http://www.justice.gov/crt/federal-prot … mination-1

"Federal laws prohibit discrimination based on a person's national origin, race, color, religion, disability, sex, and familial status. Laws prohibiting national origin discrimination make it illegal to discriminate because of a person's birthplace, ancestry, culture or language..."

Harvard University: Forbidding institutions of higher education from considering race in deciding whom to admit “would represent a significant intrusion into the academic freedom of universities.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ … ive-action

Am I the only one that thinks things here SNAFU? People have long argued about the benefits of blind admission. You can also take in economic status when considering admission (admitting a certain percentage of people from less affluent families, since that does not violate discrimination laws). I've heard good arguments from both sides, but when all is said and done, someone explain to me how this is not a violation of Federal law?! Sure, it may be tolerated, but it's a clear violation in my opinion.

It's a violation, but social justice warriors consider this OK as long as racism is in the favor of a minority that was previously wronged.  For reparations, or something.  Affirmative action:  Keeping racism alive long after it should have been done away with.

Oh lord.
Are you a GG supporter or something?

Sorry, I'm all for a healthy discussion, but this is a little TOO baity even for me.

But I will say this...the term Social Justice Warriors is here to stay. And we can thank our stupid politically correct culture for it.

I have to agree. While I think this would definitely be an interesting discussion to have I don't really know if this something that could stay completely civil. If we act on it can't help but see an absolute train-wreck ahead.

Unfortunately, you're correct about this. Absolutely hate the term... but as you say it's here to stay. Damn it.

It's opponents of political correctness who coined the term and keep using it though.
The proponents actually think it's a ridiculous and meaningless term.

What does "baity" even mean? If you don't want to participate in the discussion that is fine, no one is making you. Of course, you DID participate, didn't you. First line you said you're not participating (which is ironic) and then you added "stupid politically correct culture".

Anyway, I think it's perfectly fine and fun to have such discussions and yes, they can remain civil. If you're not willing to look at other people's view points, even if you disagree with them, you'll never learn anything.

Interesting new developments across esteemed universities here in the USA.

"I Need Some Muscle": Missouri Activists Block Journalists
www.nytimes.com/2015/11/10/us/university-missouri-protesters-block-journalists-press-freedom.html

Here's the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRlRAyulN4o

Disregarding racial attitudes, what amazes me about the exchange is how un-American it is. One of the tenants of American democracy is freedom of the press. It was obvious the student reporter was just doing his business, and then a journalism professor tries to have him forcefully removed?! Yikes!

In other news, Dragon's Crown is really hard

Exactly.  I didn't pay attention to all the gamergate nonsense, so I'm sure I don't use the term the same way they do.  I generally just use it sarcastically toward people that demand exaggerated/questionable/extreme changes to fight perceived/imaginary/extinct social wrongs.  A college refusing an applicant only because he/she is white instead of being a minority (just because minorities were freely discriminated against in the past) is a reasonable example to me.

SJW was originally a mocking term and some people ended up embracing it, so it's probably about 50/50 overall. I tend to find "social justice bigot" far more accurate, since a large number of people now wear "SJW" as a badge of honor and I usually use it when I want to mock the worst of the worst (either censorship advocates or anyone who resorts to their own form of bigotry and feel entitled to it because of perceived lesser status)

Given my conservative leanings, there shouldn't be too much question where I stand on the OP discussion. But I've HAD this debate plenty of times before and I know how it turns out. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. It only takes one...

Silly question... not that I'm trying to attack the goals of gamergate directly, but am I the only one that only looks into that whole mess of a situation when they want to entertained by some e-drama?

I mean who needs daytime soaps with GG around?

They're a f---ing joke.
Feel free to attack their "goals" all you want.

I guess that was an odd way to phrase that... but I know some posters here have shown sympathies towards the movement so I didn't want to ruffle any feathers. However, I guess that was kind of silly considering I admitted that I derive some enjoyment over its members foaming at the mouth.

Still, since we're on this subject I think one the main problems with GG is there really is no figurehead for the movement so it just so damn disorganized... but at the same time I can't help but feel having a figurehead might make things even worse.

If the "Gamers are Dead" narrative never happened, I would call Gamergate an overreaction to a terrible games media. As a gamer, I don't appreciate an internal attack by a press that is supposed to be serving us, not preaching ideology/talking down to us. So I like how a lot of people banded together and exposed a lot of crap going on.

That said, what it turned into is a f---ing disgrace. 5 hour long snoozefest livestreams where everyone is waiting their turn to preach, everyone trying to be the next big E-celebrity, infighting galore, complete lack of focus. I'm all for attacking Kotaku or Polygon for their stupidity and clickbait, but now it's just stupid shit and bruised egos ("OMG! So and so left Gamergate!" "OMG! So and so isn't using the hashtag properly"). And like I said, the games industry is such trash right now, it's hardly worth fighting over anymore.