Because using neutral point of view is not the job of women

Ah yes, nothing to do with rampant sexism of exactly the sort you are displaying. Nope nothing at all. Must all be the fault of "women" for having "inferior brains" or something.

Man?

I am.

Have you ever dated??

Yep.

Women are the single most argumentative, must be right, cant change their minds, NEEDS AN APOLOGY EVEN WHEN PROVEN WRONG group out their.

Once you move into the realm of "all women are X" for some attribute like that you're essentially engaging in textbook sexism. All women are not like that. Some are, some aren't. Some men are, some aren't. There are plenty of tales of (male) bosses at work who must always be right no matter what.

No, he is not right. Because his assumption is based on the idea that if women -choose- not to participate it must be all on them because there could be no unpleasantness which dominates that choice.

Karamshock is basically an idiot. He generally spams any thread like this with poorly reasoned arguments as to how the status quo is fine, nothing is wrong and nothing should ever be done.

Ah yes, the old "bias doesn't exist because men and women are different" argument.

Yes, I agree, the one defining characteristic definition of how women differ from men is the propensity to edit wikipedia articles. As we have seen, this is one of the most gender imbalanced places around so it this must be the canonical difference, with other, lesser differences such as professional sports[*] being mere shadows.

[*] Yep. Going by the results in the last Olympics, if women and men raced in the same marathon race and were cut off merely by time, there would be less gender imbalance than there is on wikipedia.

It's almost always guys. The naked cyclist was a regular sight around cambridge. He wore shoes, socks, a huge beard and a very smug expression as he cycled slowly arounf the town.

He's not trying to claim it as fact, he's saying he thinks.

Yeah and he's not justifying why he thinks that. I can genuinely believe in unicorns and faries. You'd rightly think me an idiot if I did.

You didn't tell him what he thought was crap, you told him to shut up.

Yeah I did: what do you think the well known expression "put up or shut up" means? Or for that matter the common use of [citation needed] on slashdot (derived of course from wikipedia).

It's not free speech if he has to shut up.

You seem to be under the impression that I wield more power than I actually do. All I can do is tell him he should shut up instead of spouting unsubstantiated crap.

What people should do is join their communities, use their communities instead of laws to fix the issues in their communities and be as responsible as they can be for their families, their friends and their neighbors.

Is this not exactly what Sarkeesian is doing? She seems to have garnered significant influence with notable game makers in the community.

I'm just still trying to keep up

No you're not. You're trying to make glib and sarcastic comments. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make other than being angry at something or other.

You very well know that making credible threats to either men and women is completely and unambiguously illegal.

It may not be appropriate for a woman to stand there fully naked in the middle of the street

Incidentally that's not illegal in England, though it is in Scotland. Read about the naked rambler for more details if you're interested.

Why do women wear skirts that leave the knees bare?

Skirts below full length became very popular in England during WWII, because of the severe shortages of fabric for clothes. That was in fact the first time it was really socially here acceptable. More than that in fact: it was a sign that you were doing your bit for the war effort by not engaging in excessive consumption.

So, the knees/no knees thing is relatively recent. Once that damn was broken it appears that the length became less and less important.

still: Why do women wear skirts that leave the knees bare?

Why not? It's more comfortable in hot weather and many people believe it looks better too.

I was taught that one ought to cover oneself from the shoulders down to at least the knees.

By whom and according to what logic. I'm sitting here slacking in my office (you can tell I'm slacking since I'm writing this post) wearing shorts and a T shirt. My knees are most certainly visible.

So you're the thought police?

u wot m8?

Seriously when did [citation needed] become a sign of the fascist overlords? He's making unsubstantiaed claims. It's entirely legit for me to call him out on it. He can think what he wishes and say what he wishes. Doesn't mean he won't get replies telling him what he thinks and says is crap.

Free speech cuts both ways.

Your argument is basically:

I'm really ok with this being shitty because it makes the world EQUALLY shitty.

Lovely. How about being the better person and not accepting shittiness in your life instead?

I think this woman is a liar

Put up or shut up. Or, if you prefer [citation needed].

Thanks for proving my point

Your point was that you haven't read anything by this person, can't quote anything by her and yet dismiss everything she has to say. I'm glad that you agree that I proved my point that you're a raging bigot.

I don't believe they can be civilly debated at all.

Well, no. Not with you and the reason is you are clearly very very bigoted:

Modern day feminists are not rational.

There, you've made a gross generalisation about a whole group of people and therefore this one in particular. It is not possible to debate with *you* on this topic because instead of listening to her videos and bringing up points to disagree with you launched into:

$PERSON is of $GENERAL_CATEGORY. I assert that $GENERAL_CATEGORY is unreasonable in some way and cannot be reasoned with. Therefore $PERSON cannot be reasoned with.

The only person who cannot be reasoned with is *you*.