If you take of the movement away, there's nothing left.

I'm not at all saying there aren't harrassing accounts on twitter. But when a movement manages to get several high-end video-game journalism sites to re-hash their ethics policies (IGN, Kotaku, Gamasutra, etc,) manage to raise $100k in charities, help fund projects to get female developers into gaming, and push to help a female dev's game get greenlit among the most notable accomplishments, it's certainly not aimed at harassing women out of video games and to say it is; well, it's just misinformation.

It's not about "ethics in gaming journalism" (hardly a world-changing cause anyway) and it never was. I've yet to hear any reports of it accomplishing anything other than bullying, graphic death and rape threats, and the general low level whining about "SJWs" (which as far as I can tell refers to those who think being an asshole to people deliberately is not a wholesome activity, and anyone else who disagrees with GGers) that goes on over at KiA.

Refer to the above. They've accomplished quite a bit. It's easy to avoid the good stuff when you're just looking at the bad.

Now, there have been studies done (I'll link the article below) and it's clear that people like Brianna Wu have had more negative tweets at them than Stephen Totilo which, I'm going to argue, is somewhat understandable, considering her dishonesty and going as far as to try to shame people into voting to greenlight her (extremely shitty, sorry Brianna,) game.

Here is the article on the study of the tweets. I'm going to urge you to think objectively here as there are sides to both arguments. http://www.newsweek.com/gamergate-about-media-ethics-or-harassing-women-harassment-data-show-279736

My point is that, even in tweets, while algorithms are not perfect, these show something like 90%+ of GG tweets (the 25% of tweets examined) are either positive or neutral towards these people. That combined with their accomplishments, it's obvious the movement definitely isn't about harassing people.