And how is hunter-gatherer society's a "natural" order? Just because it occurred first?
The "natural order" isn't "LET'S GO BACK TO THE STONE AGE". This kind of blatant political posturing, this whole "Conservatives just are nostalgic for living like cavemen" thing interferes with any decent understanding of a conservative world view and philosophy.
The "natural way", at least in the conservative sense, isn't rationalistic. It is not a system that is created, it's one that occurs as society reacts to the changing environment around them. It is found in the traditions that are able to survive the test of time and stand as age old cultural institutions. It's a way of life that is adopted by cultures yet isn't forced upon them.
The Anglo-sphere has developed it's way around limited government, a sense of independence, individuality, and common law. This way developed over centuries, from our Anglo-Saxon forbears and their moots, to the English kings and the Magna Carta. In none of those cases was society forced into being individualist, it wasn't forced into creating these semi-democratic cultural institutions, it developed them on their own; while they may have changed over time and continents, the fundamental roots of them and premises behind them remain the same.
Conservatism as a philosophy, at least in the Anglo-sphere, was developed by Edmund Burke after the horrors of the French Revolution. He saw the French murder their king, then plunge society into chaos. He saw the systems that were created as being forced upon the people, from Robespierre's attempts to create a new "religion" based around the French's democratic ideals to Napoleon forming a new Empire more powerful and absolute than the previous one.
In all these cases, whether it was Democracy or Empire, the system was forced onto the people and they ensuing chaos was a result of no natural order to guide them. It's also important to note that while he was a Monarchist, Burke didn't believe in things "never changing", instead he felt the French should develop along the lines of a Constitutional Monarchy; instead of trying to fall back onto a system of Estates General and a King, the French executed theirs and went through so many governments developed hastily by mere men rather than society as a whole, it's no wonder that Order couldn't be preserved.
We've seen it with the USSR, we've seen it in "revolutions" across the globe, when society's completely abandon the cultural institutions that defined them, Chaos and misery has a tendency to reign. We see it when Western countries try to "nation build" in the middle east, forcing ideals such as democracy or equal rights on some semi-tribal nations immediately after toppling one dictator or another; and is there a single nation this has succeeded in?
When thinking of things from a Conservative sense, one must keep in mind that they still believe in change. Society is constantly working on a system, and while you can "nudge" the direction you want society to work towards, attempting to upend everything and reach it "NOW!" is where people will fail.
THAT is why we see people ripping each other to shreds like animals over things like "privilege", THAT is why we see folks developing new terms and reworking the definitions of old ones, and THAT is why there's this air of paranoia and fear in the gaming industry, with folks screamed at for not including X or including Y. This is not a system that Gamers have developed as a whole, this is not the one our sub culture has been working towards, it's feminist theory that's being pushed by academics and journos.
If you believe that's wrong, think about this: Feminist theory says gaming has a "misogyny problem", it's being called a "male space", and yet do these people even play video games? One of the most universally used critiques, as that these people aren't really "gamers", yet how do we know? Oh sure, we have the clips of Anita Sarkeesian saying she isn't one, but all these indie hipster douchebags, these digra folks, these journos... how do we know they aren't?
You and I and everyone in this thread most likely haven't met and will not ever meet in person, yet "gamer culture" has developed on it's own, and like it or not we've all been influenced by it. It's why when we see blatant mainstream attempts to push memes on the rest of us, we cringe...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtySt6Fg30
...it's why when we see these neo-progressive critiques, we get a feeling that they aren't really gamers in spite of their protests that they just want gaming to "grow up", and it's why all of this is happening in the first place! We may not be able to put it into words, but we don't see these people as members of our culture; even when something as simple as that Arby's ad manages to follow the "formula" of how memes "work", we still do not see it as part of, say, "meme culture" or something like.
What we know these journos as, from the way they act to how they speak, are SJWs first and gamers at best second. This new "system" they're trying to push onto us does more than degrade our rights, it feels unnatural, it's a theory they've cooked up that is not the "natural way" as we know it to be.