"Mens Rights Activists" Impersonate Domestic Violence Organization online. Hilarity ensues.

Same here, and it's the point Malzberg was making. Very simply, actions have consequences. Artists have a responsibility to have some concept of their audience. Can you say Reefer Madness?

The sociopath is looking for validation for his POV. "Dur! See, someone put my fantasies in a game! That must mean they're okay!" Post #93 is just a variation on the Gunlubbers' Creed.

I repeat, Jeffrey Dahmer said horror films bored him, and he preferred his own imagination.
Here's a real serial killer saying media had no influence, and it bounces off everyone's heads.

No, it comes down to you making your priorities clear.

That's the lip service I was talking about earlier.

If that's the narrative you want to convince yourself inside your head, knock yourself out.
I don't know how many ways and times I'm supposed to say I find the behaviors of the culprits despicable.
I'm not going to dance for you.

Well, if you assume that all serial killers are born with the same brain, then you can certainly accept a sample size of one as validation for your hypothesis.

Beats the sample size of zero video game killers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RapeLay

Oh, well, JAPAN! Of COURSE Japan!

Yeah, I wouldn't hold Japan up as any example of ...well, anything to do with normal sex. I swear every hentai anime but one that I've ever seen or heard of, both before and after being stationed there, involved rape of some kind.

Coincidentally, despite that, it's one of the safest countries in the world to visit.

That's one, but then you have games like GTA where you can have sex with, and then kill, a hooker.

It's as immoral or as moral as you make it.
You CAN kill the hookers.
You CAN kill everybody.
Just like in life.

Oh, all right, there's no tank cheat in life...

Summary of diacanu diarrhea?

Girls wouldn't date him, even though he was a good guy, therefor, fuck 'em.

Everyone else- FEEELINGS!!!!!

Me- No.

I don't even have that much feeling toward it.

Look, if we're brutally honest, the OP had no legs.
Everyone goes "Paul Elam is a cockbag".
"Yep, he sure is".
"You betcha".
And then.....THE END!
What more is there to say?
It's a dead end.
The media stuff you can actually have a conversation.

Smarmy progressives grow bored with lack of conservative opposition; feed on one of their own. News at 11.

At the risk of becoming the history that happened with 14th Doctor and PulanskiGate, my views on this is:

-Doxxing was wrong full stop
-rape threats are wrong, full fucking stop
-Anita Whatsherface is the Ann Coulter of gaming journalism, but that's no excuse for rape threats
-Zoe Quinn has really bad taste in men, but that's no excuse for rape threats
-fanboys have no life and will die virgins and shit like this is why
-there does need to be more cyberbullying/-stalking awareness. I hoped someone had learned this lesson after Megan Meier killed herself over some creepy ass helicopter mom fucked with her head, but I guess not.
-Crazies use any excuse and justification for their action
-anyone that has a legit beef about the gaming journslism would be right to distance themselves from any and all GamerGaters, and preferrably bash those lot outta existance first before revisiting the journalism thing.
-?????
-Profit

I'm assuming this is fairly close to what Diacanu was getting at.

You missed the part where Diacanu thinks women subjected to doxxing and rape threats (let along murder threats) need to toughen up and go about their business, and also how video games/movies/television/pop culture can't ever really be harmful or unhealthy or normalize misogyny or violence against women, because Jeffrey Dahmer didn't need them. I'd say you also failed to capture the overall undercurrent of "Yeah yeah, rape threats are technically shitty, but the real crime is women criticizing the media I enjoy!"

But otherwise, you've more or less got it.

This. Dicky's response to women receiving rape threats, and being doxxed, was to "toughen up." That's the thorn in my side in this particular case.

Can't live under your bed, hardly anyone, even the barely rich, can't afford 24/7 security.
I keep asking for the realistic alternative, and getting nothing.

Present the evidence that it does.
Please, by all means.

Let's cut to the chase.
What games do you want banned?

Can you ask the hookers questions, just like in life? Find out their politics, individual and collective situation, have them tell the story you're in from their point of view?

I'm asking because the video you posted grotesquely misrepresents every part of Sarkeesian's argument, and one of the most striking among the condensed string of 15 misrepresentations per minute concerns the claim that the described objectification of women starts when you get to drag their dead bodies along the floor. It doesn't. Sneaking past them also has them cast as objects, things you're acting upon, rather than subjects, who oscillate into potential action vis-a-vis your own agency. Sarkeesian explains this idea in great detail in the parts of her video that idiot isn't quoting, btw.

Games are coded. They contain nothing that isn't prepared in code. A game that you win by not falling has a falling animation because experiencing the fall as a dead-end is part of the reiteration of play that fills in that gameworld. The animation of falling that the idiot shows is is detailed and intense and made to be seen. Mario, for instance, is very much about not falling, but has no falling animation; we never see Mario smash into the ground in a blurr of spurting blood. That's because someone took the time to add that to the first game, but not to Mario.

The options added to the hookers scene in Hitman are quite limited in terms of the hookers as subjects. If someone does try to explore the further possibilities beyond sneaking past them as objects that complicate their way, they find out that one other thing they can do is act upon them by killing them. Their death animations are again something put into the game deliberately and at cost.

And then the most interesting bit is what is left when you still try to explore more interaction. You get into emergence now: Though the game contains nothing that hasn't been put in, emergent properties of rules and recombinations allow for unscripted things to happen. This tells you the deeper categories employed by the game. And what categories do the hookers fall into? Well, you can drag their bodies along the floor like any other object. Here, the physics engine is with you. The world is complete in terms of moving objects through a three-dimensional space. How is it complete in terms of subjects, and intersubjective agency?

And if you are at all interested in games and gaming, as I and Sarkeesian are and others claim to be, how the hell are these not interesting questions? It is possible, as with all culture, to be immersed in it but not interested in questioning it. The technical term for those uninterested in their own culture is dumb assholes. Traditionally, the dumb assholes are known to issue death threats against those who leave the cave now and again and tell them they could too. In this case, they only do so if Socrates happens to be female.

criticism =/= banning

No banning?
How about editing?

So, what, non-interactive hookers?
No hookers at all?
Hooker can pull a gun on Hitman?
What's the fix?

I already explained what needs to be done. The threats need to be taken seriously. Heaven forfend that death and rape threats get treated with seriousness. When Sarkeesian was going to speak at the Utah State University, she was threatened with the worst school shooting in history. Her requests for security to screen attendees went unheeded, because everyone in Utah is allowed to carry firearms on campus. If she would have went forward with the speaking engagement, it could have most certainly meant her death.

The thing is, even if I didn't have any solutions, your answer is unacceptable. "Whaddyagonadoo" isn't an answer, it's an excuse for inaction. It's what the lazy and cowardly use to shirk responsibility for doing something effective.