I think when people join movements it gives support to that movement, and I think people have to take responsibility for the movements they support.

and I got tired being forced to defend shit.

What I think is word games is people turning around and then saying just because they are in or support the movement doesn't mean they should be judged for supporting the movement

the question seems to be core versus bad apples. you can like the followers of the Apocalypse without liking Caesar

why join or associate with a movement if no one thinks of the movement in any unified fashion and just views it all as a bunch of unrelated individuals

if you stop strawmanning you actually point to a fascinating tension: individual self evaluation versus having your reasoning subsumed into the group. It's a perennial problem with movements and ideologies and the extreme version of what you are claiming is self evidentially true is the real thing Arendt was rallying against with the phrase banality of evil (abdicating personal reasoning to the cause). Having invoked Nazis lets turn it around and point to the more positive visions of group voices and see how any sort of extreme dogmatic position on this issue is shit. you haven't set forward a moderate position.

Did you really think that?

yes. i'm sorry you want to be a jerk but that's the honest position ii held: one could be part of gamergate due to a support of the "core value or values" broadly defined while rejecting shitty side stuff. I'm quite frankly unsure of what to make of the hostility i'm getting from you given that my end decision was this balancing act couldn't hold because many people defined the stuff i hated as a core GG activity instead of a side one and i saw no point in arguing it as that was never why i was tempted to associate with GG anyways.