No, no no, no no no. "social justice advocate" is not the same as "social justice warrior" and you don't get to change the phrasing you're arguing about now just to suit your need.

We'll there's your problem, you find it offensive and don't like other people defining it for you. Maybe think about why "Gamers" are so mad they've been labeled cis-white-male shitlord misogynerds?

I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just pointing out SJW has a specific meaning, at least as to how I've come to understand it, it's a specific type of hypocrite.

As to the harassment a lot of it can be found here

I only just read about that last night. Something about her trying to claim Linux == GamerGate == 8Chan therefore Lin... MISOGYNNNNNYYYYY!!!!

I don't know enough about her to bring her up here, but apparently she's pissed at Linus for being a dick? which everyone on /. I'm sure can agree to, but I think most of us would shrug it of as, "so"...

I'm not aware of her profiting off of it just yet though, but I'm sure she's working up to it.

The claim you made was "everyone knows", which is an appeal to popularity. The terms SJW and Social Justice have alternate meanings to lots of people, what you're presenting is, "everyone agrees with me" while MANY people are disagreeing with you, RIGHT IN THIS THREAD. Therefore "everyone" does not believe what you say they believe. The example you provided (http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/202080/origin-of-the-phrase-social-justice-warrior) links to a page using RationalWiki and twitter as sources so it's just as relevant as Googling "Social Justice Warrior" and aggregating the top ten results, which clearly defines it as something other than you're trying to define it as.

I'm not insulting you personally, just pointing out that you're clearly wrong with your argument in saying, "everyone" as a way to BTFO people that clearly are not agreeing with you.

I support the dictionary definition of feminism:

But that doesn't mean I support crack pots that claim to be "feminist" so they can justify attacking a man over his shirt.

How feminism is defined and how it's perceived are two entirely different things. In one case it's dictionary definition is used as, "You support equal rights for women, great you're a feminist then!!", on the back end it's used to justify out right attacking people that are "anti-feminist" as being "anti-women" and the use of positive discrimination, which has NOTHING to do with women's rights and everything to do with forcing people to comply with a minority ideology. I've seen people, women, claim to be egalitarians because they don't like the public perception of feminism and get practically lynched for it. I REALLY want feminism to survive, but if it's going to, people need to separate "I support equal rights for all" feminist from the "Boys are dumb, throw rocks at them" feminist.

TL;DR - How something is defined in a book is not always how it's used in practice.

Do you not know what site you're posting on?

It's a form of adhom, "Look at all the horrible things he's said about WOMEN!!", rest of anything else he has to say is irrelevant. It's usually followed by, "HE'S THE LEADER OF GAMERGATE!! IF YOU SUPPORT ETHICS IN JOURNALISM YOU SUPPORT MISOGYNY!!!", because you can't obviously agree with people on some points, but disagree with them entirely on others.

Six anonymous female developers, at the very beginning of GamerGate. I read them and the articles were highly suspicious, I'm skeptical when someone won't put a name (even a sudo name) on something they've said. Others who commented in favor of GamerGate, like all the devs that also support GamerGate, were quickly threatened and had their games boycotted... Which turned out to be a big mistake on the oppositions part. They called for a boycott, GamerGate had the game green-lit.

Both sides are a minority of gamers overall, GamerGate (pro and anti) is some 150,000 accounts on twitter, Facebook groups, KiA (pro subreddit >25,000), GamerGhazi (anti subreddit ~4,750 subs)... The opposition seems to be primarily made up of non-gamers, or people that hate gaming and gamers at the very least. The pro-GamerGate side is MUCH larger than the opposition. Then there's everyone else that just doesn't care one way or the other and/or points and laughs at both sides for being idiots.

Here's a guy that did a really nice network analysis of the twitter tag, who suffered a lot of abuse for it.
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...

Pretty much what you said. Every single threat attributed to GamerGate hasn't even mentioned GamerGate. Some random guy on twitter threatened me and said he was going to rape my 3yr old daughter then burn down my house. You know what I did? Blocked the guy, turned off twitter and went to bed.

What I didn't do was screen cap it and send it flying around the internet to make myself look like a huge target for trolls that LOVE to go after people that give them attention and then blame people playing pokemon for threatening me despite pokemon not even being mentioned in any of the threats.

The media has created a huge issue here. Instead of blame being placed where it should be and seeking out the perpetrators of the harassment now everyone's taking the lazy way out, "It was GamerGate", which gives real trolls a perfect operating environment. Something Awful, GNAA, Bill Wagnor's Crew, /b/, Lizzard Squad are all riding the train now because they know they won't be called out for actual harassment. They don't support GamerGate and actively antagonize the pro camp as well, but it's not as much fun because the media doesn't report all the pro-Gamer people that are getting harassed. If it's not getting lulz, why do it? Dox or SWAT some unknown opponent of GamerGate and BAM!! instant news coverage with the victim on the front page or on an international show crying their eyes out blaming someone you hate equally as much.

If you have to resort to claiming "everyone else" believes what you believe, despite evidence to the contrary, it probably means your wrong and/or bullshitting it.

It's pretty clear there are multiple people that don't agree with you, so who is "everyone else"? Just the people agreeing with you?

