> If one has a problem with harassment, then rationally one attacks the problem (harassment)...not the victim (women)
In this situation, the harassment is directed at Ninja and his wife, thus he and his wife are the victim, not women. Also it is not feasible for one person to "attack" the problem, which is that there are a lot of shitty people on the internet. I'm sure if he could "attack" it he would.
> Are you a gamer? Can you explain how gaming with girls works or doesn't work the point of excluding them?
I am to a degree, nothing competitive, but I at least understand how the game and streaming works. What he's made very clear is when he streams one-on-one with women, there's an increase in rumor youtube videos, hate mail, harassment, and attacks against him, his wife, and others who may be involved. He doesn't want that, thus he doesn't stream with them.
> More importantly does Ninja "streaming" with a random player, give that player massive exposure & potential opportunity?
Yes it does. But note that streaming with Ninja is not the exclusive way to gain subscriptions and viewers on the platform. And yeah it sucks that he doesn't stream with women but that's still his choice to make.
> It doesn't help prove how Ninja's actions are helpful to a "community."
I'm not trying to prove that it's helpful to the community. The community is mostly garbage anyway, have you ever seen the chat in a stream? I'm just saying he made a personal choice that, by what we've observed so far, is his to make.
> I'm actually more concerned about the indirect - which is highlighted by responses like yours.
Please say your point explicitly. _What_ is highlighted by my response?
It comes down to this: We're talking about a guy who plays video games while other people watch. And people want to mandate _who_ he plays with. What right do they have to demand that?
Edit: I do want to say, if it turns out there is a law which prohibits what he's doing, then I find that interesting and would no longer defend his right to do so. Perhaps if his twitch channel is defined as a company and his co-streamers are legally his "employees", then I could see there being a case. Interested to hear from anyone who is educated in these legal matters.