole argument illogical. It would be very easy for people to turn around and call you ignorant for painting the whole of GamerGate with the same brush.
I'll put this in the most polite way possible: When you see people on this site talking about how both sides suck and how they are ruining this series and gaming in general with their antics, that also includes you. Radical leftists such as yourself are half the problem. You are not helping anything or anyone. You are making it worse. You are creating a culture war that most people do not want and find completely unnecessary. A culture war that is now forcing itself into people's lives. If you think that is the best way of getting what you want, you are sadly mistaken. The backlash has already started, and it will get bigger the more you try and silence opposing points of view and force yours onto others.
This is a D&D related forum. "Finds justice objectionable" is pretty much the definition of Chaotic Evil.
Except that, from what I understand from the public debates about "social justice", the term basically means whatever the hell the person at the time wants it to mean. It also appears that reasonable, well meaning people disagree on what social justice entails. I mean, the term "justice" is generally viewed as representing "moral rightness" and people don't even agree on that. Add in a qualifying word like "social" and the picture is even more muddied. This is why it confuses me why someone like you would even compare it to a fantasy world that barely reflects reality in which good and evil are well-define absolutes to further a point.
People calling themselves "SJWs" when they are nothing of the kind is a different issue altogether though. Call it flying under a false flag.
The point is, if you accuse someone of being an "SJW" they can't say "no" without implying that they are in favour of injustice.
It's a "have you stopped beating your wife?" type question. You will be condemned wether you answer "yes" or "no".
The only solution for RATIONAL debate is to drop the pejorative terminology and address actual issue: "should certain elements of society be excluded from representation in video games?"
Radical leftists such as yourself are half the problem.
I have to admit that even though I disagree with most of what you say, I thought you were writing your opinion in a fairly eloquently manner. And then you write something like this which of course makes the whole of your post turn into crap.
I'll put this in the most polite way possible: When you see people on this site talking about how both sides suck and how they are ruining this series and gaming in general with their antics, that also includes you. Radical leftists such as yourself are half the problem. You are not helping anything or anyone. You are making it worse. You are creating a culture war that most people do not want and find completely unnecessary. A culture war that is now forcing itself into people's lives. If you think that is the best way of getting what you want, you are sadly mistaken. The backlash has already started, and it will get bigger the more you try and silence opposing points of view and force yours onto others.
It's kinda interresting how you seem to put yourself in the middle, in some kind of neutral high-ground where you can sit and judge everyone else but deflect incoming blows stating you are the only staying logical and rational. Then only moments later you incorporate obviously emotionally driven arguments into the mix, judging others in a way you don't want to be judged yourself. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
Sometimes you learn more from the question being asked, than the answer received.
Believe it or not, I tried my best to make it unbiased.
Nope. I was looking for an option - "GTFO with social justice". It's a stupid "first-world problems" construct made by people who won't just bloody grow up. When the Illithids overthrow the human race, these dolls will be the first ones we'll execute. (Not usable for food)
I would challenge the assertion that this is a "first-world problem", unless your definition of "first world" includes only the United States of America.
@Fardragon LGBT rights aren't a problem unique to USA, what are you saying?
No, but people who object to them aren't accepted as mainstream in many other contries.
I'm speculating, but I think many european countries are on the same level, or surpassing it, as USA when it comes to LGTB euality work. You can often see these kind of evolution tied to economic progress; the richer the country's average income, the further it has come. And Europe has alot of countries with a very large portion of it's population being urbanized with good incomes and high level of education. It's the best breeding grounds for equality work really, especially when it's coupled with a high level of secularization. It's not that simple correlation of course, but it's a fairly good, generic assessment of a country's overall progress towards equality.