Actually they've learned a lot. I'm a GamerGate supporter, but by continuing to put out click bait articles on GamerGate, which is a hot topic, they're keeping themselves in business because people are eating it up. It's clear when you read most comment sections on these articles or videos or sites like /. there are A LOT of people not buying the BS. They keep doing it because they don't care about creditability, or integrity, they're just trying to keep their crappy sites open by driving outrage. Yeah, GamerGate cost Gawker millions in ad revenue, but it's a drop in the bucket, I'm sure the increase in traffic from pro and anti GamerGate people alike is more than enough to post on quarterly site reports to drum up new advertisers. They'll keep doing it until it stops getting clicks then they'll move on to some other hot button.

What GamerGate's taught me though is the mainstream really isn't any better. I knew it wasn't great, but I always expected "real journalist" did some amount of fact checking and sourcing. As it turns out sourcing is:

Gawker: Kotaku said xxxx
Kotaku: Gawker said xxxx
Polygon: xxxx is true because Gawker and Kotaku
BBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBC, all other liberal media: Most gaming media agrees xxxx is true
BBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBC, all other liberal media for months after: ZOMFG!!!! WORLD ENDING BECAUSE xxxx!!!!! MISOGYNY!!!!

I'm a liberal Canadian, GamerGate is the first time I've EVER given any props to the conservative media, but at the very least Fox News hasn't crapped all over gamers on this issue (that I'm aware of) and Sun News (Canadian Fox) actually gave time to Jennie Bharaj to talk about the issue and plug her site BasedGamer which is one of the alternative game sites that's come out of GamerGate.

GamerGate, keeping women out of the industry by helping to raise $70K for TFYC to get women into game development and $50K to help women start alternative news sites... but misogyny right?

Too late, there have already been supporters of GamerGate who have lost their jobs, had threats e-mailed to their employers and been swatted at home. Too bad the media won't report it. https://jennofhardwire.wordpre...

I'm not the original AC, but here are a couple links. Make up your own mind if she's just blissfully unaware of her actions or if she's malicious.

Dave Pakman interview with TFYC - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Forbs article discussing the event - http://www.forbes.com/sites/er...

So with Anita, she had NOTHING to do with GamerGate. She wasn't involved and no one cared about her until SHE started claiming GamerGate was harassing her. There is absolutely NOTHING connecting threats she's received to GamerGate. She received "harassment" before GamerGate, she'll probably still get "harassment" after GamerGate. And I have to put harassment in quotes because what she claims to be harassment a lot of the time, not always, amounts to people just disagreeing with her views, often politely disagreeing.

Pointing a finger at people and accusing them of serious offenses without proof is encouraging harassment and I consider it harassment in itself. On top of that, members of GamerGate actually tracked down one of the people who was actually harassing her, who as it turns out is a Brazilian click bait game journalist (YES, A FRIGG'N JOURNALIST)

She's also posted e-mails on twitter with names, return e-mails and IPs from people that were literally just people calling out her poor research, no swearing or threats, which is explicitly to have her followers harass whomever sent the letter. It's also doxing which is harassment. Criticism isn't harassment, encouraging your followers to attack people and posting private e-mails with peoples names that criticize you is harassment.

Rather than attribute harassment to random internet trolls and actually attempt to track down the real harassers, she's taking advantage of the media blitz against GamerGate to turn a profit. So, sorry, I have no sympathy for her.

I'm not talking about her again after this point because, frankly, she doesn't deserve the attention.

SJW is more than that though "authoritarian leftist hypocrite" I'm libertarian left, maybe a hypocrite (I don't think most hypocrites are aware they are). SJW is someone that claims to be for some form of equality, but will turn around and tell women they've internalized misogyny or call a black guy a "house nigger" for disagreeing with them. I've literally seen this happen to members of #NotYourShield who support #GamerGate. I've also seen a conversation between several "SJW" who were upset minorities would were disagreeing with them, and I've seen a Reddit ban notice to a transgender where the admin banned her because the trans "owed" cis-white people for fighting for their rights.

I don't think Social Justice is bad in theory, but the vocal people pushing for it and the methods they use (Shame, Berating, Slander) are the absolute worst. Strictly in GamerGate the SJW opposition is made up of pedophiles, animal abusers, ex-neo-nazis, people who saw rape as it was happening and decided not to intervene or report it. Their basically "born again Christians" who are making up and fighting extra hard against invisible boogie men to atone for being terrible people themselves in the past.

It is a shame because Social Justice like Religion is good in theory, but the wrong people get a hold of it and it becomes a weapon to be justifiably more evil and bigoted to everyone else.

There was also this article that PROMOTED her game. The only people that call it a "review" are people trying to derail the conversion. Calling it a "review" allows them to argue about semantics if/when someone posts the actual article. Oh, and Nathan Grayson ADDMITTED to sleeping with ZQ, but claimed it happened several days after the last article (GameJam) he wrote featuring her... Never mind the fact that Nathan Grayson is thanked in the credits of ZQ's game this whole mess started over. So even if he didn't sleep with her, he didn't disclose he was friends or that he was essentially promoting a game HE worked on.

This conversation usually goes:
aGG: Why do you hate Zoe? Her sex life blah blah blah, journalist never slept with her or wrote about her. (denies articles exist)
GG: Here are the articles
aGG: Well he never reviewed her game so :P (argues about "review")
GG: I didn't say he did, but he did write about it and did suspiciously choose it out of 50 other steam greenlite games
aGG: Well it's not a review and he only mentioned the game (claims it's insignificant)
GG: Nathan is also thanked in the games credits as someone that worked on the game he mentions.
aGG: *BLOCKED* (blocks after being proven wrong)
aGG: You're just a stupid misogynerd neck beard (Continues insulting and taunting...)