The favored attack of SJWs is the ad hominem. It’s an easy way for them to feel safe and secure in the false characterization of their intended victim, and it’s a big trap for the unsuspecting recipient. For the inexperienced layman coming across this situation, one’s normal reaction is to go on the defensive and attempt to explain why you are not whatever they are accusing you of being. This plays right into their hands as they then embark on continuing rounds of illogical argument designed to drive their victim to despair. A common tactic is to get the victim to apologise – apologising isn’t so hard, is it? This again is a big trap, much like when they ask for concessions – give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. And they are never ever satisfied. They will keep going until you are destroyed.

So for the unitiated I have prepared a sample list of common ah hom attacks that SJWs use in these situations. This list is not comprehensive, (it is rather difficult to keep up with the bewildering number of terms which they continue to invent as it suits them), so I encourage my faithful readers to add their own to this list. Perhaps some SJWs can chime in, in case I’ve missed any that they know about! Ahahahahahahaha. But seriously folks …

Racist – a white person who disagrees with a non-white SJW on any matter.

Misogynist – a man who disagrees with an SJW female on any matter.

Homophobe – a man who disagrees with a homosexual SJW on any matter. For some reason females are exempt from this tag.

Fascist – Term used by an ‘intellectual’ SJW in place of Racist.

Bigot – Back-up insult used together with one of the other terms to add weight to the abuse.

Vandal – Someone who disagrees with an SJW over anything to do with the environment.

Denier – Anyone who refuses to follow the Great Global Warming scam.

Gamer – a new insult signifying a person who does not agree that games should be a platform for SJW activism.

Sexist – Back-up insult used with one of the other terms to add weight to the abuse.

Rapist – a man who does not adhere to a strict, vague and ever-changing performance and behaviour criteria during any form of physical contact with a female.

Traitor – any female or non-white person who disagrees with an SJW on any matter.

Not a real ‘…’ – someone of a protected sub-group who disagrees with an SJW on any matter. For example, “He is not a real homosexual.”

Victimizer – anyone who opposes any SJW on any matter.

Intolerant Oppressor – a person who objects to another culture’s practice no matter its shape, form or intent.

Nazi – a person who publically wins an argument against an SJW.

Tea-bagger – a woman or gay man who is penetrated by a non-SJW man.

Sock-Puppet – a lower caste version of a victimizer. Victimizers are a legitimate threat to SJWs, whereas sock-puppets are akin to bees in a bee hive. Trust me, it makes sense to them.

Vox Day has a post up concerning what is supposed to be a leaked internal post from Gawker Media’s Nick Denton. Here is the interesting bit:

“… It was there all along and oh so very simple. infiltrate the group and kill
them from the inside. The media parade that has been going on for weeks
now hasn’t done anything worth a damn. Time and effort thrown out the
window with needless articles over this shit show. None of it has made a damn bit of difference until now. Everyone is eager to throw themselves at mainstream outlets. but none of them are eager to spend the money they are already using to fix this problem the right way. So I had someone send out feelers looking for people to work on a “special project” for me. Those that made it through screening have been taking part in an effort to police the group from the inside, causing a wedge to be driven amongst them. Today serves as evidence of money well spent. they have begun to crack and their influential people are beginning to part ways with the group.

Eventually there will be such a small minority that it will just blow over and nobody will care …”

My bullshit antenna went up very quickly on reading this. If gamergate was really such a problem and you had gone to such lengths to infiltrate its activities, why would you be sending out this sort of rubbish even internally? This seems to me to be an attempt to salvage something from their own failed infiltration attempt. In other words, their initial plan didn’t work so maybe they can stir up the gamergaters by “leaking” this one out to the general mainstream. Once again, and I’ve said it before, the anti-gamergate crowd is in serious trouble because their usual tactics are not working and they are not astute enough to put themselves in the heads of their opponents in order to figure out what to do. They think everyone sees the world the same way that they do and they react accordingly.

There is another possibility as well. That they really did do an infiltration attempt and that this memo was indeed leaked from inside Gawker. Which behooves me to ask, who has exactly done the infiltrating here? You’re boasting internally that you’ve gone and infiltrated your enemy and someone on the inside of your organisation leaked that out? That’s kind of embarrassing and ironic all rolled up into one fun-bag of shame if you ask me. Either way the panic continues.

Apparently, feminists want equality for women. You would think that this would mean that they want a level playing field, but that is the last thing on their agenda. A major part of the anti-gamergate crowing by the pinkshirts has been that the gaming industry should do more to encourage women. Thus are destroyed their lofty goals of equality. I mean, how is it possible to desire a level playing field but then also want special treatment at the same time? The two are like oil and water. But making sense with the SJW crowd never does any good – logic is anathema to them.

Requiring special treatment sends the automatic message that on their own women are not good enough. Even the act of encouraging women is self-defeating. If you want something then you should just go and do it. Roberta Williams didn’t require any special help, she just went and did it. And she did very well, not because she was a woman but because she was a game designer.