Wait, what? Wow, I hate to tell you but your logic train just went off the rails and killed a bunch of innocent bystanders who were just waiting for a ride. So let me see if I understand your argument correctly... You are claiming that because Anita Sarkeesian received a ton of donations in 2014 when the whole GamerGate ragefest was happening, that somehow proves she is a con-artist? Ummm... The only thing that actually proves is that she received a lot of support that year. She only wanted like $6,000 for her kickstarter campaign and ended up making a lot more than that. The whole reason for the campaign was so she could make a series of videos, which she did.... Then she received more donations when the GGers started harassing and threatening her. How is that a con? Explain how she conned people.
She made money off the back of the whole Gamergate beginning by doing this, yes. Only wanted 6,000 for her kickstarter, yet her "Feminist Frequency" quadrupled over the wake of gamergate. And you don't see anything wrong with this? She wasn't even a fan of gaming until she started making the videos. She threw together a bunch of clips, called it a day, and made money off it. She may not be a great con-artist, but she is one nonetheless. I would say less of a con-artist, and more of a fraud.
As for being a cashcow, have you looked at GamerGate? It was a massive cashcow for many people within the movement. People like Davis Aurini, thunderf00t, Sargon, Mundane Matt, etc... Many GamerGater supporters profited from it.
Wait, you're assuming motive here and then trying to present it as a fact. If you want to say you THINK people are doing that, its fine. However, saying that people ARE exploiting the LGBT community for personal reasons, then you are presenting it as a fact, which requires evidence. If anyone is using people, I THINK its GamerGate using a small number of minorities as a shield to hide behind so that people won't call them racists and sexists, at least that's what I believe they thought. They were wrong if that was the case. Its like when a white person says something racist and then tries to deflect criticism by saying "I can't be racist, I have a black friend!"
I stand up for LGBT people and other groups all the time and it definitely isn't for personal reasons. I do it because I have empathy and care about issues like equality. It seems to me that you may be projecting your own thoughts on other people. Just my opinion.
But, they are exploiting the LGBT community. Not everyone in the LGBT community agrees on the same thing, that is just making assumptions. I am quite sure the Log Cabin Republicans(A Conservative LGBT advocacy group) would not share the same vision as their Democrat opposites.
Also, let me clear something up for a lot of people. Saying something racist, whether or not you have a black friend is still racist. I grew up in a 70% black and 30% white community and the only white kids that said racist things got their butts handed to them. I guess this must be a television/movie thing where white kids are allowed to say racist things towards other races. It doesn't work too well in real life.
@Fardragon LGBT rights aren't a problem unique to USA, what are you saying?
No, but people who object to them aren't accepted as mainstream in many other contries.
I'm speculating, but I think many european countries are on the same level, or surpassing it, as USA when it comes to LGTB euality work. You can often see these kind of evolution tied to economic progress; the richer the country's average income, the further it has come. And Europe has alot of countries with a very large portion of it's population being urbanized with good incomes and high level of education. It's the best breeding grounds for equality work really, especially when it's coupled with a high level of secularization. It's not that simple correlation of course, but it's a fairly good, generic assessment of a country's overall progress towards equality.
I agree that education is a major factor, and perhaps why it is seen as so "divisive" in USA is due to widely different levels of education. Most European countries seem to organise education at the state level, so most people from a paticular country will have a broadly similar education.
I have commented previously on a correlation to those responding hysterically to the presence of a transexual and poor punctuation. This suggests an educational connection.
@Skatan I never claimed to be neutral. Claiming neutrality would imply it's neither here nor there to me, or that I don't have strong feelings, and clearly that isn't even close to being the case. I said I was non-partisan. All that means is that I don't tie myself down to any particular political movement and I consider myself an independent thinker.
This is emotional to me. This is an issue that is personally affecting me. I will not have people with opposing ideas and opinions being shut down and called "bigots" by people that have no desire to sit and negotiate, they just want to win an argument. It's hard enough to deal with those kinds of attitudes in the real world, but when you can't even go to simple forum of one of your favorite games without these idealogues hijacking the conversation to suit their own agenda, that's when you have to say enough is enough and speak out emphatically. Even if everyone else wants to tread on eggshells and pretend there isn't a problem here, I am going to continually fight against this regression in our culture. If I am going to have a culture war forced upon my shoulders, you better believe I'm going to throw it straight back.
