Social justice happens to be, unfortunately, deeply embedded with the problem publishing outlets and figureheads in games journalism. When E3 hit Anita literally went full Thompson on Doom and Fallout, backing her previous one-off (and McIntosh's repeated insistence) about game violence causing real-world violence. The press abandoned her, finally. I really can't believe it's finally over and we're rid of her. She can preach to her choir all she wants, but widespread press acceptance and VIP status at gaming conventions is done for. Whether that's going to result in less focus on social justice by KiA remains to be seen, but honestly I'm not hopeful.

But do you not see how both subs are polarised because of each other. The "SJWs" came about because as they were trying to change things, they received abuse. So they hunkered down, and changed from pushing to being tanks. Because if people weren't going to listen, and were just going to insult them, then they were going to push them. Fuck, I've been polarised a lot. I don't know if you feel the same about yourself. But every time I argue for feminism, and someone goes "nope. not a problem. You're just a victim" or lessens rape (which I feel happens a lot in TumblrInAction) it makes me sad, and mad. Because that sort of behaviour hurts men as well as women. I'm a childhood rape victim - and the sort of work I see to disparage and hurt feminism hurts me – because it makes me more ashamed.

Remember, feminism isn't just about women. It's about also removing the culture around femininity. So men don't have to fit roles. This is a good thing. TiA, and by proxy (and I've seen a few KiA comments) helps this. I've felt KiA has mocked rape before - and this is doing all of us a disservice. I think it stems from the MRA fearfulness that they'll be wrongly accused that this site seems to have. It's a valid thing to be scared of, but ultimately you're more likely to be raped than falsely accused.

SJWs, including myself do lack tact sometimes. But I'd rather be fighting to give everyone a fair chance and lack tact. Than be complicit in stopping this world being a fairer place.

I've even personally found it kind of hard to get excited for ethics in games journalism lately. IGN immediately hunkered down and stopped being a transparent marketing company when GG started, Gawker/Kotaku is (finally) kill, Polygon have been acting ethically (if annoying) for 4-5 months now, and there haven't been a lot of big, public journalistic cock-ups. Almost like games journalists are afraid of being caught. There's no more Dorito Popes or high profile "8/10 it's okay - IGN" reviews. Absolute disasters like Dragon Age II aren't pulling 9/10 scores for no reason in 2015. It's hard not to get sucked into an effort to see Randi and Anita de-throned (not that Randi's harassment in the open source community is remotely related to gaming anyway). Even the recent follow-up GJP leaks were disappointing, given they were mostly "completionist" and anything remotely incriminating was in the original leak.

You're proud of that, and I'm not trying to take it away from you, but I think that's in part due to the general landscape of gamers. We've all had enough of Early Access, and the pressure against Valve to allow refunds, and so on. I'm sure KiA helped in part - but I'm personally of the opinion that it would have happened without. And without we'd have had less misogyny and pushback on feminist issues too.

Absolute disasters like Dragon Age II aren't pulling 9/10 scores for no reason in 2015.

Sidenote. I fucking loved DA2. I've played it around 3 times. It was too linear but I'd of called it a 7 personally.

Also, regarding Pao, I was skeptical of her actual role (and didn't participate) but we all got fucking duped. The founders put her there to take the abuse (and rile up social justice, even using the PR dept. to play up social justice lingo) while the board restructured the company

I don't think it was as simple as that. But I'm also not ruling it out. Either way, it doesn't matter if anyone was duped. Reddit should in no way have behaved the way it did to another human being like that. For me, when the anti-SJW argument is the way they behave, and then to turn around and call people 'cunt' and racial epithets, you're worse. And I feel it stems from the argument of 'free speech' having no bounds that KiA pushes. This is usually the biggest talking point I find between myself and KiA members. I don't want absolute free speech EVERYWHERE. But I do what the ability to practice all forms of free speech.

Coontown's existence has made Reddit a worse place. You see racism bleed everywhere on this site. And having them removed would do the site some great good. And a private company banning that sort of behaviour isn't a horrible thing. And if Reddit profits better, and gets to put more money into the company - than fuck yeah, that makes my life better.

coontown's days are numbered, I think

Hopefully.

Pao had red flags, but is still a human being. A lot of Reddit made presumptions about her, and then attacked her for said presumptions. And I believe the Spez or Yishan (whoever said it) that she was trying to actively stop the subs that cause trouble banned. People weren't willing to give her a chance - and I would wager good money a stupidly high number was because she was an Asian female.

Especially after social justice wrote off Shanley,

Shanley is one of three people that always pushed me away from feminism, not towards it. So I understand that.

But I don't think KiA would even consider a point that SJWs have to say because they're SJWs. I feel anyone who disagrees with KiA is instantly cast a 'SJW' because it's easy to dismiss people once you've demonised them.

Ultimately, I see value in making news sources responsible for their actions. But as said I see that as a smaller part of KiA than some people hope for. And when people from Coontown/TiA/FatPeopleHate tend to gravitate towards you, even a little, there should be big alarm bells ringing that not everything is as it should be.

Social justice is important. Women aren't treated as fairly as they should. And in games, they are often sex objects or secondary objects. There are women gamers, and I think there'd be plenty more if they didn't feel games are for men - because of the fact that to appeal to men, some developers feel the need to exclude a more feminine approach.

I know there are plenty of female orientated games, and this is supply and demand, but it's not a horrible idea slightly changing a game and making it work for everyone. Making a website accessible to blind people is a fantastic thing, and if it changes the overall experience - then it doesn't mean it's worse, right? But when I see posts on KiA I feel people do think that's a horrible infringement of their rights. And for me that's the "me" vs "us" mentality. And I'd personally rather be us.