- Please provide a source with some information on what sort of legislation she is actually advocating
- You still have not yet established that X = Y to declare that defending Sarkeesian but not Thompson is hypocritical, even if she is trying to have something banned.
1. No, feel free to dismiss it as either anecdotal or entirely made up, because while what I'm about to reference is self-evident, it clearly doesn't meet your implied definition
2. This isn't a debate, this is pointing out something easily observable
You're misunderstanding something here, I'm not making an argument. I'm pointing out that Sarkessian is just as big a malcontent, if not moreso, than Jack Thompson. That you seem to be treating this as some kind of debate is cute, but I don't get into arguments with white knights.
The latter term referring to those who refer to perceived insults against whatever their pet cause is with naked hostility whenever possible.
Sarkeesian's rabble rousing, and knowingly doing so, isn't something that is up for debate. She's very obviously doing it, because she very obviously wants to. She created a problem where none existed for the sake of raising her own profile. That problem was "female representation in the video game industry". It's a lot like modern arguments about how affirmative action "doesn't go far enough", she's creating artificial goalposts of what defines "proper" representation without actually going into details about it, while looking for justifications to complain about it's lack or even go into the actual reasons for said perceived lack.
Just like someone like Jack Thompson, who didn't need empirical evidence because he was already so sure of the truth of the matter regarding video game violence.
Now, this video is the first result when I googled, so the slant is the result of laziness, rather than me taking the time to find an unbiased source. Needless to say, the burden of proof was that I establish that it happened, correct?
And I have now satisfied that burden. But for the sake of humoring you.
A link to the Polygon article, one of the most positive slants possible
"The online social media sites and the places in which we are engaging really need to step up and change the way that their systems operate," Sarkeesian said during the panel discussion. "It's not enough that [social media sites] simply put band-aids on the problem areas. They need to completely reimagine what their systems look like in order to build sites that actively deter online harassment."
This was echoed in a statement Sarkeesian gave to Polygon over email, regarding her participation in the discussion on combatting cyber violence. "We need to create an online environment where everyone can participate without fear of intimidation or violence," she told us.
Finally, the group aims to develop laws and other governance to "enforce compliance and punitive consequences for perpetrators."
it's my sincere hope that you realize that Sarkeesian is attempting to work with these guys to actively develop online censoring laws using "harassment" as an excuse, and that you realize that regardless of your personal stance regarding Gamergate, that Sarkeesia and Quinn are working to encourage such a thing is...wrong.
On a fundamental level.
