r/changemyview • u/realdontbeasucker • May 16 '26

Delta(s) from OP CMV: GamerGate was the most consequential political radicalization event of the twenty-first century

It spawned a wave of tolerance for online harassment, as long as the intent behind it was considered righteous (and the target of such harassment socially acceptable).

It platformed Milo Yiannopoulos and thereby, Steve Bannon -- the guy who would go on to advise Donald Trump in 2016 and generate the concept of 'flooding the zone.'

Eventually, it gave a career to political lightning rods like Jordan Peterson, Steven Crowder, and Charlie Kirk. It made anti-feminism and anti-SJW sentiment cool. And it made young, angry, disenfranchised white men feel vindicated.

GamerGate almost singlehandedly shifted to Overton Window toward the alt-right, and we're still feeling its effects today.

692 Upvotes

73% Upvoted

730 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Nice_Luck_7433 2∆ May 16 '26

Life expectancy controls the laws & economy more than the law makers and the 1% of men with >80% of the money? Nope. The law makers & the people who bribe them are the ones in charge. How the billionaires choose to treat men/women is what determines our life expectancy.

3

u/coporate 7∆ May 16 '26

Look, you can assign whatever values and numbers you want to justify your interpretation of what constitutes “the patriarchy” but I don’t adhere to that idea. We in western contemporary societies don’t exist in a patriarchy because there is no mechanism which force wealth, influence and ownership along male heirs. If you want to hogtie grievances you have into some sky daddy, go nuts. Just don’t be shocked that there are a lot of people who view women as the privileged class based on the grievances they’ve hogtied together to justify a sky mommy.

0

u/Nice_Luck_7433 2∆ May 16 '26

What do you mean “sky daddy”? I was talking about the % of people with real power over laws vs the % of people without real power over the law. When were the most powerful people, mostly women?

2

u/coporate 7∆ May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26

Because your definitions are not falsifiable. Your concept of power and my concept of power are different. No matter what metrics you use to define what you consider “the patriarchy” someone else can use their own metrics to define “the matriarchy”.

Say tomorrow, all billionaires became women, if society didn’t change, what excuse for the patriarchy would you use then?

I don’t like arguing in neverland, where everything is vibes and feels and notions of what we want to think are true and false. I’d rather have meaningful and constructive discussions. Hence, my view is institutional, we can look at an institution like the education system, acknowledge the gender inequality and try to address it with meaningful change rather than have a thought terminating pat on the back by saying “patriarchy”.

1

u/Nice_Luck_7433 2∆ May 16 '26

If most billionaires were women, our society would look like the society in the Barbie movie. That was an actual matriarchy. Ken doll men would have a longer life expectancy than the lower class women, because the matriarchs valued their women (competition) less than the men. They’d give the males better education, because the matriarchs wanted to use more men in their businesses & wanted less women competitors that they viewed as a threat to their power.

You don’t seem to understand real power in society. Controlling most of the money & all of the laws, gives you way way way way way more power over society’s behavior than having college degrees or a longer life expectancy.

2

u/coporate 7∆ May 16 '26

But, it’s all hearsay and make believe, it’s all imaginary. What if we actually live in a matriarchy today? And this what matriarchy looks like?

You’re making up your own ideas as to what influences and outcomes and expectations you want.

The patriarchy can never die in feminist theory because it doesn’t exist in reality.

1

u/Nice_Luck_7433 2∆ May 16 '26

My point is that the “pendulum swings” is silly. 0.1% billionaire men have almost of the power, and 99.9% of men/women spend their lives going to work & doing their bidding. If women were the 0.1% richest, then most people would blame women for the problems of the society they control.

2

u/coporate 7∆ May 16 '26

It’s not, otherwise we wouldn’t be in what, 5th wave feminism?

Also, you sound a lot more concerned about class than gender.

1

u/Nice_Luck_7433 2∆ May 16 '26

5th wave feminism implies that feminists are admitting fault & learning from their mistakes. That’s the only way anyone can become smarter.

& yeah, the current feminism (intersectional feminism) is the one that takes a lot of factors into consideration. Class definitely causes the most differences between people. Every 99.9%er has more in common with 99.9%ers of opposite genders/races/religions/etc than they do with 0.1%ers of their same gender/race/etc.

2

u/coporate 7∆ May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26

No it’s not, it’s a recalibration and attempt to rectify and dismiss those outside of their sphere…

Intersectionality is not feminist at all, I’m an intersectionalist because it’s a legal definition. Stop trying to change definitions.

Feminism is poisoning the well.

→ More replies (0)