The next pillar they latch onto is that women already in the gaming industry require more support. Why exactly do they need this? If they are unable to do their jobs well and compete with their peers then they’re in the wrong business. But the pinkshirts mistake businesses that exist only to be profitable for pseudo-social security agencies that exist just to make women feel better about their own inappropriate career lifestyle choices. Notice that men in the same roles have to compete equally ruthlessly. This is a tough and lean industry that cannot afford to carry people. Man or woman, you need to perform. If men don’t perform then they’re out, chewed up and thrown to the sidelines. If women don’t perform …?

Then they need to stand as equals in another way. There are a few methods in which this can be achieved. Firstly they can skew the game company to produce games that their meager talents are better suited. This, however, has the unfortunate side effect of the games sucking big fat donkey balls and not enough people buying them. At this point they need to up the ante and declare that traditional gamers are “insert your label here.” The best way to make this stick is to solicit the gaming media to your cause, and those talentless hacks are only too willing to come along for the ride as their white knight status is made for such an undertaking. Favorable coverage for inferior product is thus assured, and anyone who disagrees with them is a “racist” or a “misogynist” or a “bigot” or a “homophobe” or many similar meaningless monikers.

And thus we arrive at the sorry GamerGate mess in which we find ourselves. It will be easy for my enemies to attack me with this post and title. They will equate my stance as meaning that I don’t want women in the industry. It is the natural stawman argument for these types. But I merely do not want women, men, hobbits, homosexuals or anyone else for that matter to be encouraged to join the gaming industry. I simply want great designers to have the necessary drive and motivation to step up and make great games that people want to play. After all, we did it for a good thirty years before all this hoopla started. And contrary to the pinkshirts assertions, good people are not being driven out of the industry. Mediocre hacks with as much talent as my left nut-sack are simply finding that their manipulations have met their Waterloo in the form of a very determined group of people who have woken up just in time to the fact that their hobby was being subverted.

Nobody should be encouraged to do anything for that matter. Get up and stand on your own two feet with the talent and motivation that God gave you. If you are a woman and you identify as a woman first and then a gamer, then you’re a fraud. You should simply identify as a gamer. Your sex has nothing to do with it. When you make it so then you begin a self-fulfilling prophecy to victim-hood status. Which is fine, as long as you stay out of our games and find solace in something else. I suggest chocolate.

Damion Schubert is dumb. How dumb is Damion Schubert, you ask? Damion Schubert is fucking dumb. Surely he can’t be that dumb, you say? Really, he is so dumb he makes retarded people look like they’re ready to invent cold fusion. Now I know you’re joking, you exclaim. Nobody that dumb could even manage to tie their shoelaces in the morning, let alone work out that it’s unhealthy to breathe and eat at the same time.

Well, as proof, he did write this:

“… Most modern armed forces, including those in the US, now recruit women as well as men. So do most terrorist organizations – 15% of all suicide bombers in groups that allow women in. Female security guards are not particularly unique – heck, Bioware has several. There are certainly women in prison – nowhere near the rate of men, of course but certainly enough to give Orange is the New Black plenty of story material. In video games, all of these are non-existent, unless they also have a speaking role.

Yes, what I’m saying is that there is a feminist argument that we should be shooting more women in video games …”

Read it again. Go on, I dare you. That’s right. There’s not enough women blowing themselves up in video games. That is unless they have a speaking role first …

“You infidel pigs! I’m going to detonate this …!” Boom.

I wonder if he gets upset when he sees a WWII game based on, hell I don’t know, the battle of El Alemein, and he notices that no women are getting shot or blown to smithereens. Better get the SJW crowd onto that forthwith, I dare say. But Damion Schubert is not just dumb. He’s also a coward. Damion Schubert being a coward exhibit A:

“… Having more females with guns in your game will lessen criticism of other areas. Having the amorphous, faceless women of the world take roles like soldier, mercenary, guard, criminal, and cop – presenting a vision of the world where women can take positions of strength – will make it far less objectionable when you, as an artist, want to include that strip club or whorehouse. A world where women CAN choose a role of strength and power but some choose not to is… well, not just less objectionable, but also far closer to, you know, reality …”

You see, Damion Schubert, game designer, doesn’t really want women in his games in combat roles because it’s not that close to reality, [no shit, it took him a while – ED]. But because he’s such a spineless grovelling little white knight SJW gamma-male, he thinks that the best way to get his whorehouse women in his games is by giving the socialist equality agents a token amount of chicks-toting-guns. That way they’ll be happy, and he’ll get his crack-whores in his games where they belong.

Which means we now return full circle to Damion Schubert being dumb. Because the quota-loving femi-nazis are never satisfied. You can never give them enough chicks in combat fatigues, Damion. They will never be happy. And it’s fools like you that enable them in the first place. Because you’re dumb.

(Incidentally, I briefly considered that Damion’s post was satire. But then I realised that it’s not possible seeing as he’s incapable of first-level thinking, let alone second or third.)

A quick post here that is important and one which I will refer back to in the coming weeks. The topic is the definition of the term ‘gamer’. This is important as it has been hijacked by the SJW crowd and academia posing as game journalism in order to pit gamers against each other. First they announced that the term was dead, which was fantastically stupid and alerted a lot of people as to what has been going on behind the scenes now for some time. Now they’re trying to break it down and pit various sub-groups against each other. Divide and conquer is their motto.