Just so we're clear, being emotional doesn't automatically make you irrational. These two things are not connected by default.
You don't like the term "radical leftists"? But I'm sure you don't mind using the term "radical right", right? I don't know if you are aware of this, but there are two ends of a political spectrum, and both of them are too imbalanced to be practical in the real world. Neither of them are good, and both of them have destroyed the reputation of this game before it even got started. Just because your sympathies lie with one of those sides, it doesn't mean you should just ignore it and shepherd away any criticism.
I am allowed to cast judgement the same as anyone else is. I am not averse to it myself, and if anyone wants to have an opinion on me, they are quite welcome to. I just have a problem with people who are unable to be fair to both sides. People who are unable to detach themselves for 2 minutes from their own ideology to see other ideas around them. Judge me but fully consider my point of view before you do, then I will have more respect for you. There was a time where colleges and other institutions used to be just like that. It's sad the point we've come to.
@Skatan I never claimed to be neutral. Claiming neutrality would imply it's neither here nor there to me, or that I don't have strong feelings, and clearly that isn't even close to being the case. I said I was non-partisan. All that means is that I don't tie myself down to any particular political movement and I consider myself an independent thinker.
Neutral or non-partisan, it's just semantics and the interpretation of the word and its meaning is personal. Lets leave that discussion since it's pointless.
This is emotional to me. This is an issue that is personally affecting me. I will not have people with opposing ideas and opinions being shut down and called "bigots" by people that have no desire to sit and negotiate, they just want to win an argument. It's hard enough to deal with those kinds of attitudes in the real world, but when you can't even go to simple forum of one of your favorite games without these idealogues hijacking the conversation to suit their own agenda, that's when you have to say enough is enough and speak out emphatically. Even if everyone else wants to tread on eggshells and pretend there isn't a problem here, I am going to continually fight against this regression in our culture. If I am going to have a culture war forced upon my shoulders, you better believe I'm going to throw it straight back.
But this is what I don't understand, if you are non-partisan how can you have people with opposing ideas? It sure sounds like you have a set opinion, thus you have a "side" in the argument.
I haven't seen any eggshells here lately, quite the opposite really. What you claim to be "regression in our culture" is seen as progressive by alot of people, thus even if you don't want to it kinda seems like you have indeed taken a side. Especially since you refer to it as a war, and a war always need opposing sides, one of which you seem to have joined up with.
You don't like the term "radical leftists"? But I'm sure you don't mind using the term "radical right", right? I don't know if you are aware of this, but there are two ends of a political spectrum, and both of them are too imbalanced to be practical in the real world. Neither of them are good, and both of them have destroyed the reputation of this game before it even got started. Just because your sympathies lie with one of those sides, it doesn't mean you should just ignore it and shepherd away any criticism.
You misinterpret and once more you jump to conclusions which aren't based on anything but your prejudice, which was exactly what made your other post turn into crap. You have no idea what a person votes for, nor what ideology he/she pledges themselves to. Calling someone a "radical lefty" is just childish Trump-style rhetorics intended to smear your opponent.
If you are actually interrested though I can tell you I am liberal, and not the kind of liberal I've seen american republicans call people on the left side, but the proper kind still prevalent in parts of Europe.
I am allowed to cast judgement the same as anyone else is. I am not averse to it myself, and if anyone wants to have an opinion on me, they are quite welcome to. I just have a problem with people who are unable to be fair to both sides. People who are unable to detach themselves for 2 minutes from their own ideology to see other ideas around them. Judge me but fully consider my point of view before you do, then I will have more respect for you. There was a time where colleges and other institutions used to be just like that. It's sad the point we've come to.
Of course you are and I would die for your right to express those views, and as you of course understand, I am therefore allowed to debate this with you as well. There seems to be a difference between you and me though, I have no opinion about you, only about your words and the way you've expressed yourself here. I spoke out only because to me it seemed you did the same thing to others which you claimed they did to you, which is as I said in my last post; hypocrisy.
