It’s Game Over for ‘Gamers’
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
The big issue with the title is that it isn't backed up by the article, which takes a softer tone and basically just says "Well, if everyone is a gamer, then nobody will be!".
It's just taunting and taking a tone, possibly to antagonize and pull dumb opponents in to make themselves look bad.
* Little to add to the conversation?
a) What conversation? Noone is having a conversation. There is people with incredible patience like Anita dissecting and interpreting patterns, and writing a personal piece about why it matters, and there is troglodytes threatening and screaming. That's not a conversation
b) Little to add? It's an opinion piece. It explains concisely why it matters to Anita Sarkeesian and why it matters to everyone. It's beautifully written, heartfelt, honest, inclusive and non-threatening piece.
* Grandstanding? "seek to attract applause or favorable attention from spectators or the media." Whenever Anita Sarkessian says anything, she gets harassed and threatened. To think that she just seeks attention instead of actually caring is grotesquely absurd.
Incorrect. There is active conversation happening everywhere, on both sides. Popehat, for example, has had two thoughtful pieces on it. Other places have published good writeups as well.
"seek to attract applause or favorable attention from spectators or the media." Whenever Anita Sarkessian says anything, she gets harassed and threatened.
Put bluntly: negative attention is still attention. More constructively, note that she is garnering applause and favorable attention from a lot of people, especially the media. There are many articles celebrating her critiques--which is quite alright! So, no, I don't think that grandstanding is an inappropriate verb. I also don't think that grandstanding is only done by people in the wrong.
To think that she just seeks attention instead of actually caring is grotesquely absurd.
I never said or implied that, and that is a wonderful false dichotomy you've used there. Where she cares is orthogonal to whether she seeks attention.
Care to expand on what you meant to imply, then?