So let us get it nice and clear right from the outset.

Definition of ‘Gamer’:

A person who plays video games as a hobby and interest.

That’s it. Simple, eh? Not so fast. The term ‘person’ is key. If you identify as anything else in this equation then you are not a gamer. You are a person with an agenda that is using the gaming industry to advance your pet cause. Some examples:

A woman who plays games.
A man who plays games.
A homosexual who plays games.
An Asian who plays games.
A liberal who plays games.
An old person who plays games.
A young person who plays games.

Need I go on? If you play games once a month or 24 hours a day every day of the year then in general terms there is no difference; you are gamers. If you play on different platforms, it doesn’t matter; you are gamers. If you play MMOs or first-person shooters, it doesn’t matter; you are gamers.

But if you announce that you are X and a gamer, it matters; you are not a gamer. You are the enemy.

I’ve been having an internet comment fight over at Spinksville. In the past Spinks and I have got on well. She’s pretty smart, and by the sounds of it a good gamer, and I like that in people. But now she’s bought into the whole “inclusion equals equality equals why can’t we all be nice to each other rubbish”, so we’ve been having a nice lowbrow little argument over at her blog.

But it got me thinking. Because at the end of her last comment she said:

“… I just find the saddest part of this is as gamers, we should be cheering when our industry expands and brings in new people to game with …”

As I said in my comment to this, why is more people necessarily a better thing? In my direct life experience, more people usually equals a higher suck ratio. More means more idiots, more people who don’t recognise a half-decent game, more trolls, and more mouth breathers. The very people that Spinks and her ilk complain about all the time. It reminds me of that newbie blogger initiative bullshit that they trot out now on an annual basis. Socials only feel comfortable when they are lots of fellow socials in their group. They cannot stand on their own. An extreme example is when a young teenage girl gets lured into prostitution. The vast majority of them then lure all their girlfriends in as well. It makes them feel better when they’re all in the shit together.

But more than that, socials want social recognition and confirmation that they are “good people”. They want social justification that what they are doing is socially acceptable. That is the most important thing to them. Gaming comes a distant second, and that is why I take the moral high ground on this issue. I know that some of my regular readers are getting sick of this subject, and decrying my “negativity”. But when the drums of war beat the only thing to do is get up and fight or run away. You don’t like my negativity, then run away. I’m not forcing you to read this blog.

There’s another reason why socials want more people in whatever their collective hobby is. When they mean more people, they mean more people like them. More people who have a social agenda first, and a love of the hobby second. They use collective mass to overwhelm their opponents. “See how many people want this!” they chant. One by one they take over the institutions that people set up from a love for whatever they were doing.

Spinks wrote: “… Games don’t have political screeds on their loading screens …”

I thought so too until I bumped into a male NPC with a husband in Elder Scrolls Online.

As recently as 2010 I wrote a post on this blog about why people should not have to hide the fact that they enjoy video games in their spare time. Some of my most regular and free-thinking commentators said that for them to do so would be socially suicidal. I myself have never given a tinker’s cuss to what others think about me, so this was a little eye-opening at the time. Four years later and video-games are mainstream. I regularly meet people in real life who tell me they enjoy video-games. Nobody bats an eyelid.

I suppose I should be happy with this, but of course I am not. It was much more preferable when my hobby was socially maligned, because we were left the fuck alone. There were no social justice wankers, (the real abbreviation of SJW), trying to make our lives “better” by “bringing us all together” in the world of video games. It has taken them a very short time to infect the pot, but now the pot is infected indeed.

The Zoe Quinn saga is by now old news, but in the blogosphere that I inhabit, my fellow bloggers are only now waking up to what has been happening. They have also expressed surprise in the direction the drama has taken, with the attack on gamers by the very journalist sites that were supposedly speaking for and to them. The problems are two-fold with this understandable confusion. Firstly, the “gamers are dead” drama was a smokescreen invented by the parties defending Zoe Quinn to deflect attention away from what they have been up to these last few years. Secondly, these sites have been speaking at gamers for all this time, with their socialist agenda firmly in mind.

Remember dear readers, equal opportunity is simply institutionalised mediocrity. All these changes that the SJW crowd have been trying to effect in the gaming world are not designed to make games better. And by seizing upon the fact that certain elements of the gaming community are nasty is a pathetic and insulting tactic to force their agenda on us. Of course there are nasty people in gaming. There are nasty people everywhere in the world. I am insulted that I am smeared with the same brush, but I will not explain my actions to them. By doing so, one buys into their controlling social agenda. Much better to stay above the liberal crowd. I will not be part of the herd.

Which brings me back to my initial point. We gamers used to be social pariahs. Which is how I liked it. It was better when it wasn’t socially acceptable for us to say we were gamers, because the very people that would “accept” us socially are the very people now causing all these problems. For the true gamers out there who want nothing more than good games there can be only one recourse. Tune in next time for what that is.