As a final note I'd just like to say that I disagree with your last comment. True, the internet is ugly at times, luring out the worst sides of many people, BUT I think that never before in the history of humankind have we debated and discussed as much as we do today, and we owe it to forums and other internet sites such as these. Sure, we see a surge in polarization these last couple of years but that's prolly related to world politics more than anything and stuff like that always goes in cycles.
I'll take the first option, though it's clearly a loaded question. Just as the term "sjw" is basically only used as an insult (I am aware that Scott used it for herself), referring to it as "warfare" in the poll question is a surefire way to bias the poll. Not that internet polls are ever a good way to collect data, but this one is intentionally worse than most.
@abentwookie "People who call others "SJWs" are definitely not non-partisan either even though they frequently claim it. I usually won't accuse people of being "evil" because the word itself doesn't mean much to me as an atheist. However, I will certainly question their lack of basic human empathy when they show such disdain for ideas like social justice."
1. I can dislike those who I perceive to be an SJW AND uber-conservatives or people on the other side who are also unable to listen to reason. That would make me non-partisan.
The problem is you don't actually do that which is why you clearly aren't non-partisan. Every argument you post is against the "SJWs" and Feminists. You're not saying anything negative about GamerGate, Anti-Feminists, etc... You're no more non-partisan than I am regardless of how much you want to pretend to be an "unbiased" observer. No one is buying it.
2. You can question whatever you like. You are not the arbiter of morality, although I'm sure you like to think you are. It means absolutely nothing to me what your perception of the situation is. All I care about is rationality and reason, and finding the best way of diplomatically resolving an issue that benefits the largest amount of people.
Then try using some rationality and reason in your arguments, which are nearly devoid of both. Your last comment is interesting. So you care more about making a majority happy than being sure that minorities are treated fairly? When you say the largest amount of people that certainly is what it seems to imply.
Your idea of social justice is too militant and zealous for logical thinkers to get on board with. As I stated before, the problem is not social justice, it's how and where people are looking for it. People like yourself are fighting the wrong battle against the wrong people, and that is why your peers are failing miserably.
Militant? lol Oh, you mean like having transgendered characters in video games? Like having better female and racial minority characters as well so that everyone can feel included and well-represented? If you want to talk about militant, you should talk to GamerGate. They are the ones bombarding sites with angry messages, flooding sites with negative reviews simply because of something in the game they don't like, spouting off about how feminists and minorities are trying to destroy games, sending death threats, etc... They are extremely militant. All I do is advocate for better representation and attempt to debate people on the subject. I don't yell at them, I don't get mad, I don't rage. And yet I'm the militant. Rock solid logic you have there.
Also, failing miserably? Which peers would those be because I am seeing a lot of success. The fact that we are seeing more and more games and movies with better female characters, LGBT, racial minorities and other things that are sending GG types into raging tantrums shows that we are definitely having success. Not to mention that most of these games and movies are doing well financially is also an example of success. And even individuals like Anita Sarkeesian have been insanely successful to the point where you guys complain about how much success she has had. So tell me, who exactly is failing? I'd love to see some examples.
Trying to shut down an argument by calling anyone that disagrees with you a "bigot" is the easiest way of making your whole argument illogical. It would be very easy for people to turn around and call you ignorant for painting the whole of GamerGate with the same brush.
How is that any different than when GamerGaters refer to feminists as feminazis and call people who support equality SJWs? So much for your non-partisanship.
I'll put this in the most polite way possible: When you see people on this site talking about how both sides suck and how they are ruining this series and gaming in general with their antics, that also includes you.
The funny thing is I have seen more people against the GamerGaters than the ones who say both sides suck. And you're not actually saying both sides suck, you're pretending to be unbiased while at the same time focusing entirely on bashing "SJWs" You're not even remotely unbiased.
Radical leftists such as yourself are half the problem. You are not helping anything or anyone. You are making it worse. You are creating a culture war that most people do not want and find completely unnecessary. A culture war that is now forcing itself into people's lives. If you think that is the best way of getting what you want, you are sadly mistaken.
We're not the ones creating it. We're advocating equality. Its the people who have a problem with this that are creating the war.
The backlash has already started, and it will get bigger the more you try and silence opposing points of view and force yours onto others.
There is always a backlash against people trying to fight for equal treatment and representation. There was a backlash against the Women's Suffrage Movement, there was a backlash against the civil rights movement, there was backlash against LGBT activists, there is currently a backlash against BlackLivesMatter... Anytime a group of people stands up and threatens the status quo, there will be a backlash. The problem is that the people involved in the backlash always end up on the wrong side of history.
GamerGater tries to silence opposing viewpoints all the time by making threats until people leave, brigading YouTube channels until people quit, complaining to companies until things get changed in games or people get fired, etc.. Except I'm sure you find ways to justify that in your own mind. This is why you're not unbiased. If you actually believed the things you say, you guys wouldn't complain about a transgendered character in a game, you wouldn't complain about a joke about a GamerGate, etc... But you do. You're no different than anyone else so get off your high horse... the horse is dead..
Comments
And yes, both sides have made money from the controversy but you specifically targeted only ONE SIDE in your OP, which is dishonest.
"Perhaps I should reiterate my original statement: I am not against the LGBT community, however I am against people who exploit them for their own personal reasons. I am fully AGAINST SJW's and Gamergaters as a whole."
Wait, you're assuming motive here and then trying to present it as a fact. If you want to say you THINK people are doing that, its fine. However, saying that people ARE exploiting the LGBT community for personal reasons, then you are presenting it as a fact, which requires evidence. If anyone is using people, I THINK its GamerGate using a small number of minorities as a shield to hide behind so that people won't call them racists and sexists, at least that's what I believe they thought. They were wrong if that was the case. Its like when a white person says something racist and then tries to deflect criticism by saying "I can't be racist, I have a black friend!"
I stand up for LGBT people and other groups all the time and it definitely isn't for personal reasons. I do it because I have empathy and care about issues like equality. It seems to me that you may be projecting your own thoughts on other people. Just my opinion.
You are wrong on a couple of counts:
1. I can dislike those who I perceive to be an SJW AND uber-conservatives or people on the other side who are also unable to listen to reason. That would make me non-partisan.
2. You can question whatever you like. You are not the arbiter of morality, although I'm sure you like to think you are. It means absolutely nothing to me what your perception of the situation is. All I care about is rationality and reason, and finding the best way of diplomatically resolving an issue that benefits the largest amount of people. Your idea of social justice is too militant and zealous for logical thinkers to get on board with. As I stated before, the problem is not social justice, it's how and where people are looking for it. People like yourself are fighting the wrong battle against the wrong people, and that is why your peers are failing miserably.
Trying to shut down an argument by calling anyone that disagrees with you a "bigot" is the easiest way of making your whole argument illogical. It would be very easy for people to turn around and call you ignorant for painting the whole of GamerGate with the same brush.
I'll put this in the most polite way possible: When you see people on this site talking about how both sides suck and how they are ruining this series and gaming in general with their antics, that also includes you. Radical leftists such as yourself are half the problem. You are not helping anything or anyone. You are making it worse. You are creating a culture war that most people do not want and find completely unnecessary. A culture war that is now forcing itself into people's lives. If you think that is the best way of getting what you want, you are sadly mistaken. The backlash has already started, and it will get bigger the more you try and silence opposing points of view and force yours onto others.
The point is, if you accuse someone of being an "SJW" they can't say "no" without implying that they are in favour of injustice.
It's a "have you stopped beating your wife?" type question. You will be condemned wether you answer "yes" or "no".
The only solution for RATIONAL debate is to drop the pejorative terminology and address actual issue: "should certain elements of society be excluded from representation in video games?"
