Social Justice Warriors are the old religious right just with new coat of paint on them.

So Social Justice Warriors. A group claiming at present that video gaming is excluding women and the video games establishment must stop being sexist and change to create better access to women and minorities and to do that said art itself must stop being so exclusionary.

So how do they justify the claims the art itself is exclusionary, well here’s one of their actual cartoons. Done to explain it.

That’s pretty much their stance of how this whole works and how it surrounds systems of power. Ok so that’s the justification they give for wanting change but there’s another argument regularly brought up alongside this. The one claiming media Affects us like this article or to take a quote from Anita.

Compounding the problem is the widespread belief that, despite all the evidence, exposure to media has no real world impact. While it may be comforting to think we all have a personal force field protecting us from outside influences, this is simply not the case. Scholars sometimes refer to this type of denial as the “third person effect”, which is the tendency for people to believe that they are personally immune to media’s effects even if others may be influenced or manipulated. Paradoxically and somewhat ironically, those who most strongly believe that media is just harmless entertainment are also the ones most likely to uncritically internalize harmful media messages.

In short, the more you think you cannot be affected, the more likely you are to be affected.

Ok in the 1970’s a psychologist who researched this was already pointing out to people making such claims that the effect media can have is likely not the kind said people claim to be concerned about. That researcher was Guy Cumberpatch

What the claims of the impact of media amount to is at best the ability to sometimes give us a new perspective on things but mostly make us feel happy, sad or a range of other emotions. For example the film Gone Girl examining how it would be possible for someone to set up a scenario to manipulate the media against someone and the media’s readiness to condemn people. As anyone who saw the events that surrounded retired teacher Christopher Jefferies will attest to it’s often not always a story. The media often loves to have an easy bad guy and easy good guy presented for nice clean cut stories.

So stick with me here because I want you to do a thought exercise now. One which I’ve tried already and well, the results for me were quite shocking. I presented all that stuff about the SJWs view on objectification etc for a reason. I want you to step into the shoes of a hypothetical SJW and follow a thought train.

Firstly being an SJW you accept the claims that media affects people without the nuance representation of it being emotions and perspective. Imagine you believed media does affect people and can influence them to act certain ways and impact the way they do act.

So carrying on this train of thought then why would you object to fictional characters wearing skimpy outfits?

I mean you’re fine with said outfits on real women in real life so why suddenly is it an issue with fictional women, because they can’t consent?

What should it matter if they consent or not though as despite not giving explicit consent. You wouldn't go up to a girl in the street dressed like that and immediately assume she hadn't consented and felt forced into such revealing clothes and try to save her.

So back to the influencing part. If media affects people then it could be argued that it could influence women in real life to dress in skimpy outfits. But that wouldn't be a problem right? You accept women dressing how they like in reality right?

So then why do you want to push for more conservative dress and clothing for women in media?

So that’s the end of the experiment if you could just return your brain to a sane state of being we can continue.

That last question was a nasty one and I managed to come up with an answer.
Following the logical trail then, if, as SJWs believe, media influences people to the extent they claim it does then it would appear to be something quite nasty. What if far from being progressive and pushing acceptance of peoples choice in how to dress it was actually hiding a regressive agenda similar to that of the old religious right? By pushing for conservative dress in games and other media and claiming media influences people to such an extent then it’s hard to deny, what appears to be, people trying to push the same values and the same sex negative values as past religious folks.

So next time someone puts across the argument about objectification of women in games and how media affects people, try challenging them by following their logic. Try asking them if that’s so and the sexualised women are harmful media to society how are they not promoting harmful media themselves by pushing sex negative values by trying to influence people by only allowing women who are covered to be shown in media?

I mean wasn’t it religious people pushing sex as evil that lead to saddlebacking?

You’ll be amazed at how few of those self proclaimed SJWs or “allies” will suddenly have no idea why they’re pushing for more conservative dress in fiction. I mean it’s quite preposterous when you think about it. Either they have to admit they believe rather insane things like media is the cause of rape (despite the fact even the Romans had laws against rape long before our modern media so it’s hardly a new thing). Or they have to admit they are trying to push conservative values of dress onto people. Or they have to admit one or both of these major arguments they use are wrong. Most likely they’ll hastily try and move the subject on to avoid having to confront this huge logical flaw in their arguments. A flaw which by taking two of their arguments and following the logic leads to what appears to be a scary conclusion.

So for all those “modern” “progressive” people saying how Gamers are the new religious right. It’s not gamers arguing the same way and pushing the same values the religious right once did. I mean it’s not as thought some of them also have something against Atheists too or anything.

I mean it’s not as though one of the main forerunner in this whole push against “sexism in gaming” also once really rather showed their hatred of one of the leading figures in Atheism.

Weird eh?