Oh look a homosexual character in a game, and I'm done caring.
That's the problem with labels. People will use them to attach stupid ideas to just causes.
That is because you already showed proof of the gamergate side in your post here(I am agreeing with you on this, not sure why you brought it up): But, they are exploiting the LGBT community. Not everyone in the LGBT community agrees on the same thing, that is just making assumptions. I am quite sure the Log Cabin Republicans(A Conservative LGBT advocacy group) would not share the same vision as their Democrat opposites.
Also, let me clear something up for a lot of people. Saying something racist, whether or not you have a black friend is still racist. I grew up in a 70% black and 30% white community and the only white kids that said racist things got their butts handed to them. I guess this must be a television/movie thing where white kids are allowed to say racist things towards other races. It doesn't work too well in real life.
I have commented previously on a correlation to those responding hysterically to the presence of a transexual and poor punctuation. This suggests an educational connection.
This is emotional to me. This is an issue that is personally affecting me. I will not have people with opposing ideas and opinions being shut down and called "bigots" by people that have no desire to sit and negotiate, they just want to win an argument. It's hard enough to deal with those kinds of attitudes in the real world, but when you can't even go to simple forum of one of your favorite games without these idealogues hijacking the conversation to suit their own agenda, that's when you have to say enough is enough and speak out emphatically. Even if everyone else wants to tread on eggshells and pretend there isn't a problem here, I am going to continually fight against this regression in our culture. If I am going to have a culture war forced upon my shoulders, you better believe I'm going to throw it straight back.
Just so we're clear, being emotional doesn't automatically make you irrational. These two things are not connected by default.
You don't like the term "radical leftists"? But I'm sure you don't mind using the term "radical right", right? I don't know if you are aware of this, but there are two ends of a political spectrum, and both of them are too imbalanced to be practical in the real world. Neither of them are good, and both of them have destroyed the reputation of this game before it even got started. Just because your sympathies lie with one of those sides, it doesn't mean you should just ignore it and shepherd away any criticism.
I am allowed to cast judgement the same as anyone else is. I am not averse to it myself, and if anyone wants to have an opinion on me, they are quite welcome to. I just have a problem with people who are unable to be fair to both sides. People who are unable to detach themselves for 2 minutes from their own ideology to see other ideas around them. Judge me but fully consider my point of view before you do, then I will have more respect for you. There was a time where colleges and other institutions used to be just like that. It's sad the point we've come to.
I haven't seen any eggshells here lately, quite the opposite really. What you claim to be "regression in our culture" is seen as progressive by alot of people, thus even if you don't want to it kinda seems like you have indeed taken a side. Especially since you refer to it as a war, and a war always need opposing sides, one of which you seem to have joined up with. I fully agree and have never said anything else. I was merely commenting on the way you seemed to adress this rather than state my own opinion. You misinterpret and once more you jump to conclusions which aren't based on anything but your prejudice, which was exactly what made your other post turn into crap. You have no idea what a person votes for, nor what ideology he/she pledges themselves to. Calling someone a "radical lefty" is just childish Trump-style rhetorics intended to smear your opponent.
If you are actually interrested though I can tell you I am liberal, and not the kind of liberal I've seen american republicans call people on the left side, but the proper kind still prevalent in parts of Europe. Of course you are and I would die for your right to express those views, and as you of course understand, I am therefore allowed to debate this with you as well. There seems to be a difference between you and me though, I have no opinion about you, only about your words and the way you've expressed yourself here. I spoke out only because to me it seemed you did the same thing to others which you claimed they did to you, which is as I said in my last post; hypocrisy.
As a final note I'd just like to say that I disagree with your last comment. True, the internet is ugly at times, luring out the worst sides of many people, BUT I think that never before in the history of humankind have we debated and discussed as much as we do today, and we owe it to forums and other internet sites such as these. Sure, we see a surge in polarization these last couple of years but that's prolly related to world politics more than anything and stuff like that always goes in